Could a divorcee hide their assets by squirrelling them away in bitcoin? A rogue poster on the Bitcoin Talk Forum raised the issue this week, so CoinDesk asked some lawyers.
According to the user on Bitcoin Talk, a man discovered that his wife cheated on him and decided to divorce her. However, before he did, he spent several weeks moving a large percentage of his assets into bitcoins, in an attempt to shield the assets. The post continues, saying:
Commenters queried the validity of the original poster’s claim, based on her stated age and some of the claims made. And she subsequently replied to CoinDesk:
“Sorry to disappoint you, my post was a forum troll, like all my other posts in this forum.”
“But I am sure the same story has happened, or will happen in the near future.”
The debate on the forum was a heated one. The concept is clearly interesting, so CoinDesk took up the hypothetical issue with some attorneys.
Disclosure and enforcement
There are two separate questions here: firstly, should parties in a divorce be made to declare bitcoin assets, and secondly, if they are, then could they illicitly hide them and be free from enforcement? After all, bitcoin is supposed to be a way of storing value anonymously (if a person knows what they are doing).
He went on the say that family law courts are inherently practical.
Much depends on the jurisdiction in which the case plays out, however. Some US states carry a community property rule, where only assets acquired during a marriage are to be divided, while property owned before a marriage is considered an individual’s own.
The question, then, is whether someone in a divorce case would be able to hide their coins effectively (if illegally) from a soon-to-be ex-spouse?
Hiding money is nothing new, points out Hoegner:
If a counterparty’s lawyer believes that a disclosure is false, they will attempt to trace any extra funds, generally by demanding bank statements.
“We’d go back and look at the statements and then say ‘here’s where you transferred some money to Mt. Gox or Coinbase',” said Broiles. If the exchange had a US presence, they could demand records from that business.
One of the appealing things about bitcoin is its ability to quickly transfer funds to a destination out of US jurisdiction. That makes it difficult to retrieve those funds. A friend or other institution holding the funds outside the country would be harder to get the money back from.
In any case, it would be difficult to prove just who owned that money, after it was sent from a person’s bitcoin wallet to another address. Sometimes, judges will jail parties in a divorce suit until the money comes back, or until it can be proven that they have no control over that money.
That could backfire on anyone trying to hide assets from their spouse by transferring them to bitcoins. Broiles went on to say:
In general, it’s inadvisable to be dishonest with anyone in a divorce case (or anywhere else). Trying to squirrel away assets by hiding them in a virtual currency leaves people at risk of a perjury charge.
But even though this incident was little more than fictional fun from an online troll, we can expect to see real cases, warns Hoegner:
In many countries, it isn’t yet clear whether bitcoin is a currency, a commodity, or another asset.
Updated: A day after this story was written, we found this gem, in which a company's discovery request explicitly included bitcoin. Clearly, it is starting to appear on litigators' radar.
The leader in news and information on cryptocurrency, digital assets and the future of money, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.