ZachXBT asks whether UPay powered Visa crypto cards for Xinbi, the marketplace the US sanctioned weeks ago

ZachXBT is asking whether payment platform UPay supplied white-label Visa card infrastructure to Xinbi Guarantee, the Chinese-language marketplace the U.S. sanctioned on Sept. 9. Neither UPay nor CEO Owen Yang had publicly responded as of Oct. 3, and there is no public evidence that a Xinbi card was ever issued.

The distinction is important: the available public evidence does not establish that Xinbi actually launched or issued such a card through UPay. The allegation remains an unresolved question raised by ZachXBT rather than a confirmed finding.

UPay’s own business materials confirm that the company offers white-label card infrastructure. Its platform says businesses can launch branded virtual and physical cards while UPay manages card issuing, processing, production, fulfillment, settlement and compliance infrastructure. The company also advertises Visa crypto card issuance through an API.

That publicly advertised capability is now central to the questions surrounding the alleged Xinbi connection.

Xinbi was sanctioned weeks before the UPay questions

The scrutiny comes less than a month after the U.S. government took sweeping action against Xinbi Guarantee.

On September 9, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Xinbi as a significant transnational criminal organization. Treasury described Xinbi as a Chinese-language illicit marketplace used extensively by cybercriminals and said it supported activities including cyber scams, fraud and money laundering.

The same day, the Department of Justice’s Scam Center Strike Force announced that more than $52 million worth of cryptocurrency had been restrained from Xinbi and its network of vendors. Authorities said two Xinbi-controlled wallets contained approximately $12 million, while additional wallets associated with the network were targeted for restraint.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro described the broader threat in stark terms, saying, “Global crime faces global justice.” FBI and Secret Service officials also emphasized the international nature of the investigation and the role of cryptocurrency tracing in disrupting scam operations.

Against that backdrop, questions about crypto cards and payment infrastructure take on greater significance because card programs can connect digital assets with conventional payment networks.

Why the White-Label Model Matters for Crypto Cards

A white-label arrangement generally allows one company to offer a financial product under its own branding while another provider supplies much of the underlying technology and operational infrastructure.

UPay openly markets this model. Its business platform says clients can maintain their own branding across cards, applications and dashboards while UPay handles backend infrastructure. It also promotes API-based issuance, transaction management and compliance tools.

That business model does not, by itself, demonstrate that UPay worked with Xinbi. However, it explains why ZachXBT’s question is focused on the company’s white-label capabilities rather than simply on UPay’s consumer-facing card product.

UPay currently markets crypto cards that allow users to spend assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and USDT through payment networks. Its website also says its business products allow companies to connect digital assets to Visa payment infrastructure.

For regulators and compliance teams, the key issue would be whether adequate customer and business screening was performed before any financial service was provided.

Compliance questions now move to center stage

The Xinbi episode highlights the compliance challenges surrounding crypto cards, particularly when card-issuing infrastructure is offered through APIs and white-label programs.

UPay says its business platform includes KYC, AML monitoring and fraud-prevention measures, and that its services are designed to support compliant card programs. Whether those controls were ever applied to Xinbi, however, is precisely what remains unclear from the public information currently available.

Treasury’s September action makes the issue particularly sensitive. OFAC identified Xinbi and associated cryptocurrency addresses on its sanctions list, while also designating Anwen Technology and SafeW Technology as entities linked to Xinbi.

The case therefore places renewed attention on how crypto cards providers screen business customers, monitor transactions and respond when a client or associated entity becomes subject to sanctions.

For now, the central allegation remains unverified. ZachXBT has asked for clarification, while UPay and Owen Yang had not publicly addressed the claim as of October 3. Until either the company responds or additional evidence emerges, any assertion that UPay definitively issued crypto cards for Xinbi would go beyond what the available evidence establishes.

The controversy nevertheless puts the broader crypto cards sector under another compliance spotlight: infrastructure providers may increasingly face questions not only about what products they offer, but also about who is using those products and how effectively potentially illicit activity is detected.