Bitcoin and crypto links emerge in fresh Epstein DOJ records

Bitcoin and crypto references surfaced repeatedly in a newly released tranche of U.S. Justice Department materials tied to Jeffrey Epstein, with the documents and related emails depicting him discussing Bitcoin narrative, asking about crypto taxes and regulation, and showing connections – direct or adjacent – to several high-profile industry figures and companies.

The files, released as part of a broader document dump, include correspondence indicating Epstein sought guidance on how U.S. authorities might handle Bitcoin and crypto taxation as early as 2018. In one exchange described in the documents, Epstein discussed the idea of a voluntary disclosure approach for crypto gains with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, framing it as a way to flush out illicit actors by incentivizing reporting.

Another set of materials ties Epstein to early Bitcoin infrastructure circles. Emails described in the release show Epstein as a limited partner in a fund connected to Joi Ito that later invested in Blockstream, the Bitcoin infrastructure firm, with Blockstream co-founder Adam Back publicly confirming the investment link described in those emails. Back also stated that Blockstream has no current direct or indirect financial connection to Epstein or his estate, according to the same reporting of the documents. The files further show invitations connected to a 2014 trip context involving Blockstream leadership, though the documents do not make clear whether any trip occurred.

The document trove also includes communications that place Tether co-founder Brock Pierce in repeated contact with Epstein after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, including exchanges that referenced cryptocurrency alongside personal matters. The materials describe Pierce and Epstein corresponding on multiple occasions, and they include language attributed to Pierce about “having a great time with the girls,” while other messages show Epstein giving Pierce instructions while traveling. The files additionally reference a meeting at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse involving Pierce and former Harvard President Larry Summers, where the participants discussed Bitcoin, with Summers expressing concern about reputational risk from potential Bitcoin losses, according to the account of the documents.

The papers also portray Epstein engaging directly with prominent Silicon Valley investors on how to frame Bitcoin. A 2014 email cited in the release shows Epstein questioning what Bitcoin “is,” listing competing descriptions–store of value, currency, property, architecture, payment system–while responding to Peter Thiel’s question about rising “anti-BTC pressure” within the U.S. government. The correspondence is framed in the documents as an early snapshot of how influential circles were debating Bitcoin’s identity before the asset’s later, more institutional phase.

Several references in the materials touch on reputational dynamics around crypto backers and executives. One email included in the released files shows Epstein’s publicist Peggy Siegal describing Bitcoin bull Michael Saylor in harsh personal terms in 2010, years before Saylor’s company began buying Bitcoin. The email also references a $25,000 contribution tied to a gala sponsorship opportunity, placing the description in a specific fundraising context rather than a crypto-market one.

Beyond personalities and investments, the documents depict Epstein probing ethical boundaries around funding crypto-adjacent work. In an email exchange cited from the files, Epstein wrote that he was willing to fund projects but, because he was “high-profile,” could not be associated with “questionable ethics.” The recipient, Bitcoin researcher Jeremy Rubin, replied that there is a “grey area” between pumping and developing, according to the account of the correspondence.

Taken together, the materials place Epstein in proximity to early-stage crypto investing, policy curiosity around regulation and taxes, and a set of communications with individuals who later became highly visible in the industry. The Justice Department release does not, on its face, establish wrongdoing by the named firms or individuals solely from correspondence and meeting references; instead, it documents contact, discussions, and in some cases investment pathways that intersected with the crypto sector at moments when Bitcoin infrastructure and market narratives were still consolidating.

The material on GNcrypto is intended solely for informational use and must not be regarded as financial advice. We make every effort to keep the content accurate and current, but we cannot warrant its precision, completeness, or reliability. GNcrypto does not take responsibility for any mistakes, omissions, or financial losses resulting from reliance on this information. Any actions you take based on this content are done at your own risk. Always conduct independent research and seek guidance from a qualified specialist. For further details, please review our Terms, Privacy Policy and Disclaimers.

Articles by this author