Two Charged Over Alleged $43 Million Investment-Fraud Money-Laundering Network

Two New York residents have been charged with allegedly helping launder at least $43 million stolen through cyber-enabled investment scams targeting Americans.

According to the Department of Justice, Zhuoying Chen, also known as “Jolene,” and Haojie Zhang, also known as “Kevin,” allegedly managed a network that used approximately 45 shell companies and 140 business bank accounts.

Federal prosecutors claim that the accounts were used to receive investment-fraud proceeds before money was transferred to accounts in China.

The charges highlight an important feature of modern investment fraud: the person who develops a relationship with the victim may be only one part of a much larger operation.

Separate participants may control the fraudulent investment platform, recruit money mules, establish companies, open bank accounts and transfer the proceeds internationally. For victims, understanding that financial infrastructure can be as important as identifying the person who initiated contact.

The allegations have not been proven at trial. Both defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

What prosecutors allege

The indictment was unsealed in federal court in Brooklyn on July 16, 2026.

Prosecutors allege that between 2020 and 2022, Chen and Zhang supervised more than a dozen people based in Queens and Brooklyn.

Members of the alleged network reportedly opened company bank accounts using shell entities. Those accounts were then used to receive and move funds obtained through cyber investment scams.

According to the indictment:

• Approximately 45 shell companies were used;
• Around 140 company bank accounts were opened;
• At least $43 million in alleged criminal proceeds moved through the network;
• More than a dozen individuals allegedly participated;
• Funds were transferred abroad, including to accounts in China.

The defendants have each been charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering. The charge carries a maximum potential penalty of 20 years in prison, although any sentence would be determined by the court following a conviction.

How the alleged investment scams operated

The Department of Justice describes the underlying offenses as cyber investment fraud, sometimes referred to by offenders as “pig butchering.”

The alleged schemes followed a familiar pattern.

Fraudsters contacted victims through social media or messaging applications and gradually developed a relationship. Once trust had been established, victims were encouraged to transfer money into supposedly profitable investment opportunities.

The investment platform might appear to show:

• Rapid account growth;
• Successful trades;
• Regular investment returns;
• Bonuses or promotional funds;
• Increasingly valuable portfolios.

Those displayed profits may be entirely fabricated.

The victim is encouraged to invest more based on information shown inside a platform controlled by the fraudsters. When the victim attempts to withdraw money, access may be blocked or additional payments demanded for taxes, verification, insurance or account-release charges.

The Justice Department alleges that the money in this case was not genuinely invested. Instead, it was routed through the defendants’ alleged network and transferred overseas.

Why shell companies and business accounts are used

A request to transfer money to a company account may appear more credible than a request involving an unknown individual.

Fraud networks may use shell companies to:

• Create the appearance of a legitimate business;
• Open domestic bank accounts;
• Receive transfers from multiple victims;
• Separate the payment recipient from the online fraudster;
• Move funds between institutions;
• Disguise the origin and destination of proceeds;
• Transfer money to overseas participants.

A registered company is not automatically a genuine investment provider.

The company may exist only to receive funds, or its stated business activity may have no connection to the investment being promoted.

Victims should compare the name of the payment recipient with:

• The investment agreement;
• The licensed entity;
• The website operator;
• The supposed adviser’s employer;
• Any regulatory registration;
• The company’s actual business activities.

An unexplained difference between those names should be treated as a serious warning sign.

The recipient account may be only the first layer

The bank account that first receives a victim’s money is not necessarily controlled by the person who developed the relationship or designed the fraud.

Funds may move through several stages:

1. The victim transfers money to a domestic bank account.
2. The funds are combined with payments from other victims.
3. Money is divided between additional accounts or companies.
4. Transfers are sent overseas or converted into digital assets.
5. The proceeds reach organizers, facilitators or other participants.

This movement can make the case appear fragmented. One victim may know only a social-media profile, a trading-platform name and a recipient bank account.

However, those details may still provide important starting points.

Account names, company records, payment references, wallet addresses, email domains and telephone numbers can help establish connections between entities that initially appear unrelated.

What victims should preserve

Anyone who believes they have transferred money through a fraudulent investment platform should preserve the complete evidence trail.

Retain:

• Full message histories;
• Email messages and headers;
• Social-media profiles and usernames;
• Website addresses and domain details;
• Investment agreements and account statements;
• Bank-account information;
• Wire-transfer instructions;
• Payment confirmations and reference numbers;
• Cryptocurrency wallet addresses;
• Transaction hashes;
• Screenshots of displayed profits;
• Withdrawal requests and responses;
• Names of companies and supposed advisers;
• A dated chronology of every payment.

Where possible, export complete conversations rather than relying only on screenshots.

Do not edit the original records or annotate the only available copy.

What to do after discovering the fraud

Speed can affect the available options.

Victims should:

1. Stop all additional payments.
2. Contact every bank, exchange or payment provider involved.
3. Explain that the transactions are connected with suspected investment fraud.
4. Ask whether recent transfers can be recalled or reviewed.
5. Preserve the complete payment and communication history.
6. Report the matter to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center and any other appropriate authority.
7. Secure email, banking, exchange and social-media accounts.
8. Avoid paying supposed taxes, recovery charges or withdrawal fees.
9. Be cautious of businesses promising guaranteed recovery.
10. Consider asset tracing and legal advice where the loss is substantial.

A prompt report does not guarantee that funds can be frozen or recovered. It may, however, improve the likelihood that institutions can identify recent transactions and preserve relevant records.

Following the financial network

The allegations against Chen and Zhang illustrate why a fraud response should look beyond the online profile used to approach the victim.

Relevant analysis may examine:

• The initial recipient account;
• Companies connected with the payment;
• Directors, officers and registered addresses;
• Related bank accounts and intermediaries;
• Other victims linked to the same entities;
• Domestic and international transfer routes;
• Cryptocurrency conversion points;
• Known assets and commercial interests;
• Connections between individuals and shell companies.

Conflict International USA’s Asset Tracing Services support matters involving traditional financial assets, corporate structures, cross-border transfers and cryptocurrency.

Asset tracing may help clarify where funds moved and which people or entities may be relevant. It does not guarantee that all participants will be identified or that recoverable assets remain available.

Supporting potential legal action

Where a substantial loss has occurred, victims and their attorneys may need to assess potential civil claims, disclosure options and the availability of assets.

Useful work may include:

• Organizing the transaction history;
• Mapping relationships between companies and recipients;
• Preserving digital and documentary evidence;
• Identifying potential defendants or witnesses;
• Assessing known assets;
• Preparing evidence for counsel;
• Supporting subpoenas, discovery or judgment-enforcement planning.

Conflict International USA’s Litigation Support Services assist attorneys and clients with evidence development, financial analysis, asset tracing and case preparation.

Banks, exchanges and other institutions generally cannot release protected customer information without proper legal authority. Counsel may therefore need to consider subpoenas, court orders or other formal procedures.

What this case demonstrates

The alleged $43 million network shows that cyber investment fraud depends on more than persuasive messages and fake trading platforms.

It can also rely on a structured financial system involving:

• Domestic shell companies;
• Business bank accounts;
• Local facilitators;
• International transfers;
• Multiple layers of intermediaries;
• Connections to overseas fraud networks.

For victims, the payment trail may reveal more than the online identity that initiated the relationship.

The most effective initial response is to stop further losses, preserve the evidence and assess how the funds moved before deciding which reporting, tracing or legal options are proportionate.

How Conflict International USA can assist

Conflict International USA supports individuals, families, businesses and attorneys dealing with complex investment fraud and cross-border financial loss.

Depending on the evidence available, our work may include:

• Recipient and intermediary analysis;
• Company and ownership research;
• Identity and alias enquiries;
• Traditional and cryptocurrency asset tracing;
• Payment-network analysis;
• Evidence and chronology preparation;
• Cross-border enquiries;
• Support for legal counsel.

Our work does not replace reporting to law enforcement, financial institutions or regulatory authorities. We cannot guarantee that every participant will be identified, that assets can be frozen or that transferred funds will be recovered.

If you have lost money through a suspected investment platform or international fraud network, contact Conflict International USA in confidence to discuss the available evidence and realistic next steps.