Binance Refutes WSJ Claim of $850M Iran-Linked Crypto Flows

Binance chief executive Zhao Richard Teng pushed back against a Wall Street Journal investigation that alleged the crypto exchange processed roughly $850 million in transactions tied to a sanctioned Iranian financier, with funds purportedly ending up with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In a Friday post on X, Teng described the reporting as “fundamentally inaccurate,” insisting Binance never allowed transactions with sanctioned individuals and that flagged activity occurred before those individuals were placed under U.S. sanctions. He also asserted Binance had already investigated the issues prior to the Journal’s inquiry and that additional facts provided by the company were omitted from the story.

The Wall Street Journal’s report, published this week, centers on Babak Zanjani, who was re-sanctioned by the U.S. in January, and his network. It identifies Zedcex, along with accounts linked to a sister, a romantic partner, and a company director, as operating from the same devices. The Journal contends that up to $850 million moved through Binance accounts over a two-year period, with alleged activity tied to Tehran detected in late 2024. The piece also notes more than a dozen internal alerts triggered by the Zanjani-associated accounts and claims internal investigators recommended removing the accounts and informing authorities, but the accounts remained active.

The Journal’s reporting also touches on broader questions of how Binance has handled potential sanctions evasion. It states that the company’s internal compliance reviews flagged the Zanjani-linked account after Tehran-based access was detected in late 2024 and that those accounts persisted for more than a year. Binance, the Journal says, faced internal pressure to shut the accounts and report the activity, but according to the outlet, the accounts continued to operate.

The investigative piece also situates the allegations within a wider regulatory context. The Journal notes that Binance pleaded guilty in 2023 to anti-money-laundering and sanctions-violations charges and paid a record $4.3 billion fine, while promising to overhaul its compliance framework. It reports that the U.S. Justice Department is examining Iran’s use of Binance to evade sanctions in the wake of that settlement. In response to the Journal’s coverage, Binance filed a defamation lawsuit against the publication, seeking damages and a jury trial, and the exchange reiterated that it does not claim knowledge of any Department of Justice investigation and remains cooperative with regulators and law enforcement.

Beyond the Zanjani case, the Journal’s narrative points to additional alleged ties between Binance and Iranian financial networks. It cites claims that Iran’s central bank moved $107 million in cryptocurrency onto Binance accounts in 2025, and that a foreign law-enforcement agency tracked roughly $260 million in direct Binance-to-Iranian-financier transactions during 2024 and 2025.

In a separate line of defense, Teng asserted Binance’s commitment to compliance. He emphasized Binance’s “zero-tolerance for illicit activity” and described the platform as having built a “best-in-class industry-leading compliance program that continues to grow.” The exchange has also pointed readers to a Binance blog post addressing what it calls false claims, and it has publicly denied facilitating transactions for Iranian entities in response to a Senate inquiry.

Key takeaways

• Binance disputes The Wall Street Journal’s assertion of an $850 million flow linked to an Iranian financier, arguing that sanctioned individuals were never allowed to transact and that flagged activity occurred before sanctions.
• The Journal’s report centers on Babak Zanjani and his network, including Zedcex, alleging internal warnings and ongoing access to Binance accounts despite investigators’ cautions.
• Binance’s response includes a defamation lawsuit against the Journal, with the company stressing its cooperation with regulators and its ongoing compliance improvements.
• Historical regulatory context remains relevant: Binance pleaded guilty in 2023 to AML and sanctions violations and paid $4.3 billion, underscoring continued scrutiny of the exchange’s controls.
• The article’s broader claims cite Iranian central-bank crypto movements and cross-border activity that regulators allegedly tracked through Binance in 2024–2025, highlighting ongoing concerns about sanctions enforcement in crypto networks.

The Journal’s assertions and Binance’s rebuttal

The core of The Wall Street Journal’s investigation rests on a two-year stream of activity described as $850 million moving through Binance accounts associated with Babak Zanjani and his business network. The report ties these funds to networks connected with Iran, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. It also highlights the alleged overlap of devices used by multiple figures—Zanjani’s sister, romantic partner, and a company director—within the same operational footprint and devices.

Binance countered with a straightforward defense: it says it never permitted transactions with sanctioned individuals and that any flagged activity occurred before those individuals were subject to U.S. sanctions. The CEO’s post on X argued that Binance had already investigated the issues prior to the Journal’s inquiry and that the publication did not incorporate the company’s supplied facts into its coverage.

The exchange has not stood still on the compliance front. In addition to the defamation lawsuit, Binance has publicly maintained that it is cooperating with regulators and law enforcement. Teng’s remarks echo a broader corporate narrative that Binance emphasizes: a commitment to robust compliance infrastructure and ongoing enhancements designed to deter illicit finance on its platform.

Regulatory backdrop and corporate response

The Wall Street Journal’s piece sits against a larger backdrop of regulatory scrutiny surrounding Binance. The 2023 settlement, which ended with Binance pleading guilty to anti-money-laundering and sanctions violations and the payment of a $4.3 billion fine, marked a watershed moment for the exchange’s compliance reforms. While Binance asserted that its 2023 settlement catalyzed significant reforms, the Journal’s report suggests that sanction-related flows persisted in some form in the years since.

The Journal notes that the U.S. Department of Justice is examining Iran’s use of Binance to evade sanctions in the aftermath of the 2023 settlement. Binance responded to the Journal’s coverage not only with legal action but also with public statements emphasizing its commitment to regulatory cooperation. The exchange’s official blog and public statements have framed these allegations as part of a broader tension between evolving global sanctions regimes and a high-growth, cross-border crypto platform landscape.

Amid these developments, the Journal highlighted additional purported links between Binance and Iranian financial networks—claims that extend beyond the Zanjani case. It cites a 2025 move of $107 million by Iran’s central bank into Binance accounts and notes that approximately $260 million in direct Binance–Iranian-financier transactions were tracked by a foreign law-enforcement agency over 2024 and 2025. These figures, if corroborated, would illustrate the persistent difficulty of fully segregating sanctioned activity from the rapidly moving value in crypto markets.

In response to the broader narrative, Binance publicly reiterated its stance on sanctions compliance. The company underscored its compliance program as “industry-leading” and described its approach as dynamic, ongoing, and designed to scale with emerging threats. Binance’s response also referenced its public blog addressing the Journal’s claims and reiterated its denial of facilitating transactions for Iranian entities in a Senate inquiry context.

What readers should watch next

For investors, traders, and users, the evolving story underscores the enduring importance of robust on-chain analytics, continuous compliance enhancements, and the regulatory risk embedded in cross-border crypto activity. The juxtaposition of high-profile sanctions cases with the operational realities of a large exchange highlights both the capabilities and the limitations of current oversight tools in a fast-moving market.

Observers should monitor further disclosures from Binance about its compliance program upgrades, any subsequent regulatory or DOJ updates, and additional reporting from outlets detailing the intersection of sanction policy and crypto trading. The coming months may reveal how Binance’s legal strategy interacts with ongoing investigations and how regulators assess the firm’s ability to prevent illicit flows while supporting legitimate users and institutional clients.

As this story unfolds, the key question remains whether independent findings will align with Binance’s assurances of a zero-tolerance stance on illicit activity or whether new evidence will suggest gaps in the guardrails that policymakers, investors, and users rely on to navigate the evolving crypto landscape.