Smartest Money Laundering Ever?

Smartest Money Laundering Ever?

Have you ever made an ETH transaction, whether it was buying, selling, or trading? Usually, fees may run you as high as 5% for some exchanges, although I have come across traders who have complained about sometimes paying 10% during peak times.

But I absolutely bet you’ve never heard of someone paying 23,000 times as much in fees as their transaction…… until now.
Recent transactions have been discovered on the Ethereum blockchain that shows a transaction for 0.1 Ether, valued at approximately $14.80 at the time the transaction was sent by paying 2,100 ETH in fees. That’s $302,000 in fees!!!!

This sent the Ethereum community WILD, many thinking the transaction was done by mistake or the amount was misread. But really how do you eve end up paying that amount anyway? So essentially that spiked users of the community to go down the infamous “rabbit hole”, only to discover that this transaction was not the only one of its kind. Honestly, I don’t know how we missed those in the past. The same wallet address sent 0.170000000000000002 ETH or roughly $24, for a total of 3990.00000000000004 ETH in fees. That’s nearly $575,000 at today’s prices. Whoa, big baller alert! Talk about the most inefficient transaction of all time. I thought the APR on my Amazon card was bad.

Now, speculator think this may be tied to some odd money laundering method because let’s be honest, why are you fees SOOOO much more than the amount you’re transferring?

According to a tweet from the Saturn Network;

Because the transaction was not publicly broadcasted like transactions typically are, it suggests that there was some form of money laundering involved portrayed to look as  “honest miner income”.

Logically when evaluating this case, money laundering is very possible because the transactions are coming from the same wallet address and being mined without public broadcast at an astronomical rate. One thing is for sure; whoever it is, is one wealthy “miner”.


Happy mining!


-Annalese Abreu


Ledger Nano S - The secure hardware wallet


Comments: 2

  1. Cheryl says:

    I’m glad you posted this Annalese. I actually sent a link about this story, on BNT, to Timothy. I though it would make a great “mention” on DC. How can one get away with NOT BROADCASTING? I don’t know blockchain we’ll enough to know, but I thought all transactions HAD to be broadcasted. Understandably, this was probably a crook (for lack of a more friendly word, 😂) but how do you think they were able to not broadcast? Just wondering about any theories y’all may have.

    • admin says:

      Hi Cheryl! The person would have had to been running a node/mining operation to pull this off. Here’s the best explanation we could find on the net about this

      “When a miner creates a block, he can put whatever transactions into that block that he likes, including his own1.

      However, creating the block locally and populating it with transactions, and then successfully mining it, are two different things.

      For the block to be mined it must contain a valid proof of work, which proves to the network that the node has solved a computationally difficult problem. The difficulty of this problem is in no way related to the transactions the miner has decided to put into the block. It isn’t any easier to mine a block containing your own transactions – the difficulty comes from elsewhere.

      1The current vanilla Geth code prioritizes transactions in a certain way, but a miner can edit the code in any way he likes to prioritize things differently.”

Add your comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.