When the United States and the United Kingdom jointly announced what they described as “sweeping sanctions” against the sprawling Prince Group Transnational Criminal Organization in Cambodia, officials touted the move as a major blow to a cyber-scamming empire accused of siphoning billions of dollars from victims around the world.
Yet beneath the triumphant rhetoric lies a glaring omission: a key business associate of the alleged crime syndicate’s leader not only escaped British sanctions entirely but has quietly amassed tens of millions of dollars in property and corporate holdings using multiple identities.

This individual, known publicly as Chen Xiao’er, appears prominently on the US sanctions list. But documents now reveal that the man behind this name is actually Wu An Ming, a 43-year-old Chinese-born investor who holds citizenship from the Caribbean nation of Saint Kitts and Nevis.

Records obtained by OCCRP show that Wu began using the name “Chen Xiao’er” around 2017, only to formally change his identity back to “Wu An Ming” by 2020. Despite this, the US sanctions list includes only the earlier identity – a discrepancy that has enabled him to maintain access to Western financial systems and expand his global business empire.

The result is stark: a man sanctioned under one name continues to flourish under another, owning luxury real estate in London, running companies across continents, investing in listed firms, and controlling aircraft leasing operations that span Asia.

The sanctions announced by the US Treasury targeted 146 individuals and entities believed to be part of or connected to the so-called Prince Group Transnational Criminal Organization. The group is accused of running cyber-scam compounds, exploiting trafficked workers, and laundering billions.

But the US sanction designation lists “Chen Xiao’er”-an identity that records show Wu no longer uses. Instead, he operates under his legal Saint Kitts and Nevis identity, “Wu An Ming.” It is under that name that he controls:

• At least $45 million in real estate in the United Kingdom
• Multiple companies incorporated in the British Virgin Islands
• Shares in Hong Kong–listed companies
• Ownership of aircraft leasing firms and private jets
• A stake in telecommunications, medical testing, and cryptocurrency-related industries

This mismatch highlights a recurring problem in sanctions enforcement: when individuals use multiple identities across multiple jurisdictions, lists that fail to reflect updated names create loopholes large enough for millions of dollars to pass through undetected.

The UK, which mirrored US sanctions against the Prince Group, did not designate Wu under either of his identities. The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office declined to say whether it was aware that the sanctioned alias and the unsanctioned legal name belong to the same individual.

While the US was sanctioning “Chen Xiao’er,” Wu An Ming was busy expanding his London property portfolio.

In March 2022, using his real Saint Kitts and Nevis passport and his updated legal name, Wu purchased a £30-million Victorian mansion in one of London’s most expensive districts, near Holland Park. Crucially, he acquired the property in his own name, not through a shell company – indicating a confidence that his identity would not trigger scrutiny.

The purchase was financed in part through a mortgage from Citibank. But here lies another complication: now that “Chen Xiao’er” is sanctioned, Citibank arguably has indirect exposure. According to Washington DC, sanctions attorney Clif Burns, American financial institutions are barred from conducting business with sanctioned individuals – even inadvertently.

Burns described the US Treasury’s outdated listing as problematic but not exculpatory.

“America’s sanctions regime is strict liability,” he explained. “Banks can be punished even for unwitting infractions.”

Citibank has not responded to inquiries about the mortgage, leaving open the question of whether the institution will now face compliance issues involving a client whose sanctioned alias corresponds to his earlier identity.

But the Victorian mansion was just the beginning.

In late 2022, Wu used a BVI company he controls, Leisure Focus Limited, to buy the former Imperial College Sports Ground in Teddington for £3.5 million.

The site currently includes a functioning rugby pitch, though reporters noted that the clubhouse had been boarded up and left idle. The previous owner had acquired the property as an investment before selling it to Wu’s BVI firm.

That same year, Leisure Focus bought a 10-year leasehold for a small commercial property in Maida Vale valued at £235,000.
It is occupied by Monet Beauty Clinic, which shares its name with another clinic in Cambodia owned by a senior Prince Group executive – a link that raises questions about whether business relationships between Wu and the Prince Group extend further than acknowledged.

Leisure Focus transferred the lease to the clinic in 2023.

Under UK law, solicitors involved in high-value property transactions must verify their clients’ identities and confirm the legitimacy of funds. Sanctions expert Nigel Kushner emphasized how such rules are designed to prevent precisely this kind of scenario.

“Professionals are legally required to ensure their clients are who they claim to be,” he said.

Yet Wu’s properties slipped through the system, illustrating how easily due diligence can fail when identity discrepancies are obscured across jurisdictions.

Wu’s business network extends far beyond the UK real estate market.

Through another BVI entity – Future King Inc. – he controls a series of companies across Hong Kong, mainland China, Singapore, and even the United States.

Future King Inc. is the beneficial owner of two asset management companies licensed in Hong Kong:

• China Reserve Securities Ltd.
• Future Wing Financial Company Ltd.

Both share the same registered addresses, and China Reserve Securities reported a registered share capital of HK$238 million after being acquired by Future King in 2018.
While the company confirmed Wu’s role as a shareholder and director, it insisted he has no involvement in daily operations.

Future King Inc. has also held shares in:

• Nanomix Corp, a Nasdaq-listed medical diagnostics company
• Boyaa Interactive International Limited, a Hong Kong-listed online gaming company that holds over $400 million in Bitcoin reserves

Wu’s BVI parent company additionally owns interests in:

• HyalRoute Communication Group, which builds fiber-optic networks across Southeast Asia
• A chain of aircraft leasing companies, some of whose aircraft are registered in the US and leased to Cambodia Airways – a carrier reportedly tied to the Prince Group

These companies allow Wu to operate across sectors ranging from digital infrastructure to aviation – and crucially, allow for the global movement of capital, assets, and influence.

The only known business partnership between Wu and Prince Group leader Chen Zhi, according to Wu’s assistant, involves a luxury resort development in Palau.

The US sanctioned “Chen Xiao’er” for his role in this company – Grand Legend International Asset Management Co. Ltd. – which leased an island for the high-end resort project.

Wu’s assistant described this partnership as strictly limited:

“This cooperation gave rise to an equity relationship strictly limited to this project.”

She argued the resort was “unjustly sanctioned” and stated that Wu has appealed the sanctions under the alias.

But US officials maintain that Chen Zhi, the Prince Group, and its associates used legitimate businesses and real estate to funnel the proceeds of massive global scam operations – operations that exploited thousands, including trafficked workers held in fortified compounds under threats of violence.

The case of Wu An Ming exposes a troubling weakness in international sanctions regimes: the system is only as effective as its ability to track identities across borders.

A man sanctioned under one name can live and invest under another – even in jurisdictions actively targeting his alleged associates.
The UK has frozen millions in Prince Group assets, yet the man who co-founded a sanctioned resort project with the group’s leader owns luxury properties in West London with no restrictions whatsoever.

As the US and UK continue to ramp up sanctions against cyber-crime networks, Wu’s case raises critical questions:

• How many sanctioned individuals remain active under alternate identities?
• How many properties and companies are owned by people the sanctions were meant to restrain?
• And why did enforcement agencies fail to update or cross-reference identities before issuing a major sanctions package?

Until these gaps are addressed, sanctions risk becoming symbolic gestures – powerful on paper, but porous in practice.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel