 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
And I got quoted on it in the USA Today paper Bradley Jansen, director of the Washington-based Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights, said the Treasury Department's March guidance was poorly written and served only to stifle innovation. "This guidance has raised more questions than it has answered," he said. "Applying our failed banking policies on Bitcoins is a bad idea and may be the definition of insanity." http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/26/bitcoin-virtual-currency-regualtions/2702653/ |
|
|
|
You should familiarize yourself with the FATF and the Egmont Group.
By FATF you mean FinCEN, right? Who is a member of http://www.egmontgroup.org/WOW, thanks for the info that's NEW TO ME! No, by FATF, I mean the Financial Action Task Force. |
|
|
|
Thank you Mr. Jansen, was definitely worth watching and nice closing statement, hopefully the whole thing will be put on youtube so everyone can see it on-demand?
Thanks, I've written a lot on these issues at www.freebanking.org and www.financialprivacy.org. Newseum has the videos and will share with CFP, then I'll post on freebanking.org. |
|
|
|
|
Well done, but I'm just "panelist"?!
|
|
|
|
|
You should familiarize yourself with the FATF and the Egmont Group.
|
|
|
|
I will be moderating the Bitcoin panel at CFP next week: Wednesday, June 26th, 3-4:15 pm (Eastern). If you can make it to DC, best to come in person! http://www.cfp.org/2013/wiki/index.php/Program_Descriptions#Bitcoin_and_Beyond:_Financial_Privacy_and_CensorshipBitcoin and Beyond: Financial Privacy and Censorship This panel will discuss the present and future of currencies in a digital age and prospect of striking a balance between the ability to circumvent financial requirements and government interest in regulation. (I invited FinCEN, but they declined) It will be webcast, I'm told, but I don't have a URL or anything to share yet. My intention is to take questions via #CFPbitcoin as well. |
|
|
|
|
I was there when she gave the speech. Someone needs to get a transcript of the Q&A because in that she pretty explicitly said miners of bitcoins and creators of virtual currencies need to follow the FinCEN three Rs (registering, reporting and record keeping).
|
|
|
|
Does anyone else here read all this and think 'why are we still using gold?'. It seems so primitive and outdated... What we need is some sort of digital version  We used to have e-gold but the Feds shut it down for anti-money laundering violations--and now FinCEN is targeting Bitcoin. I've been warning about this for a while now. |
|
|
|
PayPal was almost destroyed early-on by attempting to launch an e-currency without a compliance program. That is why Peter Thiel seems to be so down on bitcoin (at least per his public statements last year). Also why kickstarter and other crowdfunding platforms all have in their terms of service that they can't be used to fund e-currencies. For a worst-case scenario, look up the Wired article on e-gold. This is no joke, you can go to federal f*-me-in-the-ass prison if you are not savvy about MSB laws and regs on federal and state levels.
Depending on your circumstances, yes, you'll have to register with FinCEN *and* your state MSB regulator. You'll have reporting requirements, have to show a compliant anti-money laundering program, and have record-keeping requirements. |
|
|
|
Do people remember the situation 25 years ago? AML was unheard of except within law enforcement dealing with the mafia. Today, every citizen and small company is plagued with providing AML documentation when doing business. Is there any less money-laundering done today than 25 years ago? Where are all the news articles about money-launderers arrested because their documentation was flawed? ML is a modern-day bogeyman like the witches and giants of Grimm's fairy tales. Similarly, all the KYC regulation is a non-productive red-tape burden (useful for denying banking services to Bitcoin exchanges though). As governments continually expand in size they are suffocating ordinary people with excessive regulation and surveillance. IMHO, this is because fiat systems are failing, so ever more controls are needed to maintain the status-quo. The only regulation of Bitcoin that would satisfy fiat-issuing governments would be r egulating Bitcoin into an emasculated Buttcoin, which is what the OP is describing. Edit: A timely post in ZH which reminds us why Satoshi created Bitcoin: Unfortunately, free enterprise is being strangled to death in the United States today. Entrepreneurs and small business are being pounded into oblivion by rules, regulations, red tape and oppressive levels of taxation. ... Meanwhile, wealth and power continue to become even more heavily concentrated in the hands of big government and big corporations. ... We need to change the rules of the game so that entrepreneurs, small businesses and average workers can thrive in this country once again. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-02/22-facts-prove-bottom-90-america-systematically-getting-poorerButtcoin does not change the rules of the game. Anti-money laundering laws are the new RICO after we tightened up the racketeering abuses. After I defeated the Know Your Customer rule in 1997-98, AML came back with a vengence in Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act (though we got some of the worst of it taken out/watered down). Search my name and KYC for more background there. There are plenty of arrests and fines for AML vioations. Being ignorant of them doesn't mean they aren't there. Yes, this is the challenge right now: is the Bitcoin community going to just ignore the problem like the now defunct e-gold did, or are you going to learn from history and not repeat the same mistakes? |
|
|
|
Govt agencies wanna strangle BTC in it's crib...
No, they don't "wanna strangle BTC in it's crib" they just don't care if they do. |
|
|
|
Money laundering/criminal activity? Please, you get that with every currency. You cannot stop black markets from existing.
It is not the regulators' jobs to protect us from any of this. It is our job.
Also remember: If you give them an inch, they will take a mile.
Yes, and there are (anti-money laundering and other) regulations with other currencies, just as there are now with bitcoin. The regulators have a different view of their job than you do for them. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
What, exactly, do you want them to do?
|
|
|
|
|
EFF stopped accepting Bitcoins because of the legal uncertainties and questions about reporting requirements.
The FinCEN guidance only raised more questions instead of providing answers. There is no sense beating up on non-profits trying navigate the rules that the government doesn't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Please don't type "FED" in all caps. It's not an acronym. It's not only wrong but makes Fed critics look like complete idiots and discredits our criticisms.
Not the only indication the story is bogus (though that is inevitably true when you see "FED"). The NY Fed gives public tours of the gold vault all the time, and private ones too (they did for me when I worked for Ron Paul). The whole site seems sketchy.
|
|
|
|
Thanks,
I asked Bradley again about accepting bitcoin donations - He basically said they do not currently because they were unclear on the legal and tax implications. I noted that FinCEN guidance was pretty clear so long as they don't sell the bitcoins for US Dollars. He said they were currently working on accepting bitcoin donations, and I linked him to coinwidget.com
Hopefully there will be a solution up soon. Thanks, Adam, yes, we're working on it. |
|
|
|
Good stuff guys.
Glad you got Bradley Jansen from freebanking.org ... he very aptly spelled out what is going to be the coal face in the regulatory reaction (via the abominable Bank Secrecy Act). Monetary freedom is not going to be a reality until the laws around money and private banking are changed.
Thanks, I'm going to try to cover Bitcoin more than we have--and I welcome more allies against the BSA and FinCEN! |
|
|
|
|
