Bitcoin Forum

http://www.ahametals.com/us-district-judge-bitcoin-money/ (http://www.ahametals.com/us-district-judge-bitcoin-money/)

Glad they have started accepting it as money, people were taking bitcoins in front of legal eyes and not being charged/taxed. Even if they steal no charges were put.

even if they define bitcoin as money, it would be hard to tax it for peer to peer, they just better focus on businesses.   But if a bueiness is overseas or is using an off shore bank account they wont be able to tax it either.

It would be hard to force people to report income and pay taxes on peer to peer transactions, but IMO many people will because it is the law and they are afraid of the consequences. You never know that blockchain investigative tools will be available in 10 years that could potentially link people's identity to certain TX.

great news
good to hear this

such uninformed noobs.. this is not good news. this is like declaring that cows are now rhino's and killing a 'rhino' would now send you to court as rhino's are in the endangered species list that are regulated and need special permissions and licences to kill them, where you have to fill out lots of paperwork as to the reason for the slaughter, etc, etc, etc, etc.

yes there all animals and yes bitcoin / money are all currencies and financial tools. but to declare bitcoin as 'money' is a bad thing.. leave bitcoin as its true description, a free market asset currency.

declaring bitcoin as money is bad. and anyone thinking its good needs to do more research.

as for the charlie shrem incident. at the time of the accused event bitcoin was not money so the law at the time meant that he did not have to treat it as such. his defense should be that its definition was an asset currency which is outside the realms of money transmission. (yet he should be careful because if he touched any FIAT or 'goods-of-value'(assets) known to be involved drug related purchases/crimes. the he would still be on rocky ground)

Judges are part of government. They are not part of your life unless government takes notice of you. Money is what you think it is, and what you agree to use for money with the person you barter with. Even the constitutions of countries where gold and silver are described as money, describe how the government defines money. This is THEIR definition. You accept it or you don't.

:)

I think this is where most of the bitcoin related taxes will take place. I think larger business will likely need to play the role of taxman by collecting sales tax on transactions, and income taxes on bitcoin (capital gains tax) will likely eventually fall by the wayside.

Bitcoin taxing, they are taxing virtual things. Probably they were facing huge losses in income tax.

"Government manipulates conflicting Bitcoin rulings to its advantage" = "Gravity pulls objects toward the earth"

Which would imply that taxation is not progressive. In a bitcoin economy, if the government depended primarily on sales tax, the rich and poor would pay similar taxes on consumption. Might not be considered fair.

There are pros and cons to this. If it's deemed as money, then it will be regulated as such. FINCEN already has done so. The tradeoff, now the IRS should not tax it has a property. Dam government needs to make up their mind what to call it. Or even better, just leave it alone. But we all know that won't be happening.

Your ahametal site just runs full articles from other sites, and then posts your ahametal links here for exposure..Clickbaiter...

It's pretty typical how courts and governments will classify Bitcoin as whatever they feel, suits them for the given situation.

When it suits them to classify it as a currency, they do so.   When it suits them for taxation, it is considered property or an asset.   When we are talking about money laundering, then all the sudden it is cash.

Whatever is best for the government, and costs the most for it's people, that is how they classify Bitcoin