TLDR
The US Treasury has sanctioned two France-based charities and three individuals for allegedly using cryptocurrency to help fund Hamas, expanding crypto-related terrorism enforcement into the European nonprofit sector.
- The designations target Association Baraka, Ensemble C Mieux and three people accused of routing hundreds of thousands of dollars in crypto to a Hamas commander.
- US persons and platforms must block any assets linked to these parties, with heightened scrutiny for charities and intermediaries handling cross-border crypto donations.
- The move fits a wider trend of using on-chain tracing in sanctions enforcement, and more wallet disclosures or follow-on actions could widen compliance obligations.
Deep Dive
1. Who Was Sanctioned And How Crypto Was Used
According to US Treasury-focused reporting, OFAC designated two France-based charities, Association Baraka and Ensemble C Mieux, and three individuals, including Faouzi Barika, Amel Oualid and Saleem Abdallah Saleem al Zaq, for alleged Hamas financing between 2020 and 2026. The network is said to have raised more than $2 million for Hamas, including about $1.5 million after the October 2023 attacks on Israel, though not all of that total was in crypto.
Treasury alleges that Barika and Oualid sent hundreds of thousands of dollars in cryptocurrency to al Zaq, described as a deputy battalion commander in Hamas military wing, with traced transfers from France providing a key enforcement nexus for the action. These are administrative sanctions, not criminal convictions, under OFAC authority.
You can see this described in more detail in CryptoSlates summary of the designations and in TokenPosts report on the Hamas fundraising network.
2. What Changes For Charities And Crypto Intermediaries
Under OFAC rules, the sanctions block the designated parties property that comes under US jurisdiction or control of US persons, who generally may not transact in it unless a license or exemption applies. The restrictions also extend to entities owned 50 percent or more, individually or collectively, by one or more of the blocked persons.
Crypto exchanges, custodians, payment processors and other virtual asset service providers that identify digital assets linked to these parties must freeze access and report to OFAC, typically within 10 business days, and then annually. A CoinsKid community explainer notes that nonprofits handling digital assets are now clearly in scope for sanctions compliance, not just exchanges and wallet providers, highlighting an enforcement shift toward charities and donor infrastructure using crypto routing from Europe to conflict zones.
Any organization using crypto for cross-border donations needs robust sanctions screening, ownership checks and tracing, similar to traditional banking controls, especially when counterparties or causes are high risk.
3. Broader Sanctions And Enforcement Trend
This action reinforces a broader pattern where US authorities rely on cross-border on-chain tracing to pursue illicit finance. Treasury has recently targeted other crypto-linked networks, and analysts point out that foreign institutions can face secondary sanctions if they knowingly facilitate significant transactions for designated parties.
The current designation does not automatically freeze every related blockchain transaction worldwide. Enforcement hinges on jurisdiction, who owns the assets, and whether intermediaries are subject to US rules or to coordinated regimes in other countries. Future publication of wallet addresses, intermediaries or related entities would likely expand screening lists and could force exchanges to review past exposure to the network.
Crypto users and businesses should expect more sanctions actions that hinge on wallet-level tracing and cross-border flows, and watch for official address lists and guidance that can rapidly change which assets must be blocked.
Conclusion
US sanctions on the two French charities and associated individuals show how crypto flows are now central to terrorism financing investigations, even when they represent only part of the fundraising total. For crypto platforms and nonprofits, the main impact is tighter sanctions screening and reporting obligations around cross-border donations, not a blanket ban on related assets. The key forward risk is that as authorities disclose more wallet data or expand linked designations, the universe of crypto that must be frozen under sanctions could grow quickly.
CoinsKid.Com