Yesterday I panic-bought 3000 PPC when NuBits release date was announced: http://nubits.com/Yes, I sold most of my hot-wallet bitcoins and bought peercoins because if you look at the PPC/BTC history: http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/pair/ppc/btc/btc-e/alltime you will see that it's been a year since PPC traded that low against BTC and many great news are about to come in near future (PeerShares, NuBits, Cold Minting). It is also known that should BTC skyrocket, PPC goes even higher (just look at the last PPC/BTC bubble and you will see that it correlates positively to the last BTC/USD bubble). When I bought into PPC yesterday it traded 0.0017 BTC/PPC and now it's already 0.0021 BTC/PPC. I'm bullish on bitcoin but while it's having a mid-term low I'd suggest buying into promising altcoins and grow your stash without becoming bearish on cryptocurrencies in general. |
|
|
|
I don't know what kind of comment you like to hear. But yes, taxation is theft...  I'm sure I'm not the only one facing these problems. I was hoping that someone who already sorted out these issues for themselves would comment. |
|
|
|
must be an american, unaware there are other currency than dollar.
EURO motherfucker EURO, google it.
I'm not American, I use Euro every day. Anyway, same can happen with USD chart I guess because the sell wall is only ~150 BTC thick  |
|
|
|
You think incorrectly. Whenever you trade one kind of property for another property this transaction is considered to be a barter transaction. The IRS has actually already rules on this matter as they have said that you must pay taxes on any gains (or take deductions on any losses) of your bitcoin based on the fair market value of the goods/services/property that you trade your bitcoin for.
The tax code is very complicated, however this portion is not. If this is too complicated for you then I would suggest hiring a qualified tax professional to prepare your taxes for you next spring.
According to your logic if anyone sells their bitcoins they are required to pay taxes. Now that person immediately buys as many bitcoins as possible for the remaining money after paying taxes. Bitcoin rises a bit and the selling/rebuying repeats. By doing this the person loses a lot more money than by simply waiting and holding. This gives us a system that is retarded. It discourages an individual from diversifying their investments. However, was that individual a company, I am god damn sure no income tax is required for diversifying the original investment. Which brings me to the conclusion that one should create a dummy company and do all the diversifications under the name of that company. The income tax is only paid on the wealth you take out from that company and declare as profit. Simple proof of that retarded income tax friction: I have 1 bitcoin worth of 1$ that I got for free. Bitcoin rises to 10$ -> I have 1 bitcoin worth of 10$. I sell 1 bitcoin and get 10$. 2$ (20%) goes away as income tax. 8$ remains to me. I buy bitcoins for all my money. I get 0.8 bitcoins for the 8$. Bitcoin rises to 100$ -> I have 0.8 bitcoins worth of 80$. I sell 0.8 bitcoins and get 80$. 80 - 8 = 72. 20% of 72 is 14.4$ which goes for taxes. 65.6$ remains to me. I buy bitcoins for all my money. I get 0.656 bitcoins for the 65.6$. Bitcoin rises to 1000$ -> I have 0.656 bitcoins worth of 656$. I sell 0.656 bitcoins and get 656$. 656 - 65.6 = 590.4. 20% of 590.4 is 118.08$ which goes for taxes. 537.92$ remains. However, if I just waited and held my 1 bitcoin until it was worth 1000$, then 20% income tax would be just 200$ and I would have 800$ remaining. 262.08$ were stolen by the taxman as a result of a moronic taxation system.Any comments, anyone? |
|
|
|
Big corporations do die. I once had a Pontiac car and a Compaq computer. Both are gone. I agree that some corporations are very good at perpetuating themselves, but times are changing, and I'll be happy to see BTC kill Western Union and Paypal.
Countries should die too. Yugoslavia died recently, I'd like to see all countries disappear.
That's a good one of course countries should die too! That might be even more important than the corporations extermination. But generally, I can now see why this forced extermination is not required --- people who run these businesses are not immortal. They will die, and this gives chance to newer generations. But of course, inheritance pretty much ruins it. <tinfoil hat> Some alien species consider soul as the true inheritance receiver. If an alien ruler dies, its soul is caught and put into one of its children. The child's soul is taken away and stored until the ruler gets another child which needs that soul. </tinfoil hat> |
|
|
|
The regulators seem to be moving at a glacial pace on this.
They're using the delaying strategy  |
|
|
|
|
Someone smite the necromancer.
|
|
|
|
From evolution it is known that individuals must die so that the species could evolve. This is why we are not immortal. It is important for the older generations to die because otherwise they hold the resources for themselves and it becomes extremely difficult for new generations to become successful. Same logic should be applied to corporate entities such as Coca Cola and what not. They should forcefully be exterminated after 100 years of existence, all their assets being redistributed between new firms and startups. My corpse will some day rot and turn into soil so that new life can use it for building blocks. Coca Cola, McDonalds, Ford and other big and long lived corporations should be forced to die in a similar manner. Any takers? A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. |
|
|
|
What if all the exchanges are infiltrated by central banks and the price and trades shown to us are completely false? They can do this because people are still so stupid that they don't actually withdraw their coins and dollars from the exchanges. They use exchange accounts as wallets as if they never learned anything from the Gox collapse. What if the true price is somewhat reflected only in localbitcoins? Localbitcoins is trading at 567$ while others are at 480$!!! See it yourself: http://bitcoinity.org/markets/localbitcoins/USDWhy no arbitrage? Suspicious.... |
|
|
|
|
Also, BTC has proven itself to be useful for the black markets. This will never change no matter what the general population thinks of it. If the drug dealers accept it then it must have value. Try debating this and you will make a fool out of yourself because essentially you would be trying to portray drug dealers as fools.
|
|
|
|
I think you are confusing a tax-deferred retirement account and an investment account. For regular investment accounts, you absolutely must record gains and losses based on the cost basis and market value at the time of the transaction. Tax deferred accounts are special investment vehicles with certain restrictions that allow the tax to be deferred until withdrawal and a specified retirement age.
Posted From bitcointalk.org Android App
no wonder people don't pay taxes if they make it so god damn complicated. According to what you just said I am expected to declare the swaps between altcoins too like for every single transaction. this is outrageous. One could as well as start an empty company that pays no wages and has no employees. The owner's bitcoins would be the investment and the company buys real estate in turn. I don't think there is any income tax to be paid when a company swaps one type of property for another. There clearly are holes in the whole taxation system which makes the system unfair for an individual. to yatsey87: I would obviously ask for legal advice and what not but this topic is more like speculation around a potential problem that might arise in the future . |
|
|
|
This is incorrect. If you exchange one investment for another then this would be considered to be a barter transaction. To figure your tax you would take your cost basis and subtract the fair market value of the investment that you received in exchange for your original investment. The fair market value of your new investment would then be the cost basis of your new investment.
This cannot be the whole truth because my current bank offers an investor's account which has a different number. They explained such a separate account by the possibility to postpone income taxes. Think logically, it's outrageous if I had to pay taxes each time I swap one stock for another. An investment account is exactly for allowing me to buy and sell for the purpose of investment and all the money on the investment account is not actually mine yet. The money only becomes my income once I transfer it from the investment account to my personal account. |
|
|
|
|
To my understanding a conversion from one investment into another is not taxed. So for example if I exchange my bitcoins for gold I am not paying any income tax, am I right?
Same logic can be applied to real estate then. I obtain some real estate for the wealth I have acquired from holding bitcoins. The real estate is an investment similarly to bitcoins. Can I do it as an individual (not company) and not pay any income tax?
To further elaborate on this, can I rent that real estate out? Can I live in it?
I understand there are different laws in different countries but any specific information on the matter is still welcome.
|
|
|
|
the only bottom is $0
and it will be sooner then everybody thinks
<flashing ad>EARN FREE BITCOINS BY POSTING FUD IN THE BITCOINTALK!!!! </flashing ad> |
|
|
|
What is really going on is that I simply enjoy playing a crazed conspiracy theorist.
 I tried finding that book online, pdf, audiobook, youtube videos --- everything --- but I did not find anything. I now give up and probably won't get to read it as I'm not going to buy it. Heck, I even tried pirate bay However, what I did find accidentally was this: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-youre-accidentally-making-everyone-hate-you/Turns out it's a very interesting read although total off-topic. |
|
|
|
So you're saying I pushed my claims to the extremes, and instead of that making you recognize it as worth further research it made you less likely to take the argument seriously? I see what you attempted but you did it in a flawed manner by introducing puppet masters to the equation. As a result, a perfect argument is ruined in the eyes of a perfectionist such as myself. You had all the time you needed to come up with one polished reply and you screwed it up by sucking irrelevant claims out of your thumb. However, this debate is worthless to begin with because it does not reflect my true position on the exaggerated tinfoil hattery. What is really going on is that I simply enjoy playing a crazed conspiracy theorist. There's no hidden agenda of attracting people to do their research on these topics. If anything, a fellow conspiracy factist could find food for thought. |
|
|
|
I personally don't give a shit if such insights are taken seriously or as parody making people less likely to take similar arguments seriously. I like to push my claims to the extremes so that in the worst case scenario my thoughts are interpreted as a joke associated with batshit tinfoil hattery. However, people with natural interest for knowledge will recognize the content that I provide as worth further research naively serving my puppetmasters. FTFY naively serving my puppetmasters? For a second I almost thought your fix was plausible but you ruined it in the last sentence. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
