(...) bo jedyny pit dotyczący krypto to pit38 a tam podaje się jedynie "ile krypto sprzedałem do fiatów". A że zyski z sygnaturek płacone są w krypto a ja nie dumpuję tego do fiatów to zdarzenie podatkowe chyba nie powstaje.
Nie rozliczam w Polsce ale jstem przekonany że zdarzenie podatkowe występuje niezależnie od tego czy za wykonaną usługę przyjmujemy płatność w złotówkach, walucie obcej, złocie, bitcoinie czy np gdy przyjmiemy pół świniaka jako zapłatę. Na tej samej zasadzie sklep który akceptuje płatności bitcoinem płaci podatek tak samo jakby przyjmował złotówki (nawet jeśli nie konwertuje BTC od razu). Podobnie co do wymiany BTC na PLN, samo w sobie, zgaduję, nie jest zdarzeniem podatkowym (np, jeśli kupiłeś i sprzedałes po tej samej cenie lub ze stratą). Przychód w BTC i przychód (lub strata) ze sprzedaży BTC na PLN to dwie odrębne rzeczy. Więc w przypadku przychodów z kampanii sygnatur, prawdopodobnie zgłaszamy to jako dodatkowy przychód i patrzymy na wartość BTC w PLN w momencie otrzymania zapłaty, albo musimy zarejestrować działalność gospodarczą. O ile dobrze rozumiem, zgłaszanie działalności nie jest potrzebne jeżeli taki zarobek podchodzi pod kategorie umowy o pracę albo umowy zlecenie/o dzieło. |
|
|
|
TOP 10 altcoins such as Doge, Ethereum, Ripple, Polygon, Solana, and Binance already have very high ROI,
Not sure what do you mean by this. Whether the RoI is high (or positive) would depend on the point of entry. If you bought at ath your RoI will be negative and definitely not "very high". I think you meant that they've already achieved high market caps. and the possibility of dumping is far greater than other altcoins,
How so? Why exactly is the risk greater than for other altcoins (which is a very broad term and includes coins literally created for a pump-and-dump purpose)? |
|
|
|
Gamblers who are too lazy and careless to read the terms and conditions of a platform before gambling with them will surely have issues once they go ahead and gamble without even understanding the rules and regulations of the casino, such people need to understand that reading the terms and conditions is good for themselves as they won't fall into any issues later on if they do so.
Do you actually read all ToS in full when signing up for any service? People like to publicly shame others for not doing that, but in practice, nobody does that. Reading them shouldn't be necessary, as the casinos should operate in accordance with the laws of the jurisdictions they provide their services (law > ToS). And if the casino operates illegally, following ToS will not guarantee any protection. But this thread is not about ToS in general, but about changing them without giving any notice, so not sure how reading them would help. |
|
|
|
|
W temacie przychodów z kampanii sygnatur - jak wygląda to w Polsce pod względem zgłaszania takich przychodów w rozliczeniu podatkowym?
Czy to jest coś co kwalifikowałoby się jako działalność gospodarcza i wymagało płacenie ZUS? Czy można to gdzieś upchnąć w PIT jako dodatkowy przychód itp?
A może podpada to pod bycie nielegalnie zatrudnionym, i całe ryzyko ponosi "pracodawca"?
|
|
|
|
Hell, why don't they make some framework on what makes a crypto a security in the United States (the Howey Test is not specific enough)?
Because it's all about the power, not about protecting investors. By doing that, SEC would be reducing their power. Without clear rules, they have a power to strike at any time at any crypto, or the entire industry if they wish to. This kind of waffling is really going to end badly for Gensler and the SEC since basically the entire crypto industry has turned on them.
Sadly, the crypto industry has no strong lobby and is politically irrelevant. But even if they were, as SEC is deemed an independent body, Gensler's position is pretty safe, as long as he doesn't go against the SEC's Commissioners (who appointed him). Moreover, SEC's actions are in line with the current administration's crackdown on crypto, known as "Operation Choke Point 2.0". |
|
|
|
However, people still need to develop critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and a deep understanding of concepts. So while AI can provide quick solutions and answers, I still recommend encouraging a holistic approach to learning. Because the learning process involves more than just finding the right answer, So anyway, you can combine the benefits of AI with active participation, hands-on practice, and peer-to-peer discussion to create a well-rounded learning experience that fosters critical thinking, problem solving, and effective communication.
As much as I agree with this, the fact is that a huge portion of current jobs require people to just follow a specific pattern, where little to no personal judgement is required. Whatsmore, the "human element" of engaging thoughts that are not needed for the specific task is often undesired (e.g. causes distraction, which leads to mistakes). And even for the holistic way of looking at the world, this can still be dissected, analysed and replicated, it'll just take a little bit longer. |
|
|
|
Binance lawyers allege SEC Chair Gensler offered to serve as advisor to crypto company in 2019
Lol. Gensler is such a weasel. It's almost fascinating how he is able to keep spouting all his nonsense with a straight face and conviction, like some sort of sociopath. By the way, has it been confirmed that he personally knew the father of Caroline Ellison, the CEO of Alameda (sister company of FTX) or was it just rumours? |
|
|
|
Banning something is hardly an effective strategy, maybe you can control the cotton and material making industry of a local economy but here we are talking about information handling. To ban just means to ask 'please another country, other people take this business away as we prefer to work longer hours on repetitious tasks'. They will block any import of that product at a lower cost then we can do; this is just the thinking of a dictator manipulating their country to their own advantage.
But what if allowing new technology backfires and we reach the point when human jobs are lost and no new ones are popping out in other sectors? Is there a plan for such scenario, or just a belief that, for some weird reason, this will never happen? Society wont gain from banning the use of technology any more then it did in attempts to do so hundreds of years ago as in every advance forward people feared and attempted to obstruct it; perfectly natural reaction but an economy is indirect and macro picture view to gains a nation might realize in sum total.
What you're missing is that many of those people that opposed new technologies and automation actually had their lives ruined by the changes. Looking at the big picture all look nice, as, historically, technological progress actually created more jobs, but things weren't that rosy on an individual level. Especially when we're talking about times when people would only work one job their entire life. So don't be quick with the judgements. Fear is not automatically bad and it has a solid evolutionary purpose. |
|
|
|
ToS are not meant to work or be used against a gambler except the gambler was the one found violating the rules
This doesn't quite make sense. "Rules" are defined by ToS, so you're essentially saying that ToS are not meant to be used against the user unless the user violates ToS. make us always advise gamblers not to have the money they cannot afford loosing on their casino wallet.
I'd change this statement to say don't hold more in your casino balance than you need to. If you win, just withdraw to your bank account/crypto wallet and leave only the amount you intend to use for gambling in the future (if any at all). In other words, gambling sites should not be used as bank accounts or wallets. |
|
|
|
Hmm, it’s pity how crypto exchanges are getting seriously slaughtered in the name of securities. I think the problem started when these exchanges initiated their expansion with other instruments such as trade of crypto with fiat. This led people to start exchanging the crypto currencies on large scale with fiat thus making intervention of the Security Exchange Commission. Obviously its the fiat money that is getting traded into the Bitcoin for example so they need to have accounts for that. This imposed KYC restrictions and thus it turned everything into normal stock market even for the crypto exchanges. Not sure how far this will go but it ain’t good for us.
Wrong. The fact that they are trading crypto for fiat (as exchanges have always been, since Bitcoin's early days) is not what's the problem here. The problem is that SEC, for years was delaying producing a clear set of rules and guidelines for determining what is classed as security and what isn't. If something isn't officially disallowed by law, then it's considered legal, therefore exchanges were taking advantage of the demand and started offering different types of services, until SEC woke up from a nap and decided that some sort of services and certain coins actually fall under securities laws. But even if those exchanges were using potatoes or other cryptos instead of fiat - it wouldn't change a thing. |
|
|
|
The current price is about 40% of the ATH that has ever happened, of course today is a good opportunity to buy, many people always calculate the current price with ATH, and in my opinion if we buy immediately then we can get a profit opportunity especially in 2024 it will happen halving day.
I haven't noticed looking at the price as a ratio to the ATH is very popular. What would be the logic for using such metric? At what percent is a good time to buy and why? Is this assuming that each cycle will have the same or similar levels of ups and downs? There's some logic in that, but this approach seems to be ignoring any outside factors and the simple fact that, as its market cap increases, BTC will not be able to grow by the same % as in the past. |
|
|
|
Yeah, it is actually better to choose to play on a non-kyc casino (as I see we do have a few of them around already) than to decide to play on a kyc enabled casino and submit a fake document when asked to submit document for account verification, like the first comment said, casinos are always looking for who to make the scape goat, if any gambler decides to offer him or herself to be used as a scape goat, then such person have no right to complain what so ever..
Like I said earlier and I rephrase again, better use a casino where kyc is non existent, then cheat on a kyc enabled casino, you will only end up losing all your money including your deposit if caught.
Using a fake id is a dumb move because if the casino detects that, even if they're 100% legit, they simply might not have any other choice but to freeze your funds and report you for investigation. On the other hand, if you live in the so-called "civilised world" (aka developed countries), then, when you encounter a non-kyc gambling site, you can be sure they are not operating in compliance with your country's laws. In such cases, trust and a good reputation are everything, as you won't get any legal protection. |
|
|
|
ChatGPT is such a sophisticated technology that many people are worried about losing their jobs because of using the technology, although OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said it will not destroy the job market but I am not sure about the statement because there are so many advantages that the technology has, although the technology can help many jobs but I am more worried that many humans will lose their jobs, so this must be very careful so that the technology does not rule the world and we do not want a lot of unemployment later.
Oh come on, what do you expect him to say? Was he supposed to start laughing demonically, rubbing his hands while saying "AI is coming for all your jobs!"? Off course not, he's trying to build a positive image for the company he's managing and for the industry. To get a good picture of what's really happening, try to get the opinion of independent experts/analysts, rather than listening to the salesman. |
|
|
|
|
This scenario (the proposed options) doesn't make much sense.
Either way, we would have to wait for the government to change its stance, i.e. why "gamble to accumulate" if you can't ever cash out?
So this question can be really simplified to something like: "Are you willing to gamble with (all) your crypto?"
I'd say: Nope (unless with small amounts).
|
|
|
|
How often do lawsuits like this materials into a full-blown closure of exchanges? Binance, out of all the existing exchanges today, seem to be the most experienced when it comes to legal pressure like this. It's like CZ has been brushing off all those lawsuits and all those pressures mounted onto him and his platform, and I'm sure he'll end up just paying some fines and fixing whatever there is to fix as mandated by the SEC.
It all depends on what the SEC's true intentions really are. If they're just a tool of the government and are part of a serious crackdown on the crypto market, then things are not looking great. Even if Binance (and Coinbase) settle and/or pay the fines, SEC could keep harassing them forever by declaring other coins as securities. But if it is just a one-time extorsion action, that's maybe intended to show that they are doing "something" after their failures with FTX - then we might see things going back to normal. |
|
|
|
The markets are sending a strong message to SEC here and I like the response! I was honestly expecting markets to actually show more red after two of the big exchanges operating in the USA have been sued for almost the same thing...and in response we get this, more like a "GTFO" kind of message  Sadly looks like the rebound to >$27k levels was short-lived and we're back to $26k range, but that's still not so bad I would expect after the Coinbase news broke out. But on a serious note, how much damage can SEC inflict at the moment, and is there a way around to get them off cryptos back ?? We need positive news going forward not this, what a drawback SEC  You can't really get them off crypto's back unless we're talking about creating some underground, alternative, decentralised economy. The moment you want to legally exchange cryptos to fiat (real, not stables) is when you are at mercy of the regulators. Some say all this is a part of the "choke-point 2.0" crackdown, but on the other hand, it looks like the SEC (at least for now) targeted only some specific coins, and hopefully others (including BTC) are safe, meaning things could go starting going back to normal after the dust settles. |
|
|
|
while your country plans to ban crypto trading but online gambling legal, you'll gonna to decide what to do with coins. would you go play your coins to accumulate or just withdraw and wait for the government to change stance? no other option.
I can't embrace a scenario when the only options are hold or gamble. Why isn't there an option to sell for fiat money? Because that would be the most sensible solution, if you're not a degenerate and are looking to at least preserve your wealth. Plus, if crypto trading is only banned in my country, I could always trade it abroad. |
|
|
|
Looks like the market just stopped giving a damn about SEC's actions. They sued Coinbase today but the price rebounded to $27k. Link below includes a short video interview with Gary Gensler. Bitcoin rallies above $27,000 after SEC sues Coinbase, alleging its an unregistered brokerhttps://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/06/bitcoin-is-little-changed-after-sec-sues-coinbase-.htmlCryptocurrency prices rose Tuesday after the Securities and Exchange Commission sued crypto services provider Coinbase.
Bitcoin climbed 6.3% to $27,155.16, according to Coin Metrics, recovering its losses from the previous day after the SEC sued Binance. Earlier, it fell as low as $25,368.57, its lowest level since March. Ether gained nearly 5% to trade at $1,896.19.
On Tuesday, the SEC filed a lawsuit in New York federal court alleging that Coinbase has been acting as an unregistered broker and exchange. The agency demanded that the company be “permanently restrained and enjoined” from continuing to do so.
“If there’s a real value in these crypto tokens then compliance will build trust and the business model might change,” SEC Chair Gary Gensler said in an interview Tuesday with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street.” “What we’re doing at the SEC is pro-innovation because the capital markets really don’t work.”
“There’s a lot of work here for the crypto field but we stand ready to work to get them into compliance,” he added. |
|
|
|
SEC sues Binance --> price goes down SEC sues Coinbase --> price goes up  How does it make sense? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
