Disgraced FTX Co-Founder Cashes Out $684K While on House Arrest?

• According to an analyst on Dec. 29, 2020, the disgraced co-founder of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), may have cashed out $684,000 in crypto assets while under house arrest.
• Analyst Discovers Funds Tied to SBF’s and Alameda’s Wallets Moved While the FTX Co-Founder Is on House Arrest
• Funds were sent to a no-KYC exchange based in Seychelles and to the Bitcoin network via the Ren Protocol, a bridge funded by Alameda.

On Dec. 29, 2020, an analyst named Bowtiediguana published a Twitter thread that suggests the disgraced co-founder of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), may have violated the conditions of his house arrest. According to the thread, SBF may have cashed out $684,000 in crypto assets without permission from the court.

The analyst’s investigation began with a financial agreement between SBF and the anonymous founder of the decentralized exchange (dex) Sushiswap, Chef Nomi, which dates back to August 2020. When the deal was made, SBF shared a public Ethereum address and Chef Nomi transferred ownership of Sushiswap to SBF’s address.

However, after SBF was released from house arrest, his wallet sent all of its remaining crypto tokens to a new Ethereum address created an hour earlier. Bowtiediguana’s Twitter thread reveals that in less than four hours, 570 Ethereum, which is worth approximately $684,000, was transferred out of this new wallet to various destinations.

The funds were sent to a no-KYC exchange based in Seychelles and to the Bitcoin network via the Ren Protocol, a bridge funded by Alameda. The analyst also noted that the address in question received a further $1M from 11 wallets labeled as Alameda Research. According to the court’s release conditions, SBF is not allowed to spend more than $1,000 without permission from the court.

Bowtiediguana’s revelation has since sparked an investigation into whether or not SBF violated the conditions of his house arrest. If he did, it is likely that the SEC attorneys will be notified. For now, however, the matter remains unresolved and SBF has yet to comment on the situation.