Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, and Elizabeth Warren, a US senator, have been at odds over financial regulation for over ten years. However, on December 6, during a Senate Banking Committee hearing, they took the same stand. Both demand much stronger US government regulations on cryptocurrencies.

Speaking to Andrew Ross Sorkin on NBC’s Squawk Box the next day, she reiterated her disdain for the digital currency.

“There is a new threat out there – it’s crypto,” she said. “It is being used for terrorist financing. It is being used for drug trafficking.”

She also claimed that North Korea was using cryptocurrency to “pay for about half of its nuclear weapons program.”

“We can’t allow that to continue,” she concluded.

“When Jamie and I are in exactly the same place, it’s because we have a serious problem in this country.”

She went on to elucidate to say that this part of the financial system was “being used by terrorists, by drug traffickers, by rogue nations to launder money.”

She claimed that these elements use it to “move money through the system and finance their illegal activities.”

What Did She Mean About North Korea?

A September report by blockchain intelligence firm TRM Labs had found that North Korea-linked hackers stole $200 million worth of cryptocurrency from January to Aug. 18, which was over 20% of all stolen crypto this year.

“In recent years, there has been a marked rise in the size and scale of cyber attacks against cryptocurrency-related businesses by North Korea. This has coincided with an apparent acceleration in the country’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs,” said TRM Labs in a June discussion with North Korea experts.

Separately, blockchain analytics company Chainalysis said in a February report that “most experts agree the North Korean government is using these stolen assets to fund its nuclear weapons programs,” CNBC reported.

The agency continues “to identify and disrupt North Korea’s theft and laundering of virtual currency, which is used to support North Korea’s ballistic missile and Weapons of Mass Destruction programs.”

Sorkin pointed out how it wasn’t just on Congress acting, but also other factors, like how the S.E.C. might act, referring to how a bitcoin ETF could ultimately get approved, which would “expand access for Americans all over the country, potentially, to invest in bitcoin.”

Stating that she didn’t want to speculate on what the S.E.C was doing, she brought up the distinction between the two.

She stated that the SEC was primarily responsible for the “regulatory” aspect of monitoring the platforms and the markets, and making sure that there was adequate consumer protection.

However, she was concerned about the “law enforcement” side of things.

“What I’m talking about is the part of the system that makes sure that banks are not being used for terrorist financing.”

She highlighted that the Bank Secrecy Act, which essentially monitors the kinds of transactions that go through the system, had only been updated once.

“It was written in the 1970s. Following 911, law enforcement… figured out how the financing had made it through the system and that’s the last time the Congress updated the Act.”

She strongly renewed her calls for Congress to impose stricter regulations on cryptocurrencies.

Authored by Feba Bovas