From the link I posted last night (was on my phone then so I didn't prepare a snippet):
Perhaps for this reason, the report insists that its limited identification of examples of illicit activity over DeFi should not be taken to indicate, well, that there are limited instances of illicit activity over DeFi:
Of course, it may be that a non‐exhaustive list of examples doesn’t reflect the full extent of a problem. But persuasively making that argument generally requires providing additional evidence that speaks to the scale of the problem, beyond mere conclusory statements regarding a vague “level of risk.” However, in the rare instances where the report does address scale, it largely undermines the idea that DeFi is anything other than a relatively minor contributor to overall illicit finance risk, including for money laundering, proliferation financing, and terrorist financing, as well as drug trafficking, where the report notes, “[T]he size and scope of drug proceeds generated on the darknet and laundered via virtual assets remain low in comparison to cash‐based retail street sales.”
...