Tumbling coins has nothing to do with money laundering, it's just a way to anonymize them....

Tumbling coins has everything to do with money laundering. Of course, the source of the funds isn’t necessarily illicit.

Money laundering is turning dirty money into clean, that appears legitimate, taxable etc. If the source isn't illicit, it isn't laundering because there's nothing to clean.

Tumbling coins is just obscuring their origin.

The two don't inherently have anything to do with each other.

Even if you tumble "dirty" coins, you've got to explain to the IRS the source of income behind the new coins. Tumbling, in and of itself, doesn't achieve that.

Bitcoins may get a pass because they aren't technically "money", but in general any business that transfers money on behalf of another entity without knowing exactly who both the sender and recipient are—and registering as a money transmission business, a very expensive process—will be considered to be involved in money laundering. Even if the money is provably "clean" to begin with. A company that implemented anything like a "tumbler" for USD would most certainly run afoul of anti-money-laundering regulations.

It's not right, but that's the way the rules are written.

Like cyberpunk said. It's not money laundering, it's a way of anonymising the bitcoins.

He's actually technically correct, as that is the very definition of money laundering. The difference is (assumedly) the money he's laundering wasn't obtained via illegal means.

> Money laundering is the process of making illegally-gained proceeds (i.e. "dirty money") appear legal (i.e. "clean").

Someone should let FinCEN know that their definition is incorrect: https://www.fincen.gov/history-anti-money-laundering-laws