China seeks to seize Bitcoin tied to $5.7 billion fraud case

Traders Union
All News
Crypto
China seeks Bitcoin seizure

Highlights

Chinese prosecutors are seeking confiscation of digital assets including over 61,800 Bitcoin tied to Qian Zhimin's GB $5.7 billion fraud, with a six-month window for claims.
UK High Court ruled that Chinese law applies to alleged victims' claims on Bitcoin seized in Britain, shifting future recovery proceedings to Chinese legal standards.
The case's scale—spanning multiple jurisdictions and featuring a large Bitcoin holding—may set precedent for China's crypto crime enforcement and cross-border asset recovery efforts.

Court action and asset seizure process

As reported by CoinDesk, citing The Paper, prosecutors in Tianjin are seeking confiscation of digital assets and other property allegedly connected to Qian Zhimin, the accused controller of Tianjin Lantian Gree Electronic Technology. The court said on Oct. 13 that it had accepted the request to confiscate the assets as illegal gains and opened a six-month window for victims and other interested parties to join the case.

Prosecutors say the company sold unlicensed wealth-management products across China from 2014 to 2017, promising guaranteed principal and high returns. Authorities allege the money raised was used to repay earlier investors, support fake investment projects, buy Bitcoin and acquire property, cars and jewelry instead of funding legitimate businesses.

British authorities later seized the assets after Qian fled China in 2017 and settled in the UK. The holdings include more than 61,800 Bitcoin as well as bitcoin cash, bitcoin gold, bitcoin SV, ripple, dogecoin, cash, jewelry and investment assets.

Implications for victims and the crypto sector

The seizure effort follows a UK High Court ruling that Chinese law, rather than English law, should govern alleged victims' claims to the Bitcoin held in Britain. That decision does not prevent recovery, but it shifts the legal test to whether victims can establish a property claim under Chinese law in further hearings.

Victims who do not participate in the Tianjin court case can still seek refunds from recovered assets, according to the court's notice. Lawyers for some victims are seeking to appeal the UK ruling, leaving the final path for distribution unresolved while the case proceeds across both jurisdictions.

The scale of the case makes it significant for China's handling of crypto-linked financial crime and cross-border asset recovery. With the Bitcoin stash potentially worth far more now than at the time of seizure, the outcome could influence both victim compensation and future enforcement involving digital assets.

In our earlier article, we covered a Malaysian Court of Appeal decision that held a commission-based partner at a law firm personally liable for an unpaid balance in a property sale. The ruling overturned lower-court findings and clarified that salaried or commission partners can be treated as partners under the Partnership Act 1961, with potentially wider implications for liability across professional firms.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.