Look at the final exchange outcome, not just a single on-chain transaction
This model typically involves the client paying RMB in mainland China, a designated overseas payee receiving foreign currency, and the operator using stablecoins to replenish positions at both ends. From the client's perspective, what is purchased remains a cross-currency, cross-border funds delivery service. The fact that no single sum is directly remitted between accounts does not prove that no currency exchange occurred; the quotation, orders, RMB transaction records, on-chain addresses and foreign-currency payments need to be examined together.
Existing official cases directly address this structure
In a typical case published by the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange in 2023, Zhao and others operated currency exchange by collecting dirhams overseas, paying RMB domestically, and using Tether to circulate funds. The official case expressly states that using virtual currency as a medium to achieve conversion between domestic and foreign currencies falls within the scope of illegal foreign exchange trading. This is the judicial conclusion in a specific case and does not mean that any holding of tokens or ordinary token transfers automatically constitutes this offence.
Even with a trade contract, the lawful payment and receipt path must be verified
The Foreign Exchange Administration Regulations require that current-account foreign exchange receipts and payments have a genuine and lawful underlying transaction and that foreign exchange be purchased and paid through qualified institutions in accordance with the rules. Suppose the client genuinely has import payment obligations, but the platform collects RMB and has an overseas affiliate pay US dollars on its behalf; a genuine order does not confer foreign exchange operating qualifications on the platform. Splitting entities, splitting orders, or renaming the spread as a service fee are not paths to lawfulness.
When faced with such requests, verify and stop unlicensed arrangements
First confirm whether the client needs to resolve trade payment, investment, or personal funds transfer, and then refer the matter to a bank or institution with the corresponding qualifications to assess it according to the genuine purpose. The platform should reject arrangements premised on concealing the payer, falsifying the purpose, or borrowing accounts. Where transactions have already occurred, complete order, communication, funds and wallet records should be preserved, existing funds reconciled, and dedicated legal advice obtained promptly; transactions must not continue to be added or records deleted in order to balance the books.
Recommended actions
- Reconcile RMB receipts, on-chain transfers and foreign-currency payments against the same order.
- Verify who provides the exchange rate quotation, who bears the overseas payment obligation, and whether that party holds the relevant operating qualifications.
- Refer genuine needs to qualified institutions for assessment and stop unlicensed exchange or matched-order arrangements.
Information note: This article provides general information and does not replace legal advice based on specific facts.
References
- Typical Cases of Punishing Illegal and Criminal Activities Involving Foreign Exchange — Supreme People's Procuratorate and State Administration of Foreign Exchange
- Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Foreign Exchange Administration (2008 Revision) — State Council / National Database of Administrative Regulations, Ministry of Justice
- Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks Associated with Virtual Currency and Related Matters (Yin Fa [2026] No. 42) — People's Bank of China and Seven Other Departments
