UK Sanctions 18 Crypto Firms Tied to Russia’s $90B A7 War Network
The UK has issued “UK sanctions” against 18 crypto platforms, banks, and financial networks linked to the Kremlin-backed A7 payment system. The government alleges the network processed over $90B in 2025 to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Under the UK Sanctions regime, businesses operating in the country must freeze assets and block transactions connected to the listed entities.
A TRM Labs report names several targeted exchanges and services, including Huobi, Exmo Exchange, Bitpapa, and Rapira Group. Huobi reportedly sent more than $4.9B in on-chain transactions to UK-sanctioned entities and the A7 network since 2021, including $838M directed to A7 last year. The report says Russian illicit crypto activity did not stop after the March 2025 takedown of the exchange Garantex; instead, it migrated to successor platforms such as Rapira, Aifory Pro, Grinex.io, and ABCex.
Additional flow figures highlighted by TRM include: Rapira moving $543M (with $375.6M linked to Grinex.io); Aifory Pro moving $189M (with $175.2M attributed to ABCex); and ABCex recording $355M across restricted firms, sending $175.2M to Aifory Pro, $133.4M to Garantex, and $38.1M to Rapira. Exmo is described as having transacted over $19.5M with sanctioned actors.
The measures also target individuals connected to A7, which is said to be backed by a Kyrgyz bank and a major global crypto exchange allegedly moving $1.5B into Kremlin-linked channels.
Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said the UK sanctions aim to cut off the crypto-enabled financial flows sustaining Putin’s war. Separate TRM analysis claims illicit activity rose sharply in the prior year, with A7’s A7A5 token driving $72B in trades and A7 wallets adding $39B.
Neutral
This is primarily a regulatory enforcement story focused on sanctions evasion through specific crypto entities (exchanges/payment networks) tied to Russia’s A7 system. It is not a direct macro crypto shock (no immediate protocol change, no single large-cap token forced liquidation). For mainstream markets, the near-term effect is likely limited, because volumes and liquidity are generally diversified and the targeted counterparties are more relevant to compliance desks, OTC flows, and high-risk actors.
However, the update can still be trader-relevant in a “risk and compliance” way: delistings, account restrictions, and banking/payment knock-ons often hit affected platforms first, which can create short-term volatility in the affected venues and in certain stablecoin/transfer rails used for those flows. Historically, major sanctions actions (e.g., prior actions against Russia-linked crypto services) have usually produced localized liquidity disruptions rather than broad coin-wide selloffs.
Longer term, stronger enforcement (“freeze assets and block transactions”) tends to reduce the profitability of sanctions evasion and can shift activity into better-regulated on/off-ramps. That may support overall market integrity but may also push activity into new, less transparent successors—so the market impact is more about counterparty risk than price direction. Net: neutral for the overall crypto market, with compliance-driven risk repricing for specific firms and counterparties.