Nowadays, the enforcement of restitution orders as a key remedial mechanism in financial crimes faces significant technical and legal challenges when modern technologies, particularly cryptocurrencies, are involved. These challenges stem from the inherent nature and distinctive features of such technologies, including the anonymity of users and the untraceability of transactions. This issue is especially pronounced in Iran, where governmental policy is fundamentally based on prohibition and denial, and where both the mining and utilization of cryptocurrencies are generally prohibited. In stark contrast stands the United States, the birthplace of cryptocurrencies, which has established the most comprehensive and transparent regulatory framework in this field. Accordingly through a descriptive-analytical examination of Iranian laws and regulations and an assessment of the existing legal gaps, and ultimately by conducting a comparative analysis using the U.S. legal approach as a benchmark, the present study reaches the general conclusion that under the current legal regime governing financial crimes, there is no substantive obstacle to applying existing laws to offenses involving cryptocurrencies. This is due to the fact that the distinction lies solely in the means or object of the offense rather than its essence. Furthermore, in the enforcement of restitution orders, it is possible to rely on available technical and operational capacities to facilitate the recovery and return of crypto-assets.