FinCEN 2013 Virtual Currency Guidance is a United States interpretive guidance issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network on March 18, 2013 as FIN-2013-G001. It explains how FinCEN applies Bank Secrecy Act money services business rules to persons using, administering, or exchanging convertible virtual currency. As of June 4, 2026, the guidance should be treated as published agency guidance that has been supplemented by FinCEN’s later CVC guidance, rather than as a standalone statute.
What the FinCEN 2013 virtual currency guidance covers
The guidance focuses on “convertible” virtual currency, meaning virtual currency that either has an equivalent value in real currency or acts as a substitute for real currency. FinCEN distinguishes that category from “real” currency, which its regulations define by reference to coin or paper money that is legal tender and customarily used as a medium of exchange in the country of issuance.
FinCEN uses three core participant categories: users, exchangers, and administrators. A user obtains virtual currency to buy goods or services. An exchanger is engaged as a business in exchanging virtual currency for real currency, funds, or other virtual currency. An administrator is engaged as a business in issuing virtual currency and has authority to redeem it.
Key provisions for BSA and MSB treatment
- User treatment: FinCEN states that a person who obtains convertible virtual currency and uses it to purchase real or virtual goods or services is not an MSB solely because of that activity.
- Administrator and exchanger treatment: An administrator or exchanger that accepts and transmits convertible virtual currency, or buys or sells it for any reason, is treated as a money transmitter unless a limitation or exemption applies.
- Centralized virtual currencies: A centralized repository administrator can be a money transmitter when it enables value transfers between persons or locations. Exchangers using that system may also fall within money transmitter treatment.
- Decentralized virtual currencies: A person who creates units for personal purchases is treated as a user. A person who creates and sells units for real currency, or accepts and transmits decentralized virtual currency for others, can be treated as a money transmitter.
- Regulatory perimeter: The guidance does not classify virtual currency activity as prepaid access or foreign exchange dealing merely because real currency is exchanged for virtual currency.
Jurisdictional impact in the United States
For U.S. crypto law coverage, FIN-2013-G001 is important because it is one of FinCEN’s earliest public applications of federal BSA money transmission rules to convertible virtual currency activity. The guidance did not create a bespoke crypto licensing regime. Instead, it applied existing MSB and money transmitter concepts to virtual currency facts and business models.
The guidance is also limited in scope. FinCEN states that it explains only how the agency characterizes certain virtual currency activities under the BSA and FinCEN regulations. It should not be read as a statement about whether the same activity complies with other federal or state statutes, rules, regulations, or orders.
Status and timeline
| Date | Event | Status |
|---|---|---|
| July 21, 2011 | FinCEN published MSB definition amendments that form part of the background for the virtual currency guidance. | Published |
| March 18, 2013 | FinCEN issued FIN-2013-G001 on users, administrators, and exchangers of virtual currency. | Published |
| May 9, 2019 | FinCEN issued broader CVC business-model guidance that summarizes and builds on the 2013 guidance. | Published |
Relationship to later FinCEN CVC guidance
FinCEN’s 2019 CVC guidance consolidates current regulations, earlier administrative rulings, and prior guidance involving money transmission under the BSA. It describes the 2013 guidance as the agency’s prior interpretive guidance for transactions involving acceptance of currency or funds and transmission of convertible virtual currency. Editors should therefore present FIN-2013-G001 as a foundational FinCEN interpretation that remains relevant to U.S. AML/CFT and MSB analysis, while noting that later FinCEN guidance, administrative rulings, enforcement actions, and rulemakings may affect how particular business models are assessed.