Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
Cryptocurrency can complicate divorce even when no one is hiding it. In one high-asset matter, a client's roughly 10,000 cryptocurrency transactions produced $1.7 million in cumulative transaction volume, which opposing counsel interpreted as income. That misunderstanding could have materially increased the client's potential spousal support and attorney fee obligations.
In reality, the activity reflected trading and transfers rather than realized income. Even properly disclosed digital assets can distort settlement positions when transaction volume, gains, and tax treatment are not analyzed in context.
Declarations from the client's CPA and financial advisor clarified the $1.7 million figure, documented the estate, and traced inherited assets. The advisor's CFP and CFA credentials strengthened the analysis.
The matter settled 60 days before trial, avoiding the costs and public exposure of court proceedings. The outcome illustrates the value of involving financial professionals who can translate complicated digital-asset records into information that attorneys and courts can more readily understand.
Misunderstood transactions can affect support, attorneys' fees, and settlement. By identifying issues early and coordinating with CPAs, counsel, and forensic experts, advisors can prevent incomplete information from driving a case. Digital assets do not need to be concealed to create substantial exposure in a divorce, but when they are concealed, the issue moves from interpretation to detection.
Discovering Hidden Digital Assets
Intentionally concealed cryptocurrency can be harder to trace than traditional accounts because there is no centralized reporting authority. Exchanges such as Coinbase or Kraken can be subpoenaed, but self-custody wallets and decentralized finance positions may have no exchange login or centralized entity to subpoena.
That gap has narrowed, but only for custodial platforms. As of January 1, 2025, centralized exchanges, hosted-wallet providers, and digital-asset kiosks must report gross proceeds on Form 1099-DA. Cost-basis reporting was not initially required, so a 2025 form may show proceeds without basis, making trading volume resemble income. Basis reporting phases in for covered assets acquired on or after January 1, 2026. Congress repealed a rule covering noncustodial front ends in April 2025, leaving decentralized activity without Form 1099-DA reporting.
Discovery often begins with the financial paper trail. Divorce counsel may review bank transfers to cryptocurrency exchanges, subpoena exchange or business records, serve written discovery concerning individual wallets, and question a spouse during a deposition about wallet ownership, exchange accounts, and other financial activity.
In some cases, blockchain analysis tools and public ledger explorers may also be used to trace transfers between wallets and follow the movement of funds across multiple addresses. Because cryptocurrency can be transferred instantly and irreversibly, early identification of potential digital-asset activity is often critical.
Because the resulting records can be highly technical, forensic experts may be needed not only to interpret transaction histories but also to reconstruct the flow of assets across wallets, exchanges, and decentralized platforms.
Under California Family Code section 1101, a spouse who fails to disclose an asset may owe the other spouse 50% of its value plus attorney's fees, or 100% when the concealment involved oppression, fraud, or malice.
Advisors can flag unidentified transfers, unexplained deposits, cash withdrawals, tax-form anomalies, hardware-wallet purchases, unfamiliar platforms, or privacy tools. They need not prove concealment. Simply recognizing unusual activity for counsel and forensic professionals is valuable in itself.
The advisor’s ability to participate will depend on the client relationship. An advisor serving both spouses must remain neutral and follow applicable fiduciary and compliance obligations. One representing a single spouse may be better positioned to identify unusual transactions or tax issues.
Beyond Discovery: Evaluating & Dividing Digital Assets
Identifying cryptocurrency is only the first challenge. Once digital assets are disclosed, the parties must determine their value, tax exposure, and division. Because prices fluctuate, the valuation date can materially affect settlement.
Under Family Code section 2552, courts value community assets and liabilities as near as practicable to trial, although a party may seek an alternate date for good cause. Advisors can model how potential dates would affect both spouses.
Digital assets require different valuation methods. Exchange traded holdings have observable prices. However, locked tokens, liquidity-pool positions, thinly traded NFTs, and unvested grants may not. Mining operations may require business valuation, while assets in a self-directed IRA raise distinct issues.
Financial advisors can help analyze the consequences of different allocation scenarios. In coordination with the CPA, that role may include weighing whether the spouses should file jointly or separately while the divorce is pending, assessing how capital gains and losses could be allocated, identifying lockup periods or transfer restrictions, and determining whether a particular asset is appropriate for each spouse’s liquidity needs and risk tolerance.
Basis deserves particular attention. A transfer of property between spouses incident to divorce is generally a nonrecognition event under Internal Revenue Code section 1041, which means the receiving spouse takes the transferor's basis along with the asset. Two lots of the same cryptocurrency with identical market value can therefore carry very different embedded tax liabilities. Dividing a portfolio equally by current value can leave one spouse with the larger deferred gain and a materially smaller after-tax result. Modeling a proposed division on an after-tax basis rather than a market-value basis is among the clearest contributions an advisor can make.
Execution creates additional problems. There is no qualified domestic relations order for a wallet. Assets must generally be transferred in kind or liquidated, potentially triggering fees, spreads, or taxes. Some exchanges will not transfer assets to a non-account holder, and control follows the private keys. Settlement terms should address mechanics, deadlines, wallet addresses, fees, and non-transfer consequences. Advisors can test whether a transfer is possible and model each method's costs before the agreement is signed.
This guidance is especially important for an "out-spouse" who did not manage the family's finances or cryptocurrency. An advisor can explain the assets, risks, and long-term implications of settlement options.
Coordination among the advisor, CPA, counsel, and forensic accountant can make settlement more efficient. A forensic accountant may provide a marital balance sheet and post-separation accounting; the advisor can translate it into decisions about taxes, liquidity, and portfolio risk.
Early identification and collaboration can prevent a misunderstood transaction or unilateral decision from becoming a costly dispute. This preparation also gives both spouses a reliable basis for evaluating settlement terms and trade-offs.
Laura Chickering is Managing Attorney at Fenchel Family Law, PC, where she represents executives, founders and professionals in complex, high-asset divorce matters. Drawing on her background in corporate and intellectual property law, she regularly handles cases involving business valuations, equity compensation, digital assets and sophisticated financial tracing.
A message from Advisor Perspectives and VettaFi: Discover something new! Click here to register for our upcoming webcasts.
Read more articles by Laura Chickering
Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do not necessarily represent those of Advisor Perspectives.
