When the Justice Department announced it seized billions in stolen cryptocurrency earlier this year, it seemed like great news for victims of a hack that drained around $70 million from customers’ accounts on the Bitfinex trading platform in 2016.
“It was the biggest relief of my life,” said Frankie Cavazos, who lost 15 bitcoins in the hack.
Over the course of the last six years, the value of the stolen crypto skyrocketed. At the time of the hack, a single bitcoin was worth less than a thousand dollars. Today it would be trading for around $20,000.
For Cavazos, getting his bitcoins back would be “a life-changing amount of money.”
But so far thousands of victims like him haven’t experienced the happy ending they were hoping for. Instead, they’re embroiled in a battle over who is the legal owner of all that stolen crypto.
On the day the news broke that the funds had been recovered, Bitfinex publicly asserted that the stolen bitcoins should be returned to the platform in a statement: “Bitfinex will work with the DOJ and follow appropriate legal processes to establish our rights to a return of the stolen bitcoin.”
That’s because the company believes it’s already made its customers whole by providing them with a variety of digital tokens that customers could sell in exchange for cash after the hack. A company spokesperson told CNBC that Bitfinex customers could have sold the tokens for cash and then used the cash to buy more bitcoins at the time.
The decision to offer customers tokens came after the company decided to generalize its losses across all account holders by 36%. That meant everyone who had a Bitfinex account lost 36% of their assets – not just users whose accounts were hacked.
The first token the company created was called a BFX token. Customers received one BFX token for each dollar they lost.
Bitfinex hack victim Frankie Cavazos
CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall St” YouTube documentary
Cavazos told CNBC he felt like Bitfinex just “dumped” those tokens on its customers and said he was not given the option to decline the BFX token.
He and several other Bitfinex hack victims spoke exclusively to CNBC for the documentary “Crocodile of Wall Street,” which reports on the theft of the bitcoins and the alleged attempt to launder the stolen crypto.
One issue customers brought up to CNBC is that when they decided to sell their tokens they were actually worth pennies on the dollar.
“They pegged ’em to $1 per BFX token,” Cavazos said. “They put ’em on the open market and it went from $1 to, like, 20 cents, so they were essentially allowed to basically FOMO everyone out of their debt.”
Rafal Bielenia, who had 91 bitcoins on the platform said: “I sold those tokens as fast as possible immediately when they became available. And I was only able to get like 25% of their value.” He believes, “there was no point in time that they refunded me – not in dollar terms, and not in bitcoin terms.”
Bitfinex hack victim Rafal Bielenia.
CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall Street” YouTube documentary
For customers who didn’t sell the tokens immediately, the company later gave BFX token holders a chance to convert their tokens into equity shares of iFinex, the corporate entity behind Bitfinex through other tokens the company created called RRT and LEO.
To put it simply, Bitfinex feels the customers have already been compensated fairly and if they chose to sell the tokens before their value reached a dollar, that was their choice to make. In a statement, the company told CNBC, “Upon receipt of the bitcoins recovered from the 2016 security breach, Bitfinex has pledged to use 80 percent of the proceeds to buy back and burn LEO tokens, after all RRTs are redeemed.”
Essentially, Bitfinex wants the bitcoins that were stolen in the 2016 hack returned to the company and it will give a portion of that back to some of their customers in cash, not in bitcoins.
But some of the hack victims still assert the bitcoins belong to them. And the idea that they could lose their bitcoins not once, but twice, seems impossible.
“Why would anybody question that I should get my money back? That was my property,” Bielenia said.
“I still am going to be trying to get ahold of these 15 bitcoins because I truly believe they are mine,” Cavazos said. “I can prove it through the blockchain explorers.”
Will Hogarth, who also had his crypto stolen in the Bitfinex hack, told CNBC, “I still expect my bitcoin back and I don’t see any reason why they would keep it.”
U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNBC, “Victims, individuals and entities whose money, who claimed that’s their money, that they were victimized by this money laundering scheme will submit claims ultimately to a court who will decide how that money is dispersed.” However, no further details about that process have been released.
Booking photos for Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein.
Courtesy: Alexandria Adult Detention Center.
For now, the holdup seems to be that there has been no resolution in the court case involving the couple investigators say got caught holding the stolen cryptocurrency. Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein have been charged with conspiring to launder billions in bitcoin.
Morgan is an aspiring rapper who called herself “the Crocodile of Wall Street” and Lichtenstein a self-described “tech entrepreneur, explorer and part time magician.” The duo is facing more than two decades in prison if they’re found guilty. They have not yet entered a plea. CNBC reached out to Morgan and Lichtenstein to hear their side of the story, neither agreed to an interview. So far, no one has been charged with hacking Bitfinex in the first place.
As their case makes its way through the court system, a multibillion-dollar battle over what happens to the money is brewing.
“Ultimately, it’s going to be a dog fight as to who gets this money. Whether or not the government gets to keep it, whether or not Bitfinex gets to keep it, whether or not the customers get it back — anyone who tells you there’s a clear answer is lying for their own benefit,” said cryptocurrency attorney David Silver.
David Silver cryptocurrency attorney at Silver Miller
CNBC’s “Crocodile of Wall Street” YouTube documentary
With billions of dollars on the line, Silver expects “people are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get their hands on that pot of gold.”
“I do think it’s going to be a fight,” Cavazos agreed,
“The end of this story — we don’t know yet,” he said. “But you can’t just simply walk away with a hack like this. There’s someone that’s going to be caught up in this that has to tell the truth and when that shoe drops, it’s going to be really interesting and it’s going to impact who gets the money.”
President Trump’s new tariffs on goods that the U.S. imports from over 100 countries will have an effect on consumers, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told CNBC on Friday. Investors will feel the pain, too.
Microsoft’s stock dropped almost 6% in the past two days, as the Nasdaq wrapped up its worst week in five years.
“As a Microsoft shareholder, this kind of thing is not good,” Ballmer said, in an interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin that was tied to Microsoft’s 50th anniversary celebration. “It creates opportunity to be a serious, long-term player.”
Ballmer was sandwiched in between Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and current CEO Satya Nadella for the interview.
“I took just enough economics in college — that tariffs are actually going to bring some turmoil,” said Ballmer, who was succeeded by Nadella in 2014. Gates, Microsoft’s first CEO, convinced Ballmer to join the company in 1980.
Gates, Ballmer and Nadella attended proceedings at Microsoft’s Redmond, Washington, campus on Friday to celebrate its first half-century.
Between the tariffs and weak quarterly revenue guidance announced in January, Microsoft’s stock is on track for its fifth straight month of declines, which would be the worst stretch since 2009. But the company remains a leader in the PC operating system and productivity software markets, and its partnership with startup OpenAI has led to gains in cloud computing.
“I think that disruption is very hard on people, and so the decision to do something for which disruption was inevitable, that needs a lot of popular support, and nobody could game theorize exactly who is going to do what in response,” Ballmer said, regarding the tariffs. “So, I think citizens really like stability a lot. And I hope people — individuals who will feel this, because people are feeling it, not just the stock market, people are going to feel it.”
Ballmer, who owns the Los Angeles Clippers, is among Microsoft’s biggest fans. He said he’s the company’s largest investor. In 2014, shortly after he bought the basketball team for $2 billion, he held over 333 million shares of the stock, according to a regulatory filing.
“I’m not going to probably have 50 more years on the planet,” he said. “But whatever minutes I have, I’m gonna be a large Microsoft shareholder.” He said there’s a bright future for computing, storage and intelligence. Microsoft launched the first Azure services while Ballmer was CEO.
Earlier this week Bloomberg reported that Microsoft, which pledged to spend $80 billion on AI-enabled data center infrastructure in the current fiscal year, has stopped discussions or pushed back the opening of facilities in the U.S. and abroad.
JPMorgan Chase’s chief economist, Bruce Kasman, said in a Thursday note that the chance of a global recession will be 60% if Trump’s tariffs kick in as described. His previous estimate was 40%.
“Fifty years from now, or 25 years from now, what is the one thing you can be guaranteed of, is the world needs more compute,” Nadella said. “So I want to keep those two thoughts and then take one step at a time, and then whatever are the geopolitical or economic shifts, we’ll adjust to it.”
Gates, who along with co-founder Paul Allen, sought to build a software company rather than sell both software and hardware, said he wasn’t sure what the economic effects of the tariffs will be. Today, most of Microsoft’s revenue comes from software. It also sells Surface PCs and Xbox consoles.
“So far, it’s just on goods, but you know, will it eventually be on services? Who knows?” said Gates, who reportedly donated around $50 million to a nonprofit that supported Democratic nominee Kamala Harris’ losing campaign.
AppLovin CEO Adam Foroughi provided more clarity on the ad-tech company’s late-stage effort to acquire TikTok, calling his offer a “much stronger bid than others” on CNBC’s The Exchange Friday afternoon.
Foroughi said the company is proposing a merger between AppLovin and the entire global business of TikTok, characterizing the deal as a “partnership” where the Chinese could participate in the upside while AppLovin would run the app.
“If you pair our algorithm with the TikTok audience, the expansion on that platform for dollars spent will be through the roof,” Foroughi said.
The news comes as President Trump announced he would extend the deadline a second time for TikTok’s Chinese-owned parent company ByteDance to sell the U.S. subsidiary of TikTok to an American buyer or face an effective ban on U.S. app stores. The new deadline is now in June, which, as Foroughi described, “buys more time to put the pieces together” on AppLovin’s bid.
“The president’s a great dealmaker — we’re proposing, essentially an enhancement to the deal that they’ve been working on, but a bigger version of all the deals contemplated,” he added.
AppLovin faces a crowded field of other interested U.S. backers, including Amazon, Oracle, billionaire Frank McCourt and his Project Liberty consortium, and numerous private equity firms. Some proposals reportedly structure the deal to give a U.S. buyer 50% ownership of the company, rather than a complete acquisition. The Chinese government will still need to approve the deal, and AppLovin’s interest in purchasing TikTok in “all markets outside of China” is “preliminary,” according to an April 3 SEC filing.
Correction: A prior version of this story incorrectly characterized China’s ongoing role in TikTok should AppLovin acquire the app.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during an event announcing new tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, April 2, 2025.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images
President Donald Trump announced an aggressive, far-reaching “reciprocal tariff” policy this week, leaving many economists and U.S. trade partners to question how the White House calculated its rates.
Trump’s plan established a 10% baseline tariff on almost every country, though many nations such as China, Vietnam and Taiwan are subject to much steeper rates. At a ceremony inthe Rose Garden on Wednesday, Trump held up a poster board that outlined the tariffs that it claims are “charged” to the U.S., as well as the “discounted” reciprocal tariffs that America would implement in response.
Those reciprocal tariffs are mostly about half of what the Trump administration said each country has charged the U.S. The poster suggests China charges a tariff of 67%, for instance, and that the U.S. will implement a 34% reciprocal tariff in response.
However, a report from the Cato Institute suggests the trade-weighted average tariff rates in most countries are much different than the figures touted by the Trump administration. The report is based on trade-weighted average duty rates from the World Trade Organization in 2023, the most recent year available.
The Cato Institute says the 2023 trade-weighted average tariff rate from China was 3%. Similarly, the administration says the EU charges the U.S. a tariff of 39%, while the 2023 trade-weighted average tariff rate was 2.7%, according to the report.
In India, the Trump administration claims that a 52% tariff is charged against the U.S., but Cato found that the 2023 trade-weighted average tariff rate was 12%.
Many users on social media this week were quick to notice that the U.S. appeared to have divided the trade deficit by imports from a given country to arrive at tariff rates for individual countries. It’s an unusual approach, as it suggests that the U.S. factored in the trade deficit in goods but ignored trade in services.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative briefly explained its approach in a release, and stated that computing the combined effects of tariff, regulatory, tax and other policies in various countries “can be proxied by computing the tariff level consistent with driving bilateral trade deficits to zero.”
“If trade deficits are persistent because of tariff and non-tariff policies and fundamentals, then the tariff rate consistent with offsetting these policies and fundamentals is reciprocal and fair,” the USTR said in the release.