BCB,
I live in Wisconsin, USA.
I've got enough preliminary information that I intend to file a fraud report today.
Where I see a UK-based person being far more effective is in attempts to actually locate the individual, perhaps be a resource to answer recurrent questions by the police, should they take the case, etc.
Someone in the last day mentioned a Florida address. We don't know whether that information was part of the long con, or if he got in over his head, and shared some incriminating evidence about his escape plan.
If anyone has specific addresses, phone numbers, etc that are US-based, that may be a chaseable trail that I can provide to the authorities when I complete that form later today.
You should definitely file a complaint or report with your local authorities, unfortunately the police will probably say it is a "civil" matter and may refer you to a civil court. It's too large for small claims so you would have to retain a lawyer. |
|
|
|
|
Chainsaw
Where are you located.
Can anyone in the UK take the lead?
|
|
|
|
Good explanation ISAWHIM. I've read the (FinCEN) PDF document twice now that BCB posted. To me two things stand out and correct me if I'm wrong but the below sounds like they're taking the term "convertible virtual currency" as meaning an item that holds a value such as a deed, title or bond that's held in electronic format and used to exchange for legal tender.
Currency vs. Virtual Currency
FinCEN’s regulations define currency (also referred to as “real” currency) as “the coin
and paper money of the United States or of any other country that is designated as legal tender
and that [ii] circulates and [iii] is customarily used and accepted as a medium of exchange in the
country of issuance.” In contrast to real currency, “virtual” currency is a medium of exchange
that operates like a currency in some environments, but does not have all the attributes of real
currency. In particular, virtual currency does not have legal tender status in any jurisdiction.
This guidance addresses “convertible” virtual currency. This type of virtual currency either has
an equivalent value in real currency, or acts as a substitute for real currency.
The other thing that stands out to me is the wordage on "prepaid". Does the below mean that prepaid is perfectly fine to exchange bitcoin for and doesn't fall under (FinCEN)?
A user of virtual currency is not an MSB under FinCEN’s regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and recordkeeping regulations. However, an administrator or exchanger is an MSB under FinCEN’s regulations, specifically, a money transmitter, unless a limitation to or exemption from the definition applies to the person. An administrator or exchanger is not a provider or seller of prepaid access, or a dealer in foreign exchange, under FinCEN’s regulations.
The operative phrase here is "other value that substitutes for currency" thus "convertible virtual currency" is currency (USD) that is converted to "virtual currency" (bitcoin) which is essentially "other value that substitutes for (real) currency" which depending on the "facts and circumstances" of how you used or exchange or trade virtual currency, could fall under the definition of a "money transmitter" which is a form of "money service business" http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-21/pdf/2011-18309.pdfWith regards to "prepaid" that is a whole other ball of wax, and was actually carved out as a separate type of Money Service Business, and again depending on the "facts and circumstances" may not fall under the AML/KYC requirements. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-29/pdf/2011-19116.pdf |
|
|
|
It was weird, it's like the Senate was friendly to BTC but some other US actions have not been so friendly. I think the Congress needs to get a policy together on BTC but I doubt that will happen. The thought has also occurred to me that they are being friendly because China's yuan will be taking over but if the US moves first on cryptocurrency we can have a reserve currency to compete with China's because it won't be the dollar.
FinCen was talking to Mt. Gox in March and shut down their account months later when they still failed to comply. Mount Gox evidently didn't fill out their US bank account application correctly and was charged with a violation of 18 USC 1960 "operating an unlicensed money transmitting business" http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title18/html/USCODE-2010-title18-partI-chap95-sec1960.htmhttp://thegenesisblock.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Gox-Wells-Fargo-Seizure-Warrant.pdfMount Gox is currently seeking 50 State licensing in the US which can take up to 18 months. |
|
|
|
|
I don't believe the US will ever "forbid" bitcoin.
If the US government wants to make bitcoin go away all they have to do is issue onerous tax guidance that make use of bitcoin more expensive then other value transfer systems. To the extent other jurisdictions follow suite, the price goes to zero.
|
|
|
|
In 1995 the 104th Congress's House of Represenetatives Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services held 4 separate hearings on "The Future of Money." Alan Blinder, then Vice Chairman of the FED testified: "Discussing that point raises the question of whether the Federal Government should issue its own electronic currency. Government-issued electronic currency would probably stem seignorage losses and provide a riskless electronic payment product for consumers. In addition, should the industry turn out to he a natural monopoly, dominated by a single provider, either regulation or government provision might be an appropriate policy response. But to draw that conclusion now seems much too premature. The availability of alternative payment mechanisms will mitigate any potential exercise of market power, and government issuance might preempt private sector developments and stifle important innovations. Finally, the government's entry into this new and risky business could prove unsuccessful, costing the taxpayer money. So while we do not rule out an official electronic currency product in the future, the Federal Reserve would urge caution. " They didn't do it then and I don't believe they would do it now. Certainly not after the recent roll out of the Health Care debacle. https://archive.org/details/futureofmoneyhea02unitCanada however has been developing a centralized electronic currency, the "mint chip," over the past few years. http://www.mint.ca/store/news/royal-canadian-mint-launches-mintchiptm-developer-challenge-14900005?cat=News+releases&nId=700002&nodeGroup=About+the+Mint#.UsWqpvS1y-0 |
|
|
|
If anyone lives close a trip to his front door would be good.
Not that this is your intention but I would suggest not advocating any type of violence on a public forum. This is an effort to collect a debt and most countries have very specific laws about this process. |
|
|
|
Do I need to register with FinCEN if i from oversea and I am just buying BTC from US resident without physical presence in US.
I don't believe so. As long as you were not turning around and selling that virtual currency to another person in the US in one of the 48 States with Money Transmitter Laws. In the March 18th "interpretive Guidance" FinCEN defined three categories for persons dealing with virtual currencies: Users Exchangers Issurer "A user of virtual currency is not an MSB under FinCEN’s regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and recordkeeping regulations." FinCEN’s regulations define “person” as “an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust or estate, a joint stock company, an association, a syndicate, joint venture, or other unincorporated organization or group, an Indian Tribe (as that term is defined in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act), and all entities cognizable as legal personalities.” "A user is a person that obtains virtual currency to purchase goods or services." How a person engages in “obtaining” a virtual currency may be described using any number of other terms, such as “earning,” “harvesting,” ”mining,” “creating,” “auto-generating,” “manufacturing,” or “purchasing,” depending on the details of the specific virtual currency model involved. For purposes of this guidance, the label applied to a particular process of obtaining a virtual currency is not material to the legal characterization under the BSA of the process or of the person engaging in the process. http://fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/pdf/FIN-2013-G001.pdf |
|
|
|
What is defined as being a "substitute for currency"? If I have a staple such as soap or a commodity such as oil and I open an exchange and trade bitcoin for them am I considered a "money transmitter"? To me both of those items, soap and oil have a price that is not fixed and wouldn't fall under the "money transmitter" laws or am I not understanding correctly? If they still do fall under the "money transmitter" laws what is the difference then if I was to work for bitcoin and got paid by my job in bitcoin? My value is not set and at anytime I could get a raise or a deduction in pay. I guess what I'm getting at is as long as I don't fall under the "money transmitter" wordage I'm legally able to take and exchange any item for bitcoin and only pay a tax when I convert my bitcoin to currency be it dollars or euro's correct?
That is a question beyond my pay grade. But FinCEN makes these determinations based on "Fact and Circumstance." (As they did on the Milly/Atlantic City Bitcoin case). So you would have to request an opinion from FinCEN. |
|
|
|
It don't think the SEC cares much about bitcoin. It has too many other things to worry about unless someone tries to sell bitcoin stocks or bitcoin securities without proper registration. There are other branches of govt that might be more interested. Again it is US only and they have't stopped online gaming.
+1 Most US Law enforcement and Regulatory Agencies are already on the record as saying they are only concerned with virtual currency to the extent is is used for illegal or fraudulent activities. This includes The Fed US Secret Service Department of Justice (FBI, DEA, ATF) Department of Treasury Security and Exchange Commission |
|
|
|
|
This is theft.
first you need to compile a list if victims and amounts stolen.
Then you provide that to the authorities when you file the police report.
|
|
|
|
Nice! I'll buy a few of those.
2.9btc right now. A big bump for brand new company.. You have terrible ratings... You going to send first? You talking to me? Yes I'm talking to you. I dont have bad, I have none. And I requested escrow. So not sure why your commenting at me? I think I understand... I'm not the seller.. I meant to quote the pro d to the person above you. And my second comment was more of a question statement. Hense the .. after... They are brand new and asking for a lot of coin Ahh you quoted me the price! Didn't even notice you were not the OP. Sorry. I've deleted those posts. |
|
|
|
Trying to get my head around the (FinCEN) "money transmitter laws". They're wording for "stored value" means cash, money orders, gift cards or anything with a fixed value from my understanding. Does that mean that anything that doesn't have a fixed value isn't considered a "stored value" and therefore doesn't fall under the "money transmitter laws"?
Example: If I run a service that trades bitcoin for pocket lint and there's an exchange for bitcoin and an exchange for pocket lint. Since both bitcoin and pocket lint are fluctuating in price at all times are they both then not considered a "storeded value" and legally I could run my shop and not be bound to the "money transmitter laws" when accepting one for the other?
As far as I know pocket lint has no value and does not substitute for currency so you would NOT be a money transmitter. However if you trade any other value that substitutes for currency you would be a money transmitter. Also bitcoin is NOT "stored value" (the term now is prepaid) because this implies an issuer has a liability to pay at a later date. With bitcoin there is no "issuer" and any "liability" is extinguished the moment you broadcast the bitcoin transaction. Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
This guy is a little nutty but if you have an hour he has some interesting point. WRITTEN STATEMENT OF AARON J. GREENSPAN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THINK COMPUTER CORPORATION BEFORE THE U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS NOVEMBER 18, 2013 http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/20131118.hsgacstatement.pdf |
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes, I've checked EVERY state. State licensing is NOT public information in every state.
Regarding operating with out a license: that may be exactly what Coinbase.com is doing. They don't seem to have a state money transmitter license, yet they have not been shut down. They would not receive a $25M investment unless the investors are pretty certain what they are doing it legal.
It's all a mystery to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Fasten your seat belts.
10..9..8..7.......
|
|
|
|
We must understand that almost anyone born before 1964 can not possibly understand the tremendous potential of virtual currencies. (My apologies to those that do).
As the younger generation to comes into power in business and government we will see this type of technology fully adopted.
I wasn't born before 1964, however, I don't agree. I have not seen any difference at all whatsoever in explaining bitcoin to a gray hair as opposed to a SnapChatter. If anything, Gray Hairs are far more likely to have an interest and the light go on, from what i have gathered. I do think Gray hairs are more likely to have a red light go off as well and avoid it all together. That is encouraging. But is has not been my experience. Regarding legality FinCEN included the term "or other value that substitutes for currency" to include virtual currency so even if you are trading on Cryptsy that is money transmission according to US law. |
|
|
|
|
Edit:
I may have evidence that his ID is compromised.
May have spoke too soon.
more to come....
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
