Bitcoin Forum

Privacy is just one aspect of the Bitcoin network. For me, some of the other features are more important. For example -
- Immutable public records
- Peer to peer unregulated transfers
- Security of assets
- No complex controls over payments
- No fiat ties
- International payments without 3rd party intervention.

Of course there are many others, such as multi-sig and conditional payments. those are just a few of the advantages as I see them.  The government keeps banging on about money laundering and crime, but I don't believe those are the issues. The real issue seems to be the fact that Bitcoin frees people from the fiat crime(s). I believe that if we were able to register our wallets, together with the public keys associated with them, but we kept the private keys secret, then most of the declared objections would no longer be relevant. Of course this would need to be an optional registration, but taking advantage of it could help to expand the use of Bitcoin.

I guess that's what they wanted to do with El Salvador right? You had to open a wallet, but it was using a government app or something. So they knew everybody who used bitcoin and exactly when where etc.

I can wonder though if BTC network will handle even a small country.

Criminal activities like money laundering through Bitcoin blockchain and Bitcoin transactions are one of reasons but governments have bigger reasons which they don't publicly admit to their citizens.

As governments, they want to control their countries and citizens, they want money from tax to help their governmental operations lively. They want tax, at the end of all reasons, money is vital for governments.

I am sure they do recognize fact that citizens can hide a lot of their money through Bitcoin blockchain and altcoin blockchains too. It causes massive loss for governments in tax money flows and they will do more things to bang this market, just to eventually regain more tax money like before.

What are they going to do if people don't register your addresses with them? Are they going to stop you from using Bitcoin? They probably can't and they can't do anything about it. They have no way of knowing what addresses you have if they don't register it and if you do; hey, I'll let you track me however much you want!

Surrendering your privacy to the government goes against the very basis of Bitcoin, if you want to do this, then using fiat would probably be more efficient. The day that people willingly do this is when Bitcoin fails.

The government failed to eliminate cybercrimes from their fiat system. The most corrupt money in life are their fiat. The use of the fiat was unable to eliminate money laundering, terrorism financing and other cyber crimes. All these have been existing before bitcoin was created.

Whatever the government says, you will see many people that will follow it. Even if the banks start providing people crypto products and services today, you will see people buying bitcoin in banks and let the banks be in custody of their coins. That is life. It is a natural process because many people do not understand about privacy.

Bitcoin gives people the ability to have full control and gives privacy, but the government will not want those. The government are also going after mixers and no-KYC exchanges. But people that want privacy avoid some of these government policies because with the policies, there are still fiat scam.

The bitcoin blockchain is available to the public, what if people will let the government know about their wallet but any of the government officials can be a bad actor underneath without people known but giving the criminals information needed to steal from people, even with physical attack.

It doesn't solve anything to be honest, we are just giving more data about ourselves to the government if we do that.

We know bitcoin addresses can be created an unlimited number of times and it doesn't even require much knowledge to do that so on what government can we make them believe we showed/registered every address of our crypto assets?

For the fact, the government is not really trying to solve or stop this money laundering they simply don't want the people to have complete over their money and they just use this as an excuse to attack the decentralization on step by step and we may see someday that government will say we should boycott crypto because it's used for money laundering but they never said when fiat used for the same purpose and they will never do it either.

Which proves what's their intention with these crackdowns.

We are aiming for adoption all around the world but is there a way to somehow not sacrifice our privacy in the process? Bitcoin is decentralized by nature and we don’t want to lose its essence.

I should have known that any government would not allow bitcoin to be fully decentralized and would still want to have some sense of control over their citizens and bitcoin.

Should the government declare that they want its users to register their bitcoin public addresses just to monitor them is to me not only a privacy issue but also a security concern because every transaction tie to you can make you be a culprit to the government, they can arrest you and decide to request for the private to that address because they assume holds illicit funds.

Also asking for registration of public keys will be a useless regulation to me as many will easily by pass this act. For example someone can easily create two or more wallet and then give them the public address of the wallet that they rarely use and use the others to keep their substantial amounts of bitcoin and they’re is no way the government will know that the address belongs to a citizen except he linked them mistakenly together through transactions.

I am never going to register my wallet with my government if this ever became a thing, though i know it will never be. Since you propose that it is going to be optional, what is going to happen to the people who do not, they will the ones under tight government surveillance and their coins will probably be confiscated if it hits a centralized exchange, for failing to register.

This will do nothing, but open up more options for the government to attack BTC's fungibility.

It seems to me at this point that some authorities would be content only to introduce absolute control over Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency in such a way that every transaction must be identified in such a way that the sender and receiver are known. If control over users were to be established in this way, and if the authorities in "cooperation" with miners could censor transactions that are suspicious to them, then Bitcoin would no longer be what it is now.

In addition, if people were to be identified in this way and a database of people who own cryptocurrencies would be created, isn't it realistic to expect that sooner or later someone would hack such a database and put all those in such a database at risk?

I disagree.

It’s not money that is corrupt and toxic but rather it’s the people who use it. The government thinks that bitcoin or cryptocurrencies are just another way to exploit money so they are trying to get rid of it or… maybe they do not want the idea of bitcoin being more preferred than their precious fiats. They know that they have no control nor authority over bitcoin so they will do everything to get rid of it and the people who use it.

Bitcoin doesn't free you from fiat (crimes) because we value Bitcoins in fiat. Money laundering is not an issue here, the issue is that government doesn't have much control over those who use it. Government wants to know who launders money and they don't want someone without their permission to launder money. Do you think that billions of dollars aren't laundered via banks that are regulated and controlled by the government?

Should there be a way to register your wallet with the government?
Hell no! Just imagine if the database gets leaked. Keep in mind that blockchain is a public note where all the transactions are written. If the database of who owns which wallet gets leaked, then it will be possible to know who sends what amount of coins to whom. This is probably the worst case scenario, even centralized banks will be more safer and anonymous than a leaked database of registered Bitcoin wallets.

A lot of interesting replies and opinions here.

Firstly, I don't value Bitcoin in fiat, but in its purchasing power. I may need to relate that to a fiat currency, but that is really just to acquire it through an exchange. Even when you do value it in fiat, then it is international, so it is not just one fiat currency that is being used. Interestingly, its purchasing ability may vary from country to country - hence the opportunities for arbitrage via local exchanges.
What I am suggesting is that people who are not trying to evade taxes, or indulge in activities that some may consider undesirable, may not have privacy as the primary attribute of Bitcoin. If you use an exchange with KYC, then you are a long way closer to my suggestion. One might even say that you have already embraced it.
Would it really make you less secure if the database was hacked? Would it really leave you vulnerable to a £50 wrench attack ( price adjusted for inflation )? At least it make make any perpetrators easier to discover.
Remember that Bitcoin is pseudonymous , so most of the info is easy to  discover anyway. If you really want to indulge in illegal activities, use the currencies of the elite. These are high value gold coins such as the English Britannia and the Sovereign ( the coin, not the woke prince). They are exempt from VAT, gains tax and inheritance tax in the UK, so you can work out how keen the government really is to stop fraud and money laundering.
I just feel that registering your wallet with the government doesn't really give anything away, and may lead to simplification of the use of Bitcoin. Of course you may elect to have an undeclared second wallet, and that would be your choice

Bitcoin has been designed in such a way the helps us have our privacy through the use of the blockchain technology with the bitcoin network, but if anyone uses a centralized exchange, such a person has already submitted himself to the government because the can take action at any time on him under the request of the government as they may so wishes, since they have all the user information under KYC with them, its more better if we have chosen the right means which is in the use of a non-custodial wallet for our bitcoin, government will have no access to us.

The Blockchain network is built on privacy and financial freedom as the government does not have the power to intrude the privacy of any bitcoiner.Once bitcoin loses its privacy policy to any central controlling authority the manipulation and financial crime will increase in the Blockchain world.The privacy of every bitcoiner shouldn't be linked to any central controlling authority like government and banks, otherwise the person doesn't understand the state of being financial free from third parties.The security of Blockchain network lies on your hand as your seed phrase & password to your wallet should be known by you and not shared to anyone nor the government.

As far as I understand the government can't control bitcoin because bitcoin is decentralized and can't share any secret information. Blockchain system helps more in crypto transactions. You can complete your transactions in less time without any central government intervention the popularity of blockchain is increasing day by day. Although its success started with cryptocurrency trading but its use is now being planned for many purposes some banks are testing its use.

Registering wallet with the government is not a good idea, especially since there is usually a change of people in government when their tenure are over. Other reasons are:
1. The government will become a third party to your wallet, in which a corrupt official can give info to fraudsters and empty one's wallet.
2. The government may impose ridiculous tax on bitcoin traders.
3. There will be no privacy to your wallet since the government is involved.

We live in a world controlled by the government and anything that wants to become popular and widely adopted needs their permission. So I think there will be no way for bitcoin to become popular without their permission. I have also said many times before that if we want bitcoin to be popular and used worldwide, the price we have to pay will be managed and regulated by the government. But many people underestimate the power of government, and believe that bitcoin is decentralized and has unparalleled power. No one can ban or stop the popularity of bitcoin, but see how even small government bans make it difficult for us to use bitcoin. And just think, if the government issues a complete ban, how can we spread and popularize bitcoin to everyone. How many people would dare to go against the government and secretly use bitcoin if they actually banned it?

Crimes?
It gives people control over their funds it doesn't really free you since you're still bound in the same economic ecosystem, if we don't bring returns and profit in the equation if just half freedom, since well, everything is still working in fiat.


It's not a new idea and it has already being put in practice in SK, there you can withdraw from exchanges only to a wallet that is owned by another licensed service and you have to prove you have been KYCed for it, so a closed system.
So in your scenario rather than blacklisting you have whitelisting, only approved addresses are accepted, pretty doable but it will be terrible for bitcoin, it might gain legitimacy but it will also strat to lose its main purpose.



They can start that slowly
- exchanges ask you for your addresses D/W and you sign a message with them and they are stored along with your data
- payment processors do the same, again logging and whitelisting addresses
- then they come with restrictions, you can only pay from a white-label address and miners in those countries that enforce this are also forced to mine only transactions from these known addresses
- they might even set up a blockexplorer with those whitelisted addresses
Slowly but surely cracks in anonymity will start to appear since more and more of the addresses and links between them will be known, and people will become worried about sending money to an address that identifies as suspicious, and slowly from freedom you go full dystopian madness.

I'm not saying it will be done but if you elect in enough countries stupid leaders they could try to do it and while not completely able to monitor everything they will do a lot of damage.

You technically register your wallet every time you do a KYC on an exchange.

Depending on an old system is a counter-productive idea for Bitcoin. We need to get away from the mindset we have to rely our security on the government. I am sure a decentralized solution is better. Even if one does not yet exist.

First you will provide them with public keys, and later they will require private keys from you. This will be the beginning of a quick end to everything you described above in the list of features that are important to you. No matter how much personal data you give to the government, they will never have enough until you lose 100% of your privacy. And with every concession you will find yourself more and more in digital slavery.

Money laundering and crime with bitcoin, which governments talk about, is just an excuse for infringement of the rights and discrimination of bitcoiners, the purpose of which is precisely to identify wallets with their owners. As soon as this happens (God Satoshi forbid), BTC-network will be completely regulated and will practically not differ in any way from the banking system. Why do we need such "expand the use of Bitcoin"?

But I believe that bitcoin should remain original, independent and confidential, as it was originally intended. In this form, it is unlikely to be integrated into the existing financial system (why would governments need this?) and will not be used as an official means of payment (I very much doubt the reality of these expectations), as bitcoiners have long desired. The destiny of bitcoin is to be an alternative financial system, saving from total government regulation.
    
"Should there be a way to register your wallet with the government?" - With all due respect as the oldest user of this forum, I have never been offered more unreasonable actions. :)

Those are brilliant points, but apart from that, if government are given the mandate to organize registration for Bitcoin wallet, then that means the sole purpose or ideology of Bitcoin has already been jeopardize, because just as Bitcoin stands for anonymousity and privacy of fund, if government are now given access to wallet registration, it literally means they will now have full control, which is of no different than what Is been done with our traditional fiat banking system. Because thou Bitcoin exchanges are regulated, and yet offers limited access to fund uses and activity tracking, it doesn't mean it was meant to be a tool of control by the government. Bitcoin is independent digital currency, and it will be good if it's Left to remain that way.

It is difficult to have a middle point in the answer, which justifies your idea expressed in the context, that is, it is enough with the income tax returns, or exposure of assets, surely this idea varies from country to country, but the idea is to declare that heritage. That should not mean having to register our wallets.

It's more or less, to offer a practical idea, it's like if you bought a car, and the government accessed your GPS, no, there's no reason to do that. They know of the existence of your car, and that everything related to that acquisition is legal.

Bitcoin should be treated as a currency, the fact that arbitrage opportunities or any profit making opportunities should be considered independently of its core function.
You underestimate the importance of privacy to most. The reason why privacy appears to be a smaller issue than it really is would be because of the lack of education and knowledge. Privacy is important and a fundamental human right. If it doesn't seem to be important to you, then I believe fiat would be far easier for you to use.

There is also an assumption that people who want privacy are necessarily people who transact in illicit funds or are involved in them. This is false.

Pseudonymous != Zero Privacy. If you think someone can easily track your transactions, then you do not value privacy and you should absolutely declare all of your transactions and every single one of your activity to the government. Bitcoin is designed to be pseudonymous, and it cannot be done without the users intentionally taking steps to ensure this. Issues should not revolve about whataboutism but should focus on what we should achieve with our privacy.
Don't you think this defeats the purpose of your suggestion?

That's why they restrict every other ways that users can interact with bitcoin, I mean there's the fact that they're cracking down on mixers, wallets and other things that the bitcoin and the cryptocurrency community is using right, not to mention that they're imposing taxes on them to try and discourage people from using them not to mention that they've got this propaganda against bitcoin is only used by criminals and that they can catch you easily if you ever use it but they don't mention the caveat that if you have criminal intent in using it that's the only time they can arrest you. It's a difficult road to be into bitcoin and invest in it, but things are slowly changing and I hope it's for the best especially with institutional investors getting into the bitcoin market, they've got the ability to influence the people in the government, who knows, they might do some lobbying that would work in our favor but I'm just being optimistic, it's unlikely that a company would do that for the benefit of the whole bitcoin community.

What do you think KYC is?

They are already doing this in certain countries. I think Singapore is one of them. If you want to withdraw from an exchange, and you are a resident in Singapore and maybe one other country that I can’t recall, it won’t let you withdraw until you prove that wallet is yours. No idea what other proof they require.

I don’t understand the point because you can always send to another wallet anytime. So what is the point in only letting you withdraw to specific wallets? Maybe to provide a trail but there would of been a trail anyways without locking the withdraw address. Don’t understand the point honestly why this law exists.

Criminal activities are also one of the reasons but governments will be motivated to use Bitcoin only when they see a lot of revenue coming from Bitcoin or crypto. But the governments have not yet taken any good initiative for this through which they can collect taxes. If not now but in the next 1 decade surely governments will be forced to use it because there will be support from the majority of the population. We see crime by fiat as well but we can't deny the many benefits of using Bitcoin. Rather than considering some of its negative aspects, one should consider the positive aspects. It is an open door to economic freedom for all people of the world.

Why would anyone wanna register his/her BTC wallet with the government? If this is going to be optional, I highly doubt that anyone would agree to do such thing. Having trust in your government is the dumbest thing. I personally don't trust my government and I want to keep my assets as far away from my government as possible. Having such a "BTC wallet register" would be a recipe for disaster in the corrupt countries, where the corrupt government officials would try to force your to give them all your assets in one way or another.

What would be the point of pseudonymity that we're barely enjoying with bitcoin if we let that kind of thing happen? I for sure would rebel against that idea, that's not going to be a really good thing to do when it comes to protecting your privacy, plus I don't like how my government spends the taxpayers' money, their public projects suck and most of the time, the biggest expenses are lavish parties and useless abroad travels. Maybe if I'm forced to comply, I would just create a throwaway address that won't get any transactions, I won't mind if they monitor that one, I might even pay them to do for my amusement.

That would be the height of Bitcoin's desecration. If this happens, you can't anymore attach the word free or freedom or independence with Bitcoin. What's the point of using Bitcoin, then?

Even the private in private keys would be rendered useless. Yes, you didn't surrender it. Yes, only you and you alone know it. But by registering your wallet, the government already monitors what you're doing with your Bitcoin. The moment they notice something suspicious and orders you to submit your private keys, what else can you do?

I think that's the perfect way to clear and solve all the security issues related to the wallet security. Nowadays scams are very much involved into the market and people are getting disappointed from them.

When a new user comes into the market and gets scammed straight away then no matter how much you convince him again to trust and invest into crypto he'll not be ready to do that. So they needs to be catered.

We have gone past issues of registration because I believe KYC verification covers that, and any government that wants to have the details or records of any exchange's users, should get it from the exchange management seeing that it is regulated and accepted and under some kind of control( unless it is not), all for the sake of prevention of money laundering and limiting scammers and hackers activities on the decentralized network.
For countries like Brazil, Lugano of which accept crypto currency and allow its citizens use it to pay taxes, I think the aim after regulation of cryptocurrency should be to create centers that function in place of commercial Banks, where citizens can go, create and register wallets on the exchange of choice and buy, sell or trade on their own as we normally now do or through the centres where ones account is registered on.

I guess just use Bitcoin the way it was always meant to be used? Like with your own wallet, and simple new wallets all the time, hot wallets for some, cold for savings, and never do address reuse.

I don't really know why people complain a lot about governments though its kinda their job to be intrusive ;)

I am not a fan of this if it will really happen here in my country in the future especially something like this scenario as one of the reason why I am into crypto is privacy. I would prefer storing my Bitcoin holdings in a non-custodial wallet rather than using a government app which will violate my right to be anonymous.

I think you guys are missing the main point of this thread. What I was trying to say is that privacy should be an option to be selected by the user. Lets take one situation - I own a domain name, and I sell it to a US citizen. The US banking system is archaic and a real pain to deal with. I used to have a dollar account with Citibank, and the easiest way for me to accept payments was via dollar cheques. This was a nuisance, as I had to post  the cheques to a London address, and wait for them to clear. There were all the usual risk associated with fiat bank accounts, although these never impacted me. I tried PayPal, but PayPal tried to scam me, not my customer, it was PayPal itself. Bitcoin is a godsend to avoid all these problems with international payments. There is no need for privacy, as the domain name registration is a matter of public record. I am happy to declare everything to the taxation authorities, and to exploit any legal options to reduce my tax bill on the transaction.

I appreciate that the potential for apparent privacy with Bitcoin is an important issue for some, but it seems to be the major excuse that is used by governments to restrict and reduce the use of Bitcoin. My point is that by recording a wallet  to allow the government to monitor activities, it may open up many opportunities, and avoid the draconian restrictions that they would like to impose. There is no need for the government to know your private keys, and access to them should only be granted following a high court order. This should only be granted following conviction for a criminal activity in my opinion. I find it better to take advantage of government incentives, and to maximise income and minimise costs. This is better than fighting, and winning pyrrhic victories.

That's great. Privacy goes beyond the topic about engaging in illicit activity but it also concerns about the ability for your government to collect metadata on you, and for a thirdparty to be able to intrude into your privacy. If this does not concern you, then we can continue in this tangent.
Not exactly. Government prefers fiat because they are essentially controlling it; they can enact any exchange policies to influence the prices by printing more money or encouraging saving, etc. If the majority of the population are using crypto, then they don't have as much power to do it anymore.

There is a reason why the restrictions exist and that is to make it prohibitively expensive for citizens to do something that doesn't align with the government. And no, I'm not talking about any illegal activities; capital control is an example that comes to mind. Again, Bitcoin advocates having your own bank which wouldn't align with your point about forfeiting your Bitcoins if there is a court order. Allowing them control over your coins is like Paypal or central banks (peep Cyprus's crisis in 2013) all over again.

If forfeiting your rights to the government is the way to go, then we probably wouldn't have a decentralized network in the first place. Just let them create their own with absolutely zero privacy. It goes far beyond the problem about AML, KYC or any other illicit activities that comes with a pseudonymous system.

In future, with developments and deployments of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), governments will try to force their citizens to use CBDCs, KYC as a mandatory condition.

By these digitalized tools, they will be more easily control money flows of their citizens and the first thing they will do is asking citizens to KYC CBDC wallets.

With blockchain-based currency like Bitcoin, governments don't control it from code to network, and they know they can not have full control on these blockchains and money flows in and out those blockchains.

You can't, but it is also possible to make a centralized Blockchain though that will be quite a bit different in function from Bitcoin. They would likely differ in quite a few areas as compared to Bitcoin to try to mimic their fiat system. If that happens, then it would possibly be recognized as a legal tender. Else, registering your wallet to regulate Bitcoin doesn't seem to be as good of an idea.

Aren't they up to it already that for every exchange we sign up for, we need to submit KYC documents already?  The governments can surely request access to these databases since the companies are regulated by the government.

Blockchain is an honest record of people's wallets so let's say wallet registration is being enforced by the government, will the government make these wallet databases public for all the see?

If this is only optional, then it would be nice to have such a thing to ensure your total security about any harm to your wallet because if they somehow accidentally sent some malicious funds to it, the government will quickly react and remove any suspicions from you with just some minor explanations. Unlike when you don't have such privileges, then you need to ready your explanations because it won't be an easy way out once they find out about your wallet and manage to track you down. I agree at some point but I don't want to have them share any control of my wallet, just some monitoring is fine for me.

Exactly, this will make Bitcoin have features that traditional financial systems have where all our financial activities are watched and monitored and we are asked for verifications, paperwork, and whatnot for certain transactions we make with our accounts. It is not just about giving them access to our funds that will make it troublesome, it's the fact that they can be able to keep an eye on what we do with our Bitcoins in real time which is against the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

So in my opinion, this wouldn't solve the existing problems but it will create more problems, especially for those using Bitcoin because you wouldn't be able to use your wallet or funds as freely as you do it right now because you will know your wallet is being watched and all your activities are monitored.

It would be so annoying and inconvenience every single person. I hope that in the future Bitcoin could just be treated as cash. Give full anonymity and don’t charge any fees or taxes if you conduct your business with BTC . No instead they will try to use a tool made for freedom to enslave people right back into their corrupt system.

Registering with a government wallet has two disadvantages. First of all, it won't be a non-custodial wallet. I don't know if there is any way for the government to keep non-custodial accounts and monitor wallets at the same time. Correct me if I am wrong. The second is that you can't spend your funds like a free bird. Because the government always monitors your transactions. They could freeze the account as well if it is custodial. So it will be treated as a bank account in Fiat. There will be no privacy as well. However, still, everyone would use a non-custodial wallet anytime. So it doesn't make sense to register with a government wallet if you don't use it. 

They can require their citizens to register addresses, not accounts but this requirement does not help governments fully control and trace Bitcoin transactions of their citizens. It depends on their citizens' cooperation with governments but I think it is how citizens submit their tax reports.

I disagree.

Monitor and control your address, wallet, bitcoins are not the same. It is only the same if governments force citizens to only use custodial wallets which controlled by governments. With Bitcoin I see this is impossible for governments to achieve this ambitiously full control because with open source code, private key, people can have their own non custodial wallets and control their coins, then transactions.

I posted it for discussion about CBDCs, not Bitcoin. CBDCs are other new forms of fiat currencies so it's normal to see CBDCs are centralized in control of governments. CBDCs surely are legal tender in those countries, no doubt.

I don't how this would solve anything. Why would you register wallets with the govt, thereby implicitly telling the govt you're only allowed to use bitcoin with their approval, when it doesn't solve any issue?

Bitcoin was developed from the start to be able to bring pseudonymity to the transaction system, eliminate third party intervention and increase privacy and security for users. Because the characteristics of Bitcoin are like that, governments don't like it, since then it will limit them from monitoring transactions carried out by individuals and reduce the use of fiat. For that reason the government wants to regulate the use of Bitcoin and launch some rules to help governments gain control over the Bitcoin network in their territory, and it will not rule out the possibility that individuals will be asked to register their wallets according to their identity - it is only a matter of time until it will happen.

Let's just forget about what the governments hits about the bitcoin. With all privacies and securities being observed in the bitcoin blockchain, proceeding to tie the government issued I'Ds was enough to keep transactions on tracts behold to catch up with any suspected illegal transactions in the public ledger network.
To me the government is only being aggressive with bitcoin because it's an influential threat over the fiats with the fact that it's a decentralized currency. Nothing more.

I don't like the idea that I've got to register my wallet just so the government knows what I'm up to and how much bitcoin I've got, that doesn't sit right with me. I feel like doing this is a disservice to what bitcoin stands for maybe even what the word cryptocurrency stands for, shouldn't these cryptocurrencies be a tool that should spit on the face of the conventional financial instruments and institutions like banks and insurance companies? Then how come do we have to consider this possibility? I don't see the future and I'm no clairvoyant or any kind of future seer but I do have a common sense and that common sense tells me that this is not going to be good for everyone here in the future, the government having to monitor your every move in the market isn't something you want, sometimes the right thing to do is to do what the government considers the wrong thing.

You think too highly of people. Many are just empty shells who follow blindly any authority they find. If the government says to do this the  they will do it. Most people who have nothing much to lose are like this. They rarely criticize the government and just accept anything that is given to them.
Like I said many people who are not discriminated or oppressed by the government have so much trust and confidence to their government not until of course they experience just how corrupt the government is themselves.

I think if we do so, we must make a big change to bitcoin network.
First,the native BTC network isn't cooperating with governments. How to let the wallet register authority be cotrolled by governments?
Then there are many countries,which government should be responsible for it?

I guess, to me, the optional registration sounds like a good idea, but it depends on who gets access to it. If it goes into public registries, I think it should be for public figures because their finances are a matter of public interest, but regular people shouldn't be encouraged to make themselves vulnerable like that. If it's a registration with authorities (so, confidential), I believe the information should be available to the law enforcement agencies, but maybe not to everyone else in the government. Optional registration is nice, but I don't think it will convince the authorities, though, as they can just point out that criminals simply won't use this feature.

That isn't true. If you run a full node, and just notify the government of your addresses, then they have no control over them, they can only watch your activities. If you are reporting these for tax purposes anyway, I don't understand the objections.

Everyone has access to Bitcoin blockchain, that's the problem. For example: A + B = C, we have no idea what is A, what is B and what is C. We might know one of them, for example A, but we won't know exactly what is B or C. If we register our wallet with government, the government will basically know both, A and B and automatically C. If that database gets leaked, you are basically naked online (thanks to public blockchain).

It's not really designed in a way to help us keep our privacy but I would say that some level of privacy is the side effect of Bitcoin. Monero is designed for having privacy protected.

It will open up opportunities but does the opportunities worth the cost that we will have to pay? Bitcoin was created to get rid of 3rd parties and if government takes the full control of Bitcoin, it automatically means returning to 3rd parties, so Bitcoin will be useless. Also, if the court will be able to order granting of private keys, basically words "you are your own bank when you use Bitcoin" will become meaningless.

P.S. We should never give up. Slaves didn't give up during terrible slavery, so why should people give up today?

This issue is always used as a mainstay for the government to do various things, to issue new regulations, and also to create regulations which are often quite troublesome and detrimental to society. The government, however, still wants to remain more powerful than the crypto space and they want to control their people or society in this crypto space. Moreover, it is not far from their power to still be able to control and regulate society by means of the law, official regulations of a country, and various issues raised related to crypto. And this may also not be separated from how they can optimize tax collection from here.

Ah, well, when it comes to money and taxes, the government will probably never be silent and will always look for loopholes to get it as optimally as possible. imagine if every citizen had to register their wallet, the government would automatically know the truth of the law, right? Yes, even if it's a big deal, of course it will be subject to taxes and other things. And the most important thing is, it's like there is no privacy left for crypto hodlers to do it.

While they may be using it as an excuse to ban crypto (I honestly do not know), money laundering is actually happening around cryptocurrency quite a lot. But this doesn’t mean that I stand with the government because I think it’s more than the crimes.

On the other hand, rather than registering my wallet with the government, I’d prefer to simply use fiat because it will then kill the exact purpose why Bitcoin was created. Because from registering it, they’ll long to regulate it.

The sole purpose of the introduction of censorships by the governments isn't even about curbing money laundering cases.. that's obviously the usual word to ease the "pressure" on the citizens. Bitcoin has issued a priceless freedom to a vast percentage of people around the globe, which sets a pathmark for the government to not monitor or have full control over the country's economy.
They don't wanna have people own billions of dollars somewhere out of their reach and control. I seen over the Internet that most influential attorneys are also pushing hard to have the system under their supervision.
Why do you think they won't incite their taxation policies as long as it's under their watch? Yes? Why should the government request that every user pays their task upon every transaction made outside their infrastructure?

Money Laundering is not happening around with only cryptocurrencies its also happening around with other methods as well because we are having many other ways which are already in use before this crypto and now after this crypto these methods are working good and peoples are using them without any problem linking this with crypto is just governments wants to have control around this with they also want to check every thing related to this which are currently not accessible for them and crypto related peoples are using them without any problem and this is the biggest problem for them.

In many countries we are having government related peoples are doing this money laundering without any problem with FATF was also introduced, but it's having no impact as this was expected so now they are trying to have related to this with crypto.

Should you register the wallet in your pocket with your banknotes with the guberment also? What fucking business is it of the guberment to make you register your wallet if you are not a criminal and are not using your coins to buy drugs? Fuck off with that idea.

If you do this then I think your privacy is not complete. The government will monitor your wallet and will mount task on any transaction you made; although you kept the private keys with you but they know the transaction you did because of blockchain technology that will allow them to track all your transactions. They will be able to see the money laundering they want but if they don’t know any identity attached to the wallet then they have no right to interfere.

Yes that's right. In fact, if we study again why Bitcoin was created from the start, we already realize that Bitcoin was created with such characteristics without the presence of a third party and of course increases privacy and security for its users. Because of its history, Bitcoin was started to be campaigned by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008 after the 2008 economic crisis in the USA and this crisis proved that the financial system at that time was very bad and detrimental to society.

So it would feel very strange if one day we registered our wallet with the government, because this would mean losing the characteristics of Bitcoin itself. The government continues to tout bitcoin as a source of crime, one of which is money laundering. that's their only reason to be able to control bitcoin. What we need to remember is that Bitcoin is a peaceful revolution, a non-violent revolution and Bitcoin does not need banks or the military to protect it.

Privacy as for me is not a part to the bitcoin network but it is the brain behind the creation of the bitcoin network. And that is why the real decentralization came to play and because of the decentrality of bitcoin network the government can't penetrate and control over the cryptocurrency. So the only way to fight against bitcoin is to attack the semi private companies that mix bitcoin. And thT is why mixers are always attacked by the government because they believed that through mixers politicians and businessmen laundering money and sent to different wallets .

So if we register wallet with the government then we have sold our rights of controlling the coins by ourselves to the government and they will make things miserable for us. Therefore I don't advise such move any day.

As this market is slowly getting regulated, crypto-related businesses such as crypto exchanges are already having financial records of their clients. That is, if the exchange is legit and licensed under the Central Bank of their jurisdiction. But outside those regulated crypto companies, crypto users still have the freedom to do what they want with their crypto holdings. Now, it is up to them if they will disclose all their crypto activities to the government by using only those regulated crypto platforms. You always have the option to keep your crypto transactions within yourself.

I understand that cryptocurrency is only but a tool. What it s used for is dependent on who is using it. Money laundering has been going on even before decades before Cryptocurrency came to light. But currently, some people are using the decentralization feature of cryptocurrency to launder money because they know it don’t pass through the government so they can’t see what’s going on, and they an take it out from crypto claiming it’s crypto gains. I’m only saying that there’s actually money laundering going one around crypto.

Sure, it could be a good thing to comply with your government, it didn't say there that you've got to be honest about your bitcoin ownership right? I can just register a fake one if they want, maybe even an Ethereum address only and tell them that it's the only cryptocurrency that I buy because bitcoin is so expensive then proceed not to put anything in that wallet. I don't think that it will come to a pass though, the government will see this as a massive headache for them and at the same time it's going to be a really stressful time for them and I don't think that government employees are paid enough money to do this kind of thing so they'll probably slack off. So yes, I agree that we should have a registration for our wallets because it will only be effective in a short period anyway.

I don't support this kind of development, if this idea is developed, it can creates a privacy problem for every Bitcoinist. Do you know how?  If you registered your bitcoin wallet with the government and I don't and I had any P2P transaction with you, if the government inquires to know who sent # amount of Bitcoin to you on ## date, you will definitely mention my name and the government can also save my wallet for them to track it when ever they want.

@Jet Cash, sometimes, the solution to a problem creates more problem for others and this your idea will create a privacy problem for other Bitcoinist.

P2p tx's do not reveal the identity of those involved, it only reveals their wallet address, so if you make a p2p tx with someone in a p2p platform, all the person can reveal to any agency is just your wallet address. However, i agree with your point and i already said something similar in my post earlier in this topic, if something like this is implemented, then the addresses that are yet to register will be in the watchlist of the government, and their coins can be confiscated if it hits a custodial service.

Of course I agree with you, the government are only concerned with the money they are losing from taxes, they have come to understand that if they allow bitcoin to flourish most people will turn to it and the banks will run out of businesses, and you and I know what will happen if the government losses money, they become powerless. The power has gone back to the people to control their money, and once a government finds out that it's losing out in control of the masses money, they put up a fight.

The major ways government control the affairs of a nation, is control of money, without money with you you become powerless. The government doesn't care about the masses, so it's a greedy fight they putting on, but they won't win.

Does the incentive weigh more than the disincentive to "register your wallet with the guberment"? Governments vary on the quality of guberment index globally so maybe there is a country out there with an actual decent government but most governments are made up of sociopaths and psychopaths and the do gooders are mainly extreme lefties who eventually go full retard commie once they gain power over the "useless eaters".

This is kind of giving the government access to our wallets. With the transparency of BlockChain, the governments were able to keep track of the transactions, and the same could be a hindrance for the user. A similar scenario happened with El Salvador providing a separate wallet named Chivo. Even a bonus of $30 in bitcoins was provided upon signup. People just signed up, used those bonuses, and moved to other decentralized wallets. 

This (if feasible) I think it's a good idea, it definitely would help calm the agitations of the government over crypto down a bit, as I personally think and believe that this will give them some sort of sense of control, knowing well that they government love to be in control, if we can register our bitcoin wallet with them, letting that have access to the public key which grants them access to knowing our bitcoin balances, transactions and histories, both present and future, I believe this should definitely help douse their aggressive agitations against crypto - this acutally will be the benefit of doing this.

But personally, I will still prefer that everything remain as they currently are because are never satisfied, for if for the reasons I stated above, we decide to do this, trust me that in fews years time, the government will come back wanting to have full access to our wallets, to enable them to be able to freeze and unfreeze assets in our wallets, this they would want to achieve by building their own centralized wallet which they would want to force everyone to start using, they are like Oliver twist - always wanting more.

I don’t think their aggressive agitations will decrease if we turn over control to them

If anything I think it will increase more. By seeing our transactions and knowing where we are or who are, they can create some theories that could lead to us being investigated. They might pinpoint certain crimes to us just from our transactions even if it’s not at all suspicious.

Besides the whole purpose of bitcoin is to get away from the government so giving control to them will be defeating the whole concept of bitcoin.

It's funny I was just thinking about this the other day.

I have some BTC in cold storage, when BTC hits $80000 I am probably going to sell some.
I have had it for wayyyyyyy longer then a year it should be taxed as long term capital gains. Any investment more then 1 year in the US is 'long term'

But, since I will move it from cold storage to a hot wallet to an exchange it makes it means that if it does get flagged with a this is a short term gain (higher taxes) not a long term gain I have to then jump through some hoops to prove it was sitting in cold storage since 201x and the old address is still mine.

If I could have a way to prove that it is mine now it could save time and effort later.

Not hiding from the tax man, I will make a profit on it and have no issues paying what I owe in taxes. Paying more then I should because I can't prove something would piss me off.

-Dave

The main purpose of a decentralized form of currency like Bitcoin was invented for it's user to prioritize their privacy.When we say decentralized what comes to our mind is it isn't controlled by a centralized controlling authority.Bitcoin totally has nothing to do with the government,so if there should be a way to register a digital wallet for storing Bitcoin with the government,then I see no difference between fiat and Bitcoin.Bitcoin will lose it's value once it is linked to a centralized entities like government,the elimination of an intermediary and a middleman in the Blockchain network retains the value of Bitcoin.

I think it's good that bit coin transactions don't involve government interference because if Bitcoin transactions are mixed with the government, of course it's not just fees in the market that have to be paid, of course additional taxes also apply, so every transaction takes a lot of deductions, without government interference, the assets are also safe and don't affect the government. .

There is a big issue of the security that blockchains are not being able to offer upto the extent that the owners are demanding. The investors are really worried while making big Investments because we hear different news of blockchains being hacked or the particular accounts are being scammed.

If governments can provide the security that people are looking for and they make themselves responsible that we can integrated in order to have a better security.

There's no benefit. You'll still have to give them your ID if we were to open "wallets" like we open bank accounts. And actually we need to show IDs every time we want to withdraw money too, ignoring things like ATMs and cards and stuff. At least the exchanges and stuff only ask for them once.

A libertarian government might benefit from your sort of approach, but for the existing governments, this request is insatiable.

You are right about what you have said @Z-tight but what I meant was a direct flesh and blood p2p transaction. For example you (Z-tight) is from my country and you already have your wallet registered with the government and I met you in person and told you I want to sell my Bitcoin for fiat and you agreed to buy. If after the transaction, the government asked you to provide my information, am sure you can give a description about me, even if you don't know my residential address or my name but you can mark my face when you see me.


Like I already said on my first comment above, "the solution to a problem creates more problem for others and this idea will create a privacy problem for other Bitcoinist." If this idea is implemented and taking for example, other Bitcoinist refuses to register their wallet, they can be implicated when they send Bitcoin to other members that have registered.