[livinginfear]

The first thing that springs to mind here is "Betteridge's law of headlines". As others have noted, the bank is just complying with governmental regulations. What I'm curious about is what you've done to make the bank so curious about you. Banks are generally much less paranoid than you'd expect. It's not in their best financial interest to scrutinise everyone to the highest degree, and performing this due-diligence on customers incurs significant costs. For 99.99% of customers, all the bank wants is some proof that your income stream doesn't come from crime, and that you are who you say you are. What is the bank so curious about in this case?

[wojciii]

I bought bitcoin anonymously for cash 10 years ago and sold it recently.

This is a huge red flag.

I paid taxes for this and all is above board.

[livinginfear]

I feel like this post is the truth of the matter finally coming out. What other outcome did you expect? You've just received a large sum of money, from an indeterminate source, for an indeterminate reason. From the bank's perspective, how do you look any different from drug dealers, or human traffickers? Elsewhere in the thread you said:

> I would expect this to be something that law enforcement would do.

If the bank didn't tell law enforcement about money moving around in strange ways, how would they ever find out?

[wojciii]

This is my current issues, but the more important issue is that cash transactions are being monitored - even small amounts. This means that cash is more or less becoming illegal or at least not approved by the people in charge.

Edit: not indeterminate source, but a know large crypto exchange.

[moooo99]

> but the more important issue is that cash transactions are being monitored - even small amounts.

How do you come to that conclusion? Monitoring cash at the point of issuing is, when talking about small sums at least, impractical if not impossible. Money laundering directives usually aren't concerned with small cash transactions on the side of the consumer. It's pretty much only relevant if the source of the money is unclear/dubious and/or the sum is very large.

Judging by your examples, both of the examples mentioned above seem to apply.

> Edit: not indeterminate source, but a know large crypto exchange.

The exchange is not the source, it's the exchange. The question the bank has to answer is "where is the money from" and since you just exchanged the money, the question extends to "where is the BTC from"?.