I'm assuming you can buy without VAT as a business but in this community no one is really registered as a business.
It really depends. If you are inside the EU, and you have a registered intracomunitary EU tax VAT number, supposedly you can buy without VAT because it is an intracomunitary purchase. If you are outside the EU, you have to buy without VAT in any case, but then you can deduct/recoup that amount when filing your tax papers.FTFY ^^ It's really not that complicated: 1/ you are a EU resident without a VAT number -> you pay the VAT 2/ you are a EU resident/business with a VAT number A/ you are in the same country as the seller -> you pay the VAT but get it back with the tax return B/ you are not in the same country -> you do not pay the VAT (Intra-EU sale) 3/ you are not in the EU -> you do not pay the VAT 4/ you are a tourist but do not reside in the EU -> you pay the VAT but can get it back, say at the airport, when you leave the country. Yeah, you are absolutely right. |
|
|
|
Imagine what kind of mistake did those who bought coins at $32 in 2011, to then sell at a loss when they witnessed the slow decline to $2.
$200/BTC are cheap coins in the long run, if you didn't understand that you really don't know much about Bitcoin.
Don't you think you mistake wish for knowledge ? No, I don't. Very good argument  My argument is based on a) past history, and thus facts and b) hard math about the growth potential of Bitcoin. If you think $200/BTC is expensive... Then you do not know enough about both past Bitcoin history and its potential. Hope you are not going to be the weak hands that tremble in case we suddenly cash below $30. If you sell you will regret your move in just a few years. |
|
|
|
Imagine what kind of mistake did those who bought coins at $32 in 2011, to then sell at a loss when they witnessed the slow decline to $2.
$200/BTC are cheap coins in the long run, if you didn't understand that you really don't know much about Bitcoin.
Don't you think you mistake wish for knowledge ? No, I don't. |
|
|
|
An hedge against what???
A hedge against never ending money printing of central banks and puppet governments. People need sound money for their retirement and health insurance. Those who bought 200$/btc certainly agree with your last sentence... Imagine what kind of mistake did those who bought coins at $32 in 2011, to then sell at a loss when they witnessed the slow decline to $2. $200/BTC are cheap coins in the long run, if you didn't understand that you really don't know much about Bitcoin. This is not a get-rich-quick scheme, it will be a bumpy ride but in the long term BTC will go either to +5 figures or to 0. |
|
|
|
I don't know how it works in other EU countries, but here in Czech Republic you will pay with VAT and later you should deduct 20% during tax return process
otherwise, you need to prove, that thing, which you want free from TAX for business, in which you company working.
I'm pretty sure, that almost everybody from this forum will be pushed to pay the miners with included VAT (is x1.2Xof web prices)
It amounts to the same though. You do get that 20% back, either in the form of having to pay less for taxes, or if you don't have enough taxes to pay, the state gives it back. You do have to pay the $8k-whatever, but the amount you pay for tax isn't gone forever, assuming you do have a company registered. Yes, that's how it works. And if you have an intracommunitary VAT number (which they gave you immediately if you are a company registered in the EU, you just have to ask for it), you should be able to buy goods coming from a company based in a different EU state without VAT at all. |
|
|
|
I'm assuming you can buy without VAT as a business but in this community no one is really registered as a business.
It really depends. If you are inside the EU, and you have a registered intracomunitary EU tax number, supposedly you can buy without VAT because it is an intracomunitary purchase. If you are outside the EU, you have to buy with VAT in any case, but then you can deduct/recoup that amount when filing your tax papers. So, buying through a registered company is always recommended as you can deduce/recoup the VAT, which is not a trivial amount when considering $7,000 units. I guess there are many users with a registered company in this community, at least the majority of those thinking about doing big purchases. If you are willing to buy let's say +4 units, financially has no sense to do it as an individual and not as a company. You can create a company ad-hoc only for this purposes and the costs for that will be still much lower than the VAT you are going to save. |
|
|
|
The moment we free ourselves from the tyranny of the goverment and become free...
I'm selling you my laptop and all my bitcoins for a bow , 10 arrows and a blanket.
A common reaction. People often imagine that without centrally enforced rules, everything would instantly dissolve into a dog-eat-dog war zone with people killing other people at random, looting, raping and taking a shit in front of your door (someone once provided this as an argument in this very same discussion with me..). As if the only thing stopping people from acting this way right now is the looming threat of imprisonment and punishment by the legal system. Divide and conquer still seems to be working quite well. Have you ever noticed that laws are there for OTHER people? As in the laws are here to prevent other people from killing me and stealing my stuff. Not to prevent me from doing the same. I'm a decent fellow. It's those other bastards...  A little reminder. http://silverdoctors.com/one-year-in-hellsurviving-a-full-shtf-collapse-in-bosnia/People living a quiet life eating pies with their neighbours and talking about how bad their goverment is with a beer in their hands don't have a clue what happens when there is no central authority. The same neighbour will kill you for food simply because he doesn't want to die first. Armed gang will soon appear because it's human nature to seek power and to gain control , also to ensure your own life. Kill before getting killed. What happend is former Yugoslavia and what happend right after the fall of mother Russia in the ex-soviets states is a clear example. Ps. I live close to the serbian-romanian border , so the shit going there was real. When we treat other people as "competitors" then stealing and such when times get tough is a predictable outcome. But we have known no other form of government and economics. We are taught in the schools that Darwin was right, when nature shows us cooperation is right. (Even with Lions hunting prey, Nature is mostly a brilliant example of cooperation). Kropotkin pretty much demonstrated in his "Mutual Aid" anthropological masterpiece that cooperation between members of the same species its not only natural but necessary in the broader fight for survival. But, that's what capitalism and social darwinists turned upside down. I guess there are too many humans on earth, and nature is regulating itself pushing us to an unsustainable and self-destructive system (wild capitalism). Back to the wall observing: weekly volume is getting lower and lower since the correction/bubble burst (still too soon to decide what was that - which is funny because all of us would have bet that 1 month and a half after the April 10th crash we would have know for sure if that crash was a bubble pop or a correction)  |
|
|
|
Having said that, if you want to wait to pay until after you have seen a fully working prototype of Jupiter you are more than welcome to do so.
That's all nice, but will that mean getting your miner later? My order is well in the 3xxx range, so will there be a difference in the time of delivery if I pay after you have demoed the Jupiter, as opposed to paying immediately after you open the orders? All in all though I'd much rather travel to Sweden and pick up my unit and transfer most of the money then, in form of BTC - perhaps after paying a certain percentage to reserve the unit to reduce risks on your end; but that being said risks and the amount of time it'd require to do this en masse would probably make this option impractical and/or impossible. Yes, of course you will get your miner later. There are two ways of keeping your queue spot: - paying immediately for your Jupiter - paying immediately for your Mars, then you can delay your Jupiter payment up to 30 daysI think that in 30 days things won't change much. Thus, I would skip the FPGA and order the ASIC directly (but first I would visit them personally). |
|
|
|
And to clear the VAT issue ....
DO the prices on your site INCLUDE vat @ 25% ?
No they don't include any taxes, We are not aiming our site at consumers at all. We are not advertising our prices in any consumer press etc. We are selling professional devices to professional miners. Jut like that the price went up with 25% You can deduce the VAT if you are registered. |
|
|
|
after the queue we need to pay and this is the most risky part. what guarantee do you have that it will be delivered in September 2013? what make you so sure you will not end up liked butterfly? You are not showing Jupiter or Saturn Asic Mining hardware prototype, but expect us to make payment? Mars FPGA Prototype is for Mars FPGA Mining sales, not for Jupiter or Saturn because this are ASIC Devices and you even claim of a 28nm asic chip.
The main reason we can maintain our deadlines is that we are using ORSoC who have been producing devices based on FPGA's and various types of ASIC's for over 10 years. our main competition are new to FPGA and ASIC devices, ORSoC are not new. we specifically chose them as a partner so we don't suffer the same issues that have plagued our competitors. Having said that, if you want to wait to pay until after you have seen a fully working prototype of Jupiter you are more than welcome to do so. Sam Thanks for the replies. Could you please let us know under what terms and conditions will the customers be preordering? What about refund policy? Do we have any guarantee on the deliver date? With guarantee I mean that if the units arrive later than. 15th October (for the first 500) you refund 50% of the preorder amount. |
|
|
|
Listen from around the 27:30 minute on. Some VERY notable extracts: I want to make clear that today's actions does not mean that we are against virtual currencies To the contrary, mobile and internet based financial technologies, including virtual currencies, have great promise to empower consumers, to encourage the development of innovative financial products and expand access to financial services. In fact FinCen issued guidance in March 2013 to bring clarity and regulatory certainty to businesses and individuals.... Those offering virtual currencies must comply with these regulatory requirements and if they do so they have nothing to fear... This is pretty damn good news guys... You've cherry picked. This is an ex-script from the same video... ...27:06 "[...] was used because of the anonymity it offers. Liberty Reserve thus threatens the financial system by facilitating anonymous transactions among cyber criminals ultimately involving more traditional financial institutions where so called Liberty Reserve dollars are converted into US Dollars. Liberty Reserve also threatens the US financial system by providing financial services to the developers and purchasers of financial malware [...]" Replace "Liberty Reserve dollars" with "Bitcoins" and "traditional financial institutions" with "exchanges (Mt Gox et al)" and suddenly, the pictures not quite so rosy. Your experience may differ, but subjectively no where in that video does it hint at endorsement of Bitcoin. And if you were to take Liberty Reserve as the model and apply it to the current BTC world, most of the current Bitcoin businesses fall afoul of US (read: Western global) anti money laundering regulations. Two points: 1. Seem odd to suddenly be offering blind trust to a government after years of building an ideology on the basis the same government is untrustworthy.  I guess they are ok when they say what you want? Not so good when they don't? 2. ...27:06 "[...] [Bitcoin]was used because of the anonymity it offers. Liberty Reserve [Bitcoin]thus threatens the financial system by facilitating anonymous transactions among cyber criminals ultimately involving more traditional financial institutions where so called Liberty Reserve dollars [Bitcoins] are converted into US Dollars. Liberty Reserve [Bitcoin] also threatens the US financial system by providing financial services to the developers and purchasers of financial malware [...]" Not hard to swap the names and drop the hammer. If anything, it's another telegraphed warning at Bitcoin. Didn't see this part initially when the news broke. Very telling IMO. FUD? Maybe. You don't "telegraph warnings" to a p2p protocol. But there is a clear message to exchanges - they want their voice to be heard. Everything else in your post is FUD of the dullest kind. |
|
|
|
Yeah, but I think to them virtual currency means AmazonCoin and Terrance and Phillips MintChip not Bitcoin. They are looking for money laundering. Don't you suppose they are at least a little concerned with tumblers and that Bitcoin is the payment system of choice for SR. Don't be naïve.
The March 2013 Fincen guidance was mostly about Bitcoin, so he's implicitly speaking about BTC and not Amazoncoin. The regulatory pressure is now on BTC exchanges, and this is a clear message. Comply, come to daddy, we are friendly... Until we are not. |
|
|
|
Is the same thing happening right now? Interesting stuff... Expected. Only coinseeker would sell if the US says "Bitcoin is bad". Normal people will just buy all the coins they can with their fiat and transfer them to their wallets  Leaving jokes apart, all this is quite bullish for BTC. Despite of MtGox's fuck up, it's a fact that main BTC exchanges are trying to comply with regulations. And the sheriffs that busted LR say clearly that they are NOT after virtual currencies if they abid to FinCEN rules: http://www.davidnews.com/2013/05/liberty-reserve-laundered-6-billion.htmlThat's the sheriffs press conference, listen carefully from minute 28:00 I want to make clear that today's actions does not mean that we are against virtual currencies And you can see how the guy is implicitly referring to BTC, saying that it's ok if the exchanges are registered as MSB's Thanks for the link. I like how he starts off - "This might be the biggest international money laundering case..." NO - HSBC 8 billion and Wachovia 100's of billions. And he went on to say "To the contrary, mobile and internet based financial technologies, including virtual currencies, have great promise to empower consumers, to encourage the development of innovative financial products and expand access to financial services. In fact FinCen issued guidance in March 2013 to bring clarity and regulatory certainty to businesses and individuals...." " Those offering virtual currencies must comply with these regulatory requirements and if they do so they have nothing to fear..."  Thanks for the transcription, I was too lazy to do it. "Virtual currencies have great promise to empower consumers" "They have nothing to fear" He really wanted to make it clear. |
|
|
|
I agree it's good news for Bitcoin, if it's sincere. Now submit to regulations and hope for the best. You still don't get it do you? Exchanges have to play by the rules ofcourse but bitcoin itself can not and will not be regulated. Sorry if that hurts your regulated feelings. That's why there's a need for a decentralized exchange that can't be touched as well (eg bittorrent). Until then, it's gonna be a risky game playing on these exchanges. The problem with Bitcoin is fiat.  Yeah, final victory is breaking the loop fiat->btc–>fiat. As long as BTC's value is linked to fiat, they still have an enormous power. They are still the owners of "money", and while they cannot shut down the protocol, they can play with its perceived value at will. Still, quite a challenge for the establishment. Gotta love to be part of this experiment. |
|
|
|
I don't think anybody was speaking of Bitcoin itself rather than exchanges and anti money laundering regulations.
He was speaking about Bitcoin because he made a precisa reference about the Fincen statement that cited explicitly Bitcoin. That was still about exchanges. What he said is that they are not against virtual currencies at all, they just want exchanges to comply to regulation. Thus, they know they cannot simply "shut down" BTC as they did with LR. That's bullish. |
|
|
|
I don't think anybody was speaking of Bitcoin itself rather than exchanges and anti money laundering regulations.
He was speaking about Bitcoin because he made a precisa reference about the Fincen statement that cited explicitly Bitcoin. And then he said the they do like innovation, which is pretty much the difference between BTC and LR: the former is an open source, community driven innovative project. The latter was just a business run by a convicted felon that circumvented wittingly regulations. The point is the feds have realized virtual currencies are a big deal, and that you cannot simply ban a p2p protocol. If they have half a brain they know they have to control as much as possible the fiat->btc conversion and that the ban route is the most ineffective one. I wouldn't be surprised by an exchange run by JPMorgan, in any case they want to he the market makers as per silver and not been cut out. And if they finally want to get rid of it, there are better strategies than simply ban it. |
|
|
|
What is current breakeven point for these?
No b/e at 375€ "starting price" |
|
|
|
I wonder if I should move my BTCs to a private wallet.
Well, that's always safer. Anyhow, listen carefully to what the sheriffs say about BTC (minute 28:00). Basically, that they are not AGAINST them, that they are FOR innovation including virtual currencies, as long as the exchanges comply with FinCEN regulation: http://www.davidnews.com/2013/05/liberty-reserve-laundered-6-billion.htmlNO FEAR |
|
|
|
Is the same thing happening right now? Interesting stuff... Expected. Only coinseeker would sell if the US says "Bitcoin is bad". Normal people will just buy all the coins they can with their fiat and transfer them to their wallets Leaving jokes apart, all this is quite bullish for BTC. Despite of MtGox's fuck up, it's a fact that main BTC exchanges are trying to comply with regulations. And the sheriffs that busted LR say clearly that they are NOT after virtual currencies if they abid to FinCEN rules: http://www.davidnews.com/2013/05/liberty-reserve-laundered-6-billion.htmlThat's the sheriffs press conference, listen carefully from minute 28:00 I want to make clear that today's actions does not mean that we are against virtual currencies And you can see how the guy is implicitly referring to BTC, saying that it's ok if the exchanges are registered as MSB's |
|
|
|
How come the US can freeze their accounts?
This is the main question. They have seized whole Libertyreserve (More than 1 million customers worldwide, 45 Banks accounts and other properties,servers in different countries including switzerland,Costa Rica, Netherlands, Spain, Morocco, Sweden,Cyprus, Australia, China, Norway, Latvia, Luxembourg,United Kingdom, Russia, Canada) just because they failed to stop their peoples ( 200,000 US customers, according to them) from using it. Having money on third party services that not even attempt to comply with AML regulation is very probably a bad idea. That's why significant money went to Gox, because at least they look like they try |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
