Crypto criminal law

Voluntary self-disclosure

Crypto criminal defense lawyer in Munich

Criminal Defense in Cases Involving Cryptocurrencies and Digital Assets

As a law firm specializing in cryptocurrency criminal law in Munich, schirach.law defends individuals, entrepreneurs, managing directors, executives, and companies nationwide in criminal and tax criminal proceedings related to cryptocurrencies, blockchain technology, and digital assets.

Crypto-related criminal proceedings often involve criminal law, criminal tax law, money laundering, asset forfeiture, regulation, and technical blockchain analysis.

That is why it is not enough to examine individual transactions in isolation. First, it must be determined which wallets, exchange accounts, and assets are involved, how investigative authorities classify them, and what criminal significance the technical data actually has.

schirach.law combines criminal defense in the areas of commercial and tax law with a deep understanding of digital assets and complex transaction structures.

What is crypto criminal law?

Cryptocurrency criminal law is not a separate area of law.

The term describes criminal and tax criminal proceedings in which cryptocurrencies, tokens, blockchain applications, or other digital assets play a significant role.

This can particularly affect Bitcoin, Ether, stablecoins, tokenized assets, as well as applications in the fields of DeFi and Web3.

Typical allegations include, among others,

• tax evasion in connection with crypto assets,
• money laundering pursuant to Section 261 of the German Criminal Code (StGB),
• fraud and investment fraud,
• embezzlement in the management of digital assets,
• cybercrime and unauthorized access to wallets or accounts,
• unauthorized crypto asset services,
• insider trading and market manipulation in connection with crypto assets,
• insolvency offenses involving crypto companies,
• sanctions violations and cross-border transactions, as well as
• potential aiding and abetting by founders, developers, intermediaries, or other project participants.

In other proceedings, crypto assets do not form the actual core allegation. Instead, investigative authorities treat them as a potential instrument of the offense, alleged proceeds of crime, or assets intended for seizure or forfeiture.

For the defense, it is therefore crucial first to determine what role the digital assets actually play in the specific proceedings.

Specialization of schirach.law in crypto criminal law

At schirach.law, Marco Benedikt von Schirach, Katharina von Schirach and Julian Korbinian Huber have the additional qualification “Certified Consultant for Crypto Assets and Taxes” from the WIRE – Institute for Applied Business Law .

The diverse qualifications of the team members complement the firm's focus on criminal and tax law with specialized knowledge in the area of ​​crypto assets and their tax treatment. This is particularly important in cases where complex transaction histories, tax obligations, anti-money laundering issues, and criminal risks intertwine.

Lawyer Marco Benedikt von Schirach is also a specialist lawyer for criminal law and a certified defense lawyer for economic criminal law and tax criminal law (DSV eV).

Further information on the qualifications and areas of expertise of our lawyers can be found on their respective profile pages.

Marco Benedikt von Schirach – Profile and qualifications

Julian Korbinian Huber – Profile and Qualifications

Katharina von Schirach – Profile and Qualifications

When should you retain a lawyer specializing in crypto criminal law?

As early as possible – especially before you submit extensive statements, wallet data, or transaction histories to investigative authorities, tax authorities, banks, or cryptocurrency exchanges.

Specialized legal advice is particularly advisable if

• the police, public prosecutor's office, or tax investigation office make contact,
• you receive a summons or notice of hearing,
• investigative authorities search your home or business premises,
• hardware wallets, mobile phones, or computers are seized,
• investigators secure crypto assets or demand wallet access,
• a cryptocurrency exchange blocks an account or a withdrawal, or
• a bank questions the origin of crypto assets.
• there are undeclared crypto gains or other tax discrepancies,
• you are considering a correction or a voluntary tax self-disclosure,
• there is an allegation of fraud, money laundering, or aiding and abetting,
• BaFin or another regulatory authority is raising questions about a crypto business model, or
• those responsible for a crypto project are personally coming into focus.

Even voluntarily submitted wallet addresses, tax reports, or explanations can later become part of criminal or tax criminal proceedings.

Therefore, it should first be clarified what information is actually necessary and what legal consequences its disclosure may entail.

How are crypto transactions investigated in criminal proceedings?

Blockchain analysis can make transaction paths visible. However, it does not automatically answer which person controlled a wallet, why a transaction took place, or whether someone knew about a potential illegal origin.

This distinction is central to crypto criminal proceedings.

What on-chain data actually proves

Public blockchains document transactions between addresses.

Depending on the network, the following can be traced, for example:

• sender and recipient addresses,
• transferred assets,
• timestamps,
• amounts,
• smart contract interactions, and
• other technical parameters.

reconstructed.

This data can prove a transaction path.

However, by itself, it does not answer which person stands behind an address or for what legal and economic reason a transaction took place.

Wallet clustering and attribution to individuals

Blockchain analysis tools attempt, among other things, to assign multiple addresses to specific wallet clusters or services.

These are analytical conclusions based on technical data and specific attribution methods.

For the defense, it is therefore necessary to examine:

• What data forms the basis of the attribution?
• What method was used?
• Is this a definitive attribution or a probabilistic assessment?
• Were there multiple users or access options?
• Who actually had access to the private keys or credentials?
• Do the on-chain data and the economic facts match?

A wallet attribution must not be equated with personal criminal liability without further investigation.

Off-chain data, exchanges, and KYC

The attribution of a wallet to an individual frequently relies on additional information.

This can include:

• KYC data from centralized crypto exchanges,
• login and IP data,
• bank transactions,
• seized devices,
• wallet files,
• emails and chats,
• contractual documents,
• tax reports, and
• statements from other parties involved.

Only the combination of on-chain and off-chain data frequently enables a personal reconstruction.

Even then, however, a separate examination must be made of what is technically established and what criminal law conclusions may be drawn from it.

Investigating crypto matters independently: What can be determined on one's own?

Anyone who discovers suspicious crypto transactions, missing data, or discrepancies on their own can initially reconstruct part of the facts.

Such independent preparation can be prudent before making statements to banks, crypto exchanges, tax authorities, or investigative agencies.

Secure transaction history

First, existing data should be completely secured.

Depending on the specific case, this includes in particular:

• Wallet addresses,
• Exchange accounts,
• CSV and API exports,
• Transaction IDs,
• Bank transactions,
• Purchase and sale receipts,
• Tax reports,
• smart contract interactions, and
• Documentation regarding mining, staking, or other acquisition processes.

Missing data should be identified where possible before drawing legal conclusions from incomplete information.

Assign wallets, exchanges, and transfers

Subsequently, it can be verified which wallets belong to one's own assets and which transfers merely took place between one's own addresses or accounts.

Particularly in the case of long transaction histories, bridge operations, layer 2 networks, DeFi protocols, and switching between centralized and decentralized exchanges can complicate reconstruction.

An automated tax report or blockchain explorer can assist with this, but it does not replace verifying whether the technical assignment and economic background are correct.

No hasty statements to banks or authorities

Anyone investigating a matter themselves should distinguish between internal review and external explanation.

A premature description of the source of funds, a wallet cluster, or tax processes can later become significant in criminal or tax criminal proceedings.

Therefore, before making extensive disclosures, it should be clarified whether there is actually only a documentation problem or whether a criminal risk already exists.

Data should be preserved and not subsequently modified, deleted, or manipulated.

Search and seizure of hardware wallets

During a search, those affected should remain calm, offer no resistance, and contact a criminal defense attorney as early as possible.

As a matter of principle, no statements regarding the allegation should be made without prior consultation.

In crypto-related criminal proceedings, investigative authorities frequently target digital assets and access methods.

This may particularly affect

• hardware wallets,
• computers and mobile phones,
• seed phrases stored in writing,
• wallet files,
• access credentials for exchange accounts,
• backups,
• tax documents, and
• transaction records.

Particular caution is required if investigators demand that devices be unlocked, passwords disclosed, or access to wallets and accounts granted.

Whether and to what extent cooperation is required should be assessed based on the specific circumstances of the proceedings.

schirach.law specifically analyzes the search warrant, the scope of the measure, securements and seizures, as well as further tactical options under criminal procedure law.

Seizure, asset freezing, and confiscation of crypto assets

Crypto assets can become the subject of asset-securing measures even during preliminary investigations.

Investigative authorities may attempt to transfer digital assets to agency-controlled wallets or have assets frozen on centralized crypto exchanges.

In addition, asset freezing and subsequent confiscation may also affect other assets.

For the defense, the following questions are particularly relevant:

• Who actually owns the crypto assets?
• Who had the power of disposition?
• Is there a robust connection to the alleged criminal offense?
• Are they suspected proceeds of crime, instruments of crime, or legal assets?
• Are assets belonging to third parties affected?
• How was the value of the crypto assets calculated?
• What legal remedies are available?

In view of highly volatile exchange rates, the valuation and timing of a potential realization can also be of significant economic importance.

Asset protection should therefore be an integral part of the defense strategy from the very beginning.

Money laundering and cryptocurrencies pursuant to Section 261 of the German Criminal Code (StGB)

Crypto transactions frequently become the focus of money laundering investigations.

Triggers may include, for example, transactions involving high-risk addresses, mixing services, decentralized exchanges, peer-to-peer trades, or complex transaction chains.

However, such risk indicators do not, in and of themselves, prove money laundering.

In order to substantiate an allegation of money laundering, it is necessary to examine, among other things:

• the specific predicate offense from which the assets are alleged to originate,
• which specific act is attributed to the accused,
• what knowledge existed regarding the origin of the assets,
• whether grossly negligent failure to recognize the origin comes into consideration,
• whether the asserted transaction paths are technically sound, and
• whether legal sources and acquisition processes were adequately taken into account.

The mere contact of a wallet with a flagged address does not replace proof of personal criminal liability.

schirach.law combines defense in crypto proceedings with specialized expertise in money laundering criminal law and AML compliance.

Account freezes and proof of origin for crypto assets

Banks and crypto asset service providers scrutinize suspicious transactions and may temporarily block withdrawals or accounts.

This may be triggered by internal compliance reviews, suspicious activity reports (SARs), regulatory measures, or doubts regarding the origin of the assets.

Depending on the specific circumstances, appropriate proof of origin may include, among other things:

• Purchase and sale receipts,
• exchange statements,
• wallet and transaction histories,
• bank records,
• contracts,
• invoices,
• tax returns and tax assessments, as well as
• documentation concerning mining, staking, or other acquisition processes.

The decisive factor is not the sheer volume of documents. Rather, the documents must provide a comprehensible explanation of the economic transaction and the pathway of the crypto assets.

Before transmitting extensive information to a bank, stock exchange, or authority, potential criminal and criminal tax law implications should be reviewed.

Fraud, investment fraud, and crypto projects

Crypto criminal proceedings frequently involve allegations of having deceived investors regarding a project, a token, projected returns, or the use of invested funds.

Investigations may target founders, managing directors, developers, advisors, intermediaries, and other project participants.

Regarding allegations of fraud, the following aspects are particularly relevant:

• What statements were made to investors?
• Who was responsible for these statements?
• What information was available at that time?
• How were the raised funds utilized?
• What risks were communicated?
• What had already been implemented technically?
• Did a business model merely fail, or was there an intent to deceive from the outset?

The failure of a crypto project does not automatically constitute punishable fraud.

The defense must therefore comprehensively reconstruct the technical development, economic concept, internal responsibilities, and external communication.

Liability of founders, developers, advisors, and intermediaries

Mere participation in a crypto project does not establish criminal liability for all actions associated with the project.

Decentralized projects in particular frequently operate with international teams, changing roles, and informal decision-making structures.

Therefore, it must be determined separately for each individual concerned:

• What was their specific function?
• What decision-making authority did they possess?
• Which wallets or systems could they access?
• What information were they aware of?
• What specific contribution are they alleged to have made to a criminal offense?
• Can intentional conduct be proven?

Particularly in projects involving division of labor, the precise demarcation of individual areas of responsibility is crucial.

MiCA and KMAG: Criminal risks for crypto companies

With the European MiCA Regulation and the German Crypto Markets Supervision Act (KMAG), the regulatory framework for crypto business models has fundamentally changed.

This is not just about supervisory law.

Section 46 of the KMAG provides for criminal penalties for certain violations. Therefore, founders, managing directors, and other responsible parties should determine at an early stage whether a business model involves activities requiring a license or other obligations relevant under criminal law.

Unauthorized crypto-asset services

Under Article 59 of MiCA, certain cryptocurrency services may, in principle, be provided only by authorized providers.

Section 46 of the KMAG criminalizes certain violations of this requirement.

Whether a specific business model constitutes a crypto-asset service can depend on its actual structuring.

Therefore, the actual functionality of a product or project should be examined, rather than merely relying on its designation.

For specific product or service descriptions, an additional regulatory review of the respective applicable MiCA/KMAG regime is required.

Inside information and market manipulation

MiCA also contains rules against insider trading, unlawful disclosure of inside information, and market manipulation with regard to covered crypto-assets.

Certain intentional violations may be punishable under Section 46 of the KMAG.

Consequently, for project managers, issuers, trading platforms, and other market participants, internal information processes, publications, trading activities, and communication measures can be of particular relevance.

Criminal law and supervisory law assessments must be clearly separated in this context.

Criminal tax law and cryptocurrencies

Undeclared or incompletely declared crypto transactions can trigger tax criminal investigations.

Relevant aspects may include, among others:

• Trading and swaps,
• Mining,
• Staking,
• Lending,
• Airdrops,
• DeFi protocols,
• Liquidity pools,
• token sales as well as
• business or commercial activities involving crypto assets.

Tax processing is frequently technically demanding.

Transactions can be distributed across multiple wallets, exchanges, blockchains, and Layer 2 networks. Transfers between one's own wallets sometimes appear incorrectly in automated reports, data may be missing, or different software solutions may yield conflicting results.

Therefore, the actual transaction history must first be reconstructed, followed by the tax and, if applicable, criminal law assessment.

The Federal Ministry of Finance has revised its guidelines regarding the income tax treatment of certain cryptocurrencies, as well as participation and record-keeping requirements, for the year 2025.

schirach.law combines criminal defense in crypto cases with specific expertise in criminal tax law.

Voluntary disclosure for undeclared crypto gains

Under statutory conditions, a voluntary disclosure under criminal tax law can lead to exemption from punishment.

In the case of crypto assets, the particular difficulty often lies in completely and accurately reconstructing the relevant transactions.

Before submitting a voluntary disclosure, it is particularly necessary to examine:

• which types of tax are affected,
• which periods must be included,
• which wallets and exchange accounts are relevant,
• whether the transaction data is complete,
• which transactions were actually relevant for tax purposes,
• whether a statutory exclusion ground may have already occurred, and
• what taxes and interest are payable.

An incomplete or premature declaration can jeopardize the intended exemption from prosecution.

Therefore, technical processing, tax calculation, and criminal law review should be closely coordinated.

Preventive consulting for crypto companies

Criminal law risks should not only be examined once investigative authorities take action.

schirach.law advises founders, companies, and project managers at the intersections of criminal law, criminal tax law, and anti-money laundering compliance.

The subject of a preventive criminal law review may include in particular:

• responsibility and decision-making structures,
• criminal law risks of a business model,
• handling of customer and crypto assets,
• origin and transfer of digital assets,
• internal control and documentation processes,
• money laundering risks,
• communication with investors and customers,
• internal cases of suspected wrongdoing, and
• preparation for potential regulatory measures.

In the case of regulated crypto business models, it must also be examined whether MiCA, KMAG, or other supervisory requirements are affected.

Criminal law advice does not replace any specialized regulatory, tax, or corporate law advice that may be required. Rather, it complements these by adding the perspective of personal criminal liability, asset protection, and criminal procedural risks.

Crypto criminal law and white-collar crime

Crypto-related proceedings are frequently white-collar criminal proceedings as well.

Fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, tax offenses, insolvency offenses, and regulatory allegations can intertwine.

Added to this are complex capital flows, international parties involved, and extensive digital datasets.

schirach.law therefore combines technical factual analysis with strategic defense in white-collar crime.

In addition to the criminal allegation, we consider potential consequences for assets, companies, careers, and reputation.

Crypto criminal law in Munich and nationwide

schirach.law is headquartered in Munich and defends clients nationwide.

Our work is aimed in particular at private individuals, entrepreneurs, managing directors, executives, founders, project managers, and companies facing complex criminal or criminal tax law issues involving digital assets.

In-person consultations can take place at the firm's office in Munich. In addition, we handle crypto criminal proceedings nationwide.

 

Frequently asked questions about crypto criminal law

What is crypto criminal law?

Crypto criminal law encompasses criminal and tax criminal proceedings in which cryptocurrencies, tokens, blockchain applications, or other digital assets play a significant role.

Typical allegations include tax evasion, money laundering, fraud, breach of trust, cybercrime, and specific regulatory violations.

Can blockchain transactions be linked to an individual?

Partially.

Blockchain data initially shows transactions between addresses. To link them to an individual, investigators often require additional information such as exchange KYC data, bank movements, login details, seized devices, or wallet files.

Therefore, a transaction path alone does not automatically prove who controlled a wallet.

Can I investigate the origin of my crypto assets myself?

Many transaction paths can be reconstructed using blockchain data, exchange histories, bank records, and personal wallet data.

However, a distinction must be made between technical reconstruction and legal assessment. Anyone suspecting a criminal or tax criminal risk should verify which information should actually be disclosed before making comprehensive statements to banks or authorities.

What should I do during a search involving cryptocurrencies?

Do not resist and contact a criminal defense attorney as early as possible.

As a rule, no statements regarding the allegations should be made without prior consultation. Requests to unlock devices or provide passwords and wallet access should also be legally reviewed first.

Can hardware wallets or cryptocurrencies be seized?

Yes.

Investigative authorities can confiscate hardware wallets and other data carriers and attempt to secure digital assets. The available legal remedies depend on the specific measure and the underlying allegation.

Is using a mixer or a decentralized exchange punishable by law?

Not automatically.

The use of a mixer, a DEX, or other privacy technologies can be relevant in the context of an investigation. However, the decisive factors are the specific action, the origin of the assets, as well as the knowledge and intent of the person involved.

Are undeclared crypto gains automatically tax evasion?

No.

Tax evasion requires intentional action. Depending on the circumstances, it may simply be a tax inaccuracy or a negligent tax reduction.

Therefore, technical transactions, tax treatment, and subjective accountability must be examined separately.

Can I submit a voluntary disclosure for undeclared crypto gains?

In principle, a voluntary disclosure may be possible if the legal requirements are met and no grounds for exclusion apply.

In the case of crypto assets, this frequently requires the complete reconstruction of all relevant wallets, exchange accounts, transactions, and time periods.

Is the unauthorized provision of crypto services a criminal offense?

Certain violations may constitute a criminal offense.

Section 46 of the German Act on Markets in Crypto-Assets (KMAG) covers, among other things, specific cases where crypto-asset services are provided in violation of Article 59 of MiCA. Whether a specific business model falls under this provision depends on its actual design and the applicable regulatory framework.

What should I do if a crypto exchange or bank blocks my account?

First, it should be determined whether the block is due to an internal compliance review, a suspicious activity report (SAR) for money laundering, an official regulatory measure, or another reason.

Proof of origin may be required. However, before submitting extensive explanations or data, potential criminal and tax criminal risks should be carefully examined.

Establishing technical and legal clarity at an early stage

In crypto-related criminal proceedings, the accurate reconstruction of the technical facts often determines whether any given criminal law assessment is legally viable.

Anyone facing a search, receiving a subpoena, dealing with blocked crypto assets, or identifying conspicuous transactions and tax discrepancies themselves should therefore first clarify the data situation, the procedural status, and the legal risk.

schirach.law advises and defends clients in complex crypto, white-collar, and tax criminal proceedings – nationwide from its Munich office.

Contact schirach.law

Theatinerstraße 40–42 VII
80333 Munich

Phone: +49 89 443 695 60
E-Mail: kanzlei@schirach.law