Bitcoin Forum

If you care about retaining privacy, mining or software development in the US, contact your US House representative (https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative) to add an amendment to this bill (https://www.coindesk.com/house-takes-up-infrastructure-bill-tax-provision).  

https://www.coindesk.cc/coinbase-warns-infrastructure-bill-s-crypto-provisions-could-impact-20-of-us-population-39813.html

Despite recent misinformation that this bill depends on the "interpretation" from the Treasury, ultimately the future of Bitcoin in the US will depend on whether the damaging crypto provisions in the "infrastructure" bill pass. This is a lie to get people to ignore the issue. The bill's wording can be interpreted however they want and they can choose to enforce this ban whenever they want. DeFi will also effectively be dead, in the US. The US will be little different than China, in this regard.

Update (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/24/crypto-lobbyists-house-tax-rule-infrastructure-506756): Damaging crypto provisions nearly locked in:

Update 8/31/21 - Foreign exchange tracking to be added: (https://cointelegraph.com/news/treasury-attempts-to-squeeze-further-crypto-related-data-sharing-provisions-in-budget-bill-roll-call):
Translation: no using a foreign exchange to obtain or exchange cryptocurrency for US citizens. Goodbye privacy.

Americans don't care about privacy, they can contact their house representatives all they want.

I've read a bit about the provision in the Infrastructure spending bill and it seems like a poor attempt to increase tax revenue by invading privacy as the means, with the end result just to tax the hell out of those in the crypto industry so they can pay for their 1.25 trillion in spending. The American electorate, and by proxy, politicians, don't understand privacy, let alone basic crypto fundamentals, so it's a shame that this will get passed.

Amendments at this stage were always going to be unlikely. We can still fight this with future amendments or future legislation to overturn the ridiculous crypto provisions. It is not too late to be calling your Representative.

Lots of good info here, along with template letters and contact details: www.dontkillcrypto.com

We're all springing off to a very Chinese-like style of governance and ruling at such a fast pace it's scary. Unfortunately, announcements against privacy aren't met by negativity as much as I wish they would be.

Now these guys are either absolutely incompetent or they are doing this with intention to kill crypto and push forward their new CBDCs that they're currently working on, and I unfortunately believe the latter applies. We can try fighting off this BS, but they found such good excuses for draconic laws that too many people are brainwashed into thinking everything's done for our good ..

Anyway, how many amendment filings (or however the procedure against these new rulings is called) are needed for it to be reconsidered/denied?

I've said it before on these forums - "Land of the free" is government propaganda at this point. Free to be spied on by your government. Free to elect one of the two candidates that Wall Street has picked for you. Free to be shot and killed for minor misdemeanors, or indeed, no crime at all. Free to spend your life in a for-profit prison for a victimless crime such as smoking some weed. Free to be made bankrupt for having the sheer audacity to get sick, despite spending more of your tax dollars on healthcare than any other developed nation. Don't worry though, as long as we get all school children to recite their praise for our glorious leader "liberty and justice for all", maybe they'll not notice.

We can't expect the general public to care when even people on this forum don't care. Hell, people on this forum, a forum dedicated to a project whose entire ethos is to get away from trusting third parties, not only don't care about privacy invasion but actively encourage it. "KYC is a good thing" and "More regulations mean crypto is going mainstream" are opinions you often see parroted on here.

A little bit of both. The vast majority of Senators and House Reps have no idea what a cryptocurrency is, but they are bought and paid for by the bankers and Wall Street, so will just do as they are told.

That's the surprising thing, people don't seem to not care about their privacy anymore, this discussion don't seem to meet a lot of opposition given how drastic it is, I wouldn't say that they're at the level of China but I think US is arriving there sooner or later, either the people raise their voices or this will go through.

Most of the people are deep asleep sadly and don't care about anything, they don't even think with their heads but they just react as animals.
If there wasn't few senators and some rear politicians who support Bitcoin and crypto industry we would be screwed long time ago, but there is still hope.
If you want to see how much American citizens know about Bitcoin and how much they care about privacy with new bills and regulations, check out this recent video with street interviews made by Minority ENT from Dallas, Texas:
https://youtu.be/LeXabg8W1YQ

They are following China perfectly, as if they are operated from the same center.

This just reflects general population and I wonder if those politicians who support Bitcoin are sponsored and paid by some Bitcoin whales ;)

Politicians needs to be held to a higher standard. If you are about to pass laws and regulations which could complete destroy an entire industry, then you should be duty bound to do at least the bare minimum research on that industry.

Some definitely have other motives. I was more than a little surprised that Ted Cruz was on our side here, so much so that he even tried to stop Shelby from attaching his ridiculous military spending amendment to the crypto amendment. Almost certainly there is something else going on in the background, given Texas' position to attract huge numbers of miners and develop their renewable energy infrastructure because of them. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Cruz has huge numbers of shares in Texas energy companies, or is receiving some kind of incentive from them.

Still, I like to think our democracy isn't completely useless just yet, and if millions of people start calling their Representatives about this, that something will be done about it.

Most legitimate countries and individuals have decided to retain crypto and this is from the concurrent informations they have heard over the years and some have decided to refrain and even go as much as trying to demolish it.
Well, we still believe though we don't know exactly where it is heading to, but we know surely that someday,somehow it will contribute to the world's Economy
Trojane💎

Politicians most certainly do this intentionally. With trillions of dollars at stake, nothing is by "accident." Even if the politician themselves are incompetent, they have dozens of assistants who write and interpret policy for them.
Original bill author (Senator Rob Portman) lied and claimed he did not intend to target miners or developers. If that were true, he would have supported the amendment to exclude them. He did not. The amendment also decreased the projected tax revenue. Clearly it is intended to target them, as well as strip Americans of their privacy by forcing them through KYC exchanges. Senator Portman knew what he was doing. It is no coincidence that a retiring senator was the one who took the blame for the amendments not passing in the Senate. It was later discovered that the original bill was driven by former Federal Reserve Chairman, Janet Yellen - the Fed has the most to lose if cryptocurrency takes over and disrupts the money printing done by the Fed / Washington. Their ultimate goal is likely to ban Bitcoin/crypto and force everyone to use non-private CBDCs.

It only takes one amendment to change this bill. However, the House voted yesterday to vote on the unamended bill on Sept. 27th (https://www.coindesk.com/house-moves-to-consider-unamended-infrastructure-bill). There is still an opportunity to get them to vote against it.

Good stuff. Reaching out to my local politician through other channels here. We need people to encourage them to vote against this bill. Keep up the fight.

It is no accident that he only "changed his mind" and starting supporting the amendment after it reached the stage of requiring unanimous approval from the Senate (rather than just a simply majority), which he knew was never going to happen.

The man who doesn't know how to send an email and communicates with this staff by leaving them hand written notes. And we expect these people to reach an informed decision on cryptocurrency. Absolutely laughable.

I have been saying this for years:

Any attempts to obstruct Bitcoin, is wealth that will go elsewhere.

China and America hate Bitcoin? No problem, the rest of the world will enjoy it. Their loss.

Nothing can stop Bitcoin, unless humans go extinct or back to the rock age.

the bills wording is clearly about MSB's (money service businesses(custodians))

it clearly says about people that take responsibility of another persons funds for the service of transfering to another person

the very description of custodians

pools are not custodians. neither are software developers
neither pools or software developers have to register as being a MSB

seems oeleo is weirdly obsessed to trying to misinform the community that this bill is about software developers by jumping into every topic of the bill to push a campaign to spamming representatives about rewording to exclude software developers..
.. thats like saying redraft it to exclude people selling banana's for bitcoin.

he is another network fangirl and should actually worry about the other network he loves to much having MSB issues in regards to routing. and he should be concentrating on getting a redraft to exclude hobby/individuals who use routing to be excluded excluded.
(a useful campaign that will make good use of his time and help him personally)

maybe a simple redraft of 'businesses' as the first word instead of 'persons'
a very simple and acceptable change..  

again for context and emphasis.. software developers and pools are not custodians so they wont need to register as MSB
so no redraft is needed to clarify that because its actually pretty clear.
but if getting petty then yea 'businesses' instead of 'persons' makes it abundantly clear even to the idiots

some are just so blind that they might aswell pull the propaganda cord fully and make more crap up and make more fear that people that sell banana's are 'brokers' because they take money from one(customer) and give it to another(employees)
but common sense and logic and a sense of reality of how the real world works know that a banana retailer is not a broker and doesnt need to do KYC on customers
seems oeleo is just following some campaign he seen on twitter without actually doing the independent thought. a tactic i seen him do many times of just blindly following propaganda scripts

a software developer doesnt even take in money to give to others..
a pool doesnt even become a custodian to take in money

when people actually think. and really think.. the bill is clear. it is not going to harm software developers and pools. so no re-draft is needed

Unfortunately, the vast majority of people here are strict regulation and surveillance advocates, which means when posting about privacy-preserving techniques, disobedience to government, natural human rights, and things like that you are risking being misunderstood, ridiculed, betrayed. These are people who don't know what principles of bitcoin are, why it was created in the first place, why obsolete banking rules cannot be applied to the new kind of money, bankless digital money. Even if they knew all of that, they wouldn't care anyway. They'd rather sacrifice the freedom bitcoin offers them for imaginary "convenience" and "protection". "Unregulated" no- KYC bitcoin frightens them because it requires people to be open-minded, responsible, fearless. The government can't regulate bitcoin, they can't take control over it. What they do is "regulate" and manipulate people's minds depriving them of the ability to think clearly.

No problem? No problem?

We just lost 80 exahash of protection because of the mess in China and now you think we can simply cut another country from mining? Where do you think will those miners migrate then next? Salvador?   :-\ Let's be serious, send 1% of the miners there and their work grid is down.

Let's turn to count investors? How many companies from Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia, and Bartovia have purchased 1% of what grayscale and micro have?

Oh, just cut the countries that hold half of the world's wealth and you think everything will be fine, Bitcoin will survive because 3 billion people that can't afford even on tx at 1sat/vb a day will support it. No, bitcoin can't be stopped, their loss, do you wanna see the markets when the rest of the world will be left alone to "enjoy" it?


Why are you surprised, the average citizen never cared about privacy! Remember telephone books? A full book with names, addresses, and phone numbers, yet people were fine with it.
How would you feel right now if those were made mandatory again? Trust me after the initial outrage everyone will be fine with them again, for 90% of the world privacy is that annoying shit because of which they have to spend one extra click to set up cookie preferences when visiting a website. 

Well, Banks took a beating against Bitcoin and Crypto currencies... and also large financial consulting firms... so it is just a natural push back from the government that protects them. Some Bank even suggested lately that the developers associated with Bitcoin should be prosecuted. (People like Gavin Andresen)  ::)

So even if you not the creator of the "privacy" software and only the maintainer.... they will hunt you down.  >:(   The US is fast becoming a "Police State" like China... but they are always pointing fingers at China.  ::)

lol i remember that phone book where you just have to look for the name and dial the number.

if Americans don't want to be like China, they better tag Yellen you are against this bill. If she wins because most probably she can bribe every senator and congressman out there,  there goes your freedom. they might even have the social credit system as a plan for you all just like China has.

miners are brokers as law. looks like its made by someone who doesn't understand how this works.

The only thing that's clear is the astonishing naivety in what you're saying.  People with vested interests that are openly hostile to Bitcoin are responsible for the decisions being made here.  This is an altogether different situation to the SEC commenting on defi regulations.  This has far greater scope for abuse.  But you've made it clear why you prefer the wording as it currently stands.  It's just precise enough for your own sordid agenda:


Thank you for revealing that your stance on this matter is entirely predicated on your vendetta.  You desire a regulatory environment which is hostile to Lighting and you'll say literally anything to convince people that's somehow a good thing.  Even if it has consequences for non-LN users.

You really are a one-trick pony, aren't you. 

That's part of the problem: An assumption that if you want to preserve your privacy then that automatically means you are doing something to disobey the government, i.e. illegal. I just want to have the freedom to live my life and spend my money without being spied on or harassed.

Sure, it's all me. That's why everyone here except you is on my side of this discussion. That's why there are entire campaigns being ran on Reddit and Twitter to get people to call their representatives. That's why multiple Senators tried to amend the language of the bill, and now multiple House Reps are trying to do the same thing. That's why every news site, crypto or otherwise, is talking about how bad this bill is for bitcoin. That's why people like Brian Armstrong, Mark Cuban, and Elon Musk have spoken out against this bill. I sure do have a lot of influence to do all this myself.

Or maybe, just maybe, you are the one who is wrong here?

Don't underestimate the influence of these two countries, because maybe someone will say that China's complete exit from the crypto world is not necessarily a bad thing - but if the US moves in a similar direction, what do you think all those US-influenced countries will do? I am thinking of India, Japan and most EU countries that will do what they are advised to do - because no one wants the Americans to reassure them in a friendly way that something needs to be done.

---

It seems that they were looking for just such a man for the job, and he is doing it perfectly for now. In the end, he can always say that he didn't really understand what he was doing, but that he meant the best.

People who are involved with cryptocurrency in the USA should join hands and mold a one stand on this matter as lawmakers would prefer to hear a big voice representing many small players and constituents rather than a broken and hollow stand on this very critical bill. One thing for sure is that this is not a well-thought of kind of law and I must say that cryptocurrency is just inserted as they are looking for many ways and means to tax anything so the Infrastructure Bill would have sources of revenues for spending. Done in haste, done half-baked. Sadly.

It doesn't matter to him now. He retires at the end of this term, so he doesn't care about what people think of him, he doesn't care about getting votes come next election cycle, and he doesn't care about doing the right thing. All he cares about is the fat paycheck he gets from his banking and Wall Street donors. There is zero accountability.

Don't let them fool you in to thinking that infrastructure spending is behind these crypto provisions. The taxes which would be raised from decimating the cryptocurrency industry would amount to ~1% of all the spending in this bill alone, never mind the trillions of dollars of spending in other stimulus bills which have been passed recently or will be passed in the near future. And, at the end of the day, what is an extra $20 billion in tax revenues when the Fed is printing trillions out of thin air? This isn't about raising taxes; it is about controlling bitcoin.

alot of people just dont know how real life works.

heck they are posting dozens of posts about this bill and yet they do not even know how the SEC functions nor anything about MSB's and who the bill is really targetting
heck i bet they never seen a MSB policy handbook nor know what goes into being a msb(broker)

the funny thing is that the large exchanges that will be hit most with bureaucracy understand whats going to happen and guess what. they dont actually mind. its like another standard thing they have to do. the reason they love it. is because they have already formed policies about KYC for fiat, so extending it to crypto transfers is like a click of a button.
they like it because they know how much stress it took to first become an MSB. and so now MSB's they want more hurdles to stop the new competition. yep they dont want new players in their game

but while some idiots that dont know who its really going to affect or too afraid to admit their alliances to admit they will be affected in another way. instead they are just following some script someone else is influencing them to push while pretending its their 'side', their agenda.

in short. if you cant even figure out the real issues. and you are in fear because you just dont know.. either learn quick or find out. dont just keep reposting a campaign you only have 5% direct knowledge of/understanding of
this forum should not be the spam forum of making things go viral just because you read it somewhere that it should go viral.. learn whats its really about, learn who or what it really impacts then decide

its pretty pathetic when people just make posts because they read something and need to repost it everywhere and just pretend they are the main people.
its pathetic that they waste so much time on a nonsense agenda just to distract from the real issues.
and its pathetic how they play the social drama games.

but anyways.
while you send emails basically asking to include "excluding developers, pools' it actually fundamentally changes nothing.. and when you lot realise your changing nothing. you will realise the time you are wasting chest beating and arguing over something while avoiding the real issues

real issues like.
rewording the start as "if a US registered company" instead of "if any person"

that way this bill wont affect businesses that are set up in other countries but servicing americans (like the flaw in the bitlicence but not being worded as such)
it also wont affect individuals/hobbyists

the impact is that the US then does not have jurisdiction of other countries businesses or individuals purely because they service US citizens

dont you get it yet
while pandering to the twitter campaign that only wants an amendment to say "excluding developers and pools" .. becomes meaningless campaign as developers and pools are not custodians in the first place

its like suggesting a fruitless amendment to then make it seem the other details are fine and acceptable. without even understanding the wording at all and just getting angry because someone on twitter told you to get angry because of his misunderstanding of the wording

the wording does not include developers or pools. fact.

but what the wording does allow for is expanding US jurisdiction beyond the land borders of USA. and it even affects the "other network" routers.
heck i even appealed to the "other network" fangirls personal affects, how it would affect them. but they just cried how they should ignore how it would affect them personally. just to continue spouting out the nonsense campaign someone else came up with
its like they are on auto pilot.

so one more time

READ THE ACTUAL WORDING
any person who (for consideration) is responsible for regularly providing any service effectuating transfers of digital assets on behalf of another person

lets break it down
any persons who for consideration
-translation: anyone doing something for a fee

is responsible
-translations: actually responsible EG custodian

 for regularly providing any service
-translation: business

effectuating transfers on behalf of another person
-translation: again custodian moving funds

no where does it describe a software developer

however it does allow for these holes:
LN routes
exchanges
coinjoin/mixers
businesses outside the US border
users outside the US using a ES business
..
but lets see all these people ignore all this and just want 'developers and pools' added as an exclusion..
which if we follow that rabbit hole. it means these script following no-brainers think retailers are suppose to report because they were not put in as an extra in the exclusion list. thus the rabbit hole means anything not excluded must be included
(facepalm)
and thats another thing. software developers dont take responsibility of funds to pass onto others
and yet retailer do take cash from one customer and pass it onto another(supplier/employee)
yet wheres all the out-of the -box thinking about excluding retailers.. oh wait.. its not in the script so dont think about it, right?

atleast take a few days to think about things rather than just wasting them same days just reposting and reciting a script of something you read somewhere while defending it to the death because you read it.

its just a silly time wasting effort to just request the "exclude developers and pools" as they are not going to be impacted. and just as silly to ignore and avoid talking about the actual wording and actual impacts

but hey lets see 20 more posts about how the certain people will just mindlessly follow a campaign word for word without even the subtle concept of independent thought and wanting actual change

Debating with franky1 more than one post is meaningless, he has a desire of being right, no matter what you tell him, no matter the subject he must be right and the other must misunderstand something and not have a clue what they're talking about. Open this same topic with completely the opposite view on it, he will come again and criticize everyone and telling we are all wrong.


Hihi, all the articles pro taxation started with the mentioning of a multi trillion market as bait, you're going to be also wrong if you think that taxation is not a part of it, this is just the beginning, they need control, then there will be taxes, and then more and a little bit more. Just looking at the coins moving around and knowing who does what matters little to them, they are already tracking those, but now you will have to also pay for it.
Wait till some democrat senator realizes that if we put a tax 1% on every tx in the chain we could solve poverty in America.

this topic
oeleo posts: 6
franky1 posts: 3

hmm seems its oeleo thats going overboard with arguing

there are many topics i leave much alone. because they are making valid points and dont need my input because they have solved their own questions

there are many topics i just make a subtle point and people realise the point

but there are certain topics where certain people really try to pretend they are influencers but then really just act like script readers spouting out some campaign of time wasting and misdirect. where they dont really think for themselves and just ride the campaign bus even to a dead end.
(these people are worse then sigspammers)

and its these topics that need multiple posts to wade through the crappy campaign propaganda and to actually poke at idiots until they wake up, because they are so blind to their own scripts they just defend them post after post without thought.(like how flat earthers act like)

so instead of creating social drama of arguing. actually take a few minutes to refuse yourself from pressing the reply button just to argue just to defend your preformed opinions based on some script you read.
stop now. stop getting the itchy finger ready to press the reply button for the sake of arguing.. and think

and actually think for once. not for how you can kiss ass the campaigner by being a sheep. not for how you can present yourself as being a developer defender because you imagine them as god.

but actually think about what the subject matter means to you personally

tale the LN fangirls
they are pushing the lets defend the developers they love as gods.. to the point of sounding like idiots. rather then thinking about how this bill affects them personally about being routers for payments

yep they wanna kiss developers ass even though in this instance developers dont need defending.. because the bill is not attacking developers. while ignoring their own risks and issues the bill will cause of treating routers as MSB

and if they cant see they are putting their own risks aside and ignore the pitifulls that will affect them, to just try acting like loyal sheep defending developers(even when not needed) then they really need to take a step back from the social drama and viral memes and campaigns. and actually think for themselves for once.

now back to the point
changing the bill to just add "excluding pools and developers" is a heck of a waste of time and not a single rational independent thought has been put into it. (sheep scripting only)
where as a simple amendment of
from: 'if any person'
to: 'if a us business'
clarifies a heck of a lot and actually closes alot of loopholes jurisdictionally and descriptively of what a broker is

the 'exclude developers and pool' changes nothing. and still puts the LN fangirls at risk. and also retailers and businesses not in the US


lets word it another way.
if a US citizen had a offshore fiat account in switzerland. the IRS cant demand the switzerland bank to report on the US citizens fiat
yet this bill allows a switzerland crypto exchange to report on a US citizens crypto trades..

so if you want a true amendment that stops this over reach, and also redefines clearly for the naive what a broker actually is.
the amendment should begin with 'if a US business'

heck its even less letters to change then 'exclude software developers, pools and nodes'

I have written as many times as I can and called numerous times to voice my concern about this bill, but at the end of the day if the government find something that is making the American public money and they are not getting a big enough piece of the pie they are going to tax it until it is just barely profitable for people to keep doing it but they can rake in the money. Really pisses me off every time I think about it but I will keep fighting on my end to call or write as many people as I can.

We could already solve poverty in America if we wanted to. The cost of solving poverty is far less than the amount we spend on bombing civilians around the world. If we switched to a single payer health care system, we would not only save enough money from our taxes to solve poverty but we would also get better health care and not have to buy personal insurance. A win-win-win for the average person. But we both know those things will never happen, because soup kitchens and homeless shelters don't buy our politicians - healthcare conglomerates and weapons manufacturers do.

With other ridiculous news like the EU wanting to ban all "private wallets" (yeah, good luck with that ::)), I definitely wouldn't put it past the US Congress to try to levy more taxes from cryptocurrency in some manner or other.

You spoke too soon!

Foreign exchange tracking (https://cointelegraph.com/news/treasury-attempts-to-squeeze-further-crypto-related-data-sharing-provisions-in-budget-bill-roll-call):
Translation: no using a foreign exchange to obtain or exchange cryptocurrency for US citizens. Goodbye privacy. The rich will, of course, find ways around this.

Anyone thinking these Senators were naive? Don't be fooled. With trillions of dollars involved in US politics, everything is by design.

Be ready to contact your represenatives if this happens.

I'd be very surprised if some degree of this wasn't already happening. Hell, knowing the US government, they would probably attempt to strong-arm any foreign exchange or government that they wanted in to handing over the details of US citizens without offering any information in return.

And so can you! And what's more, it isn't even difficult. Go to Bisq or LocalCryptos, download the software or sign up for an account, and start trading peer to peer completely decentralized without handing over any personal information whatsoever.

If you use centralized exchanges, then the government will track you. It's that simple. It doesn't matter if the exchange is overseas, or they totally promise not to hand over you details (::)), or you only use their non-KYCed accounts, or whatever.

Agreed. There are ways for those tech savvy enough. VPNs, Tor, etc also ways to get around whatever restrictions they try to apply.

Who knows, maybe it will be a good thing? It could improve development of privacy focused exchange technologies. The quasi-ban on sports betting just made people move to indian casinos and offshore. Unfortunately, that also came at the expense of increased fraud - ironically what the bill is purported to improve!

However, if they do succeed in limiting crypto to KYC in the US, the banks will win and the dollar will continue to lose. Crypto offers the possibility of democratizing finance.

I'm not sure they would really be much use here. Sure, they might let you bypass any IP or country restrictions to connect to foreign exchanges, but that doesn't really matter if it is a centralized exchange which is enforcing KYC anyway. Either they ban you as soon as you sign up with your US passport or whatever, or they hand over all your information to the US government anyway. The only way to avoid the government spying on you is to not complete KYC in the first place.

I've been hoping that for years, but it is unlikely to happen. I've said before on this forum, but I am endlessly astounded by the amount of shit centralized exchanges will force on their users and the users just accept it. Coins and KYC being hacked, lost, stolen is one thing. Ridiculous KYC and spying on you is another. But then add in freezing accounts for no reason, their ridiculous fees, insider trading, market manipulation, using your deposits as investments, fractional reserve, and all the other shady stuff they do. Any sane person would have stopped using centralized exchanges years ago. If you are willing to put up with all that already, then you probably don't care about a bit more government control over you and your money.

well atleast i can now see some people breaking out of the box of the 'developer assist' campaign and now actually discussing real issues such as foreign jurisdiction

the current wording(laymans interpretation) does not limit:
US gov seeking foreign exchanges/MSB's to report to the IRS on US customers
US exchanges/MSB's from reporting to foreign governments on their foreign customers
'coz not excluded'

however the reality is knowing how MSB's are registered. this law will as worded now definitely affect
us customers using foreign exchanges. but not really affect US exchanges with foreign customers

look back to the bitlience. which was meant to only be the NY jurisdiction. and yet it affected businesses outside of NY. simply because they are servicing NY residents as their customer
authorities ran 'honeypot traps' by actually being a SEC agent living in NY and using services outside of new york and if the service allowed their custom. that business got in trouble

but a NY business did not need to do much for its foreign customers. which is why many NY businesses IP banned NY customer IP's and only served customers outside of NY. because the other countries did not adopt a similar policy

to actually make it so american businesses have to report on foreign customers. the foreign government needs its own laws to seek/retrieve/require that data. and have a policy and platform that allows american businesses to file reports to foreign governments. requiring the business to register with each country it wants to serve.

so american government cant force US businesses to report on foreign customers. because foreign governments are not forcing/set up to receive reports.

(though some governments are adopting their own policies such as the UK declining binance from operating in the UK)

Have you ever been in post soviet countries? Elders like communism a lot, they wonder about that era because there was massive corruption and nepotism. The highest percentage of people over 30 year prefer total controll and their argument against those who prefer privacy is that if you don't do anything illegal, then why are you afraid abouy anything? Let them know what I buy/do, what's the problem? I don't give a f.

This is how the majority thinks, people like total control and think it will stabilize the world and beat the crime. Eh...

If government could actually act in this manner when it's really not about the government but the people, then I wonder what we really are to the government! It's really surprising how they flatten the rules of human rights in a bid to show sovereignty and the supremacy of the government.

When it comes to the argument on privacy and not being involved with anything illegal and as such, the privacy isn't really needed,,, what happe s when you get to put them in the picture.
Why should the activities of those in government offices or politicians stay off the hook of privacy policies if they aren't doing anything illegal? It's a hypocritic act and a one sided argument.