USA Bitcoin mining, development, running nodes, transfer >$10K now felonies

[franky1]

the quote is about businesses that do transfers for others.. again learn about custodians aka money service businesses..

The exact wording from 6050i states "Any person who is engaged in a trade". If you go through a centralized exchange, then yes, they will already have all your KYC details and ware already reporting you to the IRS. But now, if you trade bitcoin cumulatively worth more than $10,000 peer to peer, whether it is for goods, services, fiat, altcoins, whatever, then at least one party is now responsible for collecting the KYC details of the other and reporting them to the IRS.

see. this proves you dont know the answer.

if you are doing a trade with someone else. then YOU are the seller/buyer..
you are not the middleman agent of 2 other people

grocery stores are not brokers just because they receive money
grocery store customers are not brokers just because the hand money to grocery stores

and no. handing money to your dad to get him to buy a mcdonalds for you on his way home from work is not a broker either
it has to be a business offering a service for a fee to take your money and do something with it for another person (aka financial custodians aka MSB)

heres an example.
you are buying/selling something on ebay.
you are not a broker whether your a buyer or seller.
ebay is not a broker. its the retail/advertiser
paypal is the financial broker
more precisely its financial accounting department, which has a special policy written up that fits the SEC requirements to be an MSB

the human software developers that made paypal (elon musk + original+current IT team) are not a broker
the physical server and human IT technician contracted to maintain paypals server are not a broker
every employee of paypal does NOT have to do AML/KYC on paypal customers


its funny. because it seems you and your buddies are trying TOO HARD to try to make the law imply that it does involve developers, miners and node users. as if you want it to imply it involves them.
you have a very weird way of trying to twist things to make it seem like it implies it

if you were really against it. you would be trying to explain how the wording does not even mention anything to do with developers, miners, node users

oh wait i forgot. you do want to imply bitcoiners are brokers but at same time stay silent about your altnet 'routers' as being a service for a fee that takes responsibility of routing payment for others.. hmm now why are you very silent about your favourite (alt) network, whilst being very loud about your assumptions that the law does apply to all aspects of bitcoin...
(im being rhetorical, i already know why. no need to reply)

instead of replying with the obvious answer.. how about do some research on the SEC and how they handle and regulate the policies of MSB's.. you will learn alot

[o_e_l_e_o]

You are now conflating the two parts of the bill together. The part which defines brokers is separate and unrelated to the 6050i reporting requirements.

grocery stores are not brokers just because they receive money
grocery store customers are not brokers just because the hand money to grocery stores

Whether or not they are defined as a broker is irrelevant for the purposes of 6050i. If you walk in to any store and try to pay for goods over $10,000 in cash, then they are legal obligated to collect your tax details. Have you ever filed a Form 8300? Have you even read it?

Each person engaged in a trade or business who, in the course of that trade or business, receives more than $10,000 in cash in one transaction or in two or more related transactions, must file Form 8300.

if you were really against it. you would be trying to explain how the wording does not even mention anything to do with developers, miners, node users

Because, for the third time in this thread, it doesn't matter how you or I interpret it. What matters is how law makers and the IRS interpret it, and they have already signaled that they will be interpreting it to include miners and anyone else they like when it is in their interests to do so. You can't explain this away - the language needs amended.

oh wait i forgot. you do want to imply bitcoiners are brokers but at same time stay silent about your altnet 'routers' as being a service for a fee that takes responsibility of routing payment for others.

Your weird obsession with Lightning aside, I'm sure that law makers will absolutely try to include Lightning nodes in to their definition as and when it suits them to do so.

[NotATether]

Figured I would check out the author since his article is such utter nonsense. Turns out he's a BSV shill who thinks known fraudster CSW is Satoshi. Lol. No wonder he doesn't know what he's talking about, but still wants to somehow twist it in to negative press for bitcoin.

Welcome to Coingeek, where all the writers, staff and even the company owner are pro-CSW.


Anyway, I hope some brave USA person/business who still deals with crypto then and is dragged to court will be able to make a legal defense that ultimately punches a hole though this legislation by a Supreme Court injunction.

[Ozero]

Coingeek had a really interesting article about the upcoming Taproot softfork

I've just read through that article, and I must say, it is absolutely trash. It sounds like he has no idea what Taproot or its associated changes are going to do.

"Taproot is essentially a mixing service"? What is he even talking about?

"Developers and reporters are usually careful to say 'privacy enhancements' instead of 'anonymity'." That's because it doesn't make you anonymous by any stretch of the imagination?

Figured I would check out the author since his article is such utter nonsense. Turns out he's a BSV shill who thinks known fraudster CSW is Satoshi. Lol. No wonder he doesn't know what he's talking about, but still wants to somehow twist it in to negative press for bitcoin.

As much as this law is obviously terrible and should be fought, this article isn't even worth the non-existent paper it isn't written on.

But nevertheless, the law was adopted and if it is signed by the president, it will come into force. It looks like cryptocurrency is facing a tough time for government regulation. For sure, mining cryptocurrency that uses the energy-intensive PoW algorithm will be banned in almost all countries. Bitcoin will suffer the most from this. In fact, more than 18 million bitcoins have already been mined. He can walk without the remaining three million. Even if the law is stupid, it will still be followed. Over time, it will be followed by appropriate amendments. Yes, interesting times are coming.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Welcome to Coingeek, where all the writers, staff and even the company owner are pro-CSW.

Oh lol. I tend to completely avoid any crypto only "news" site since they are all click bait trash, so I had no idea this one was owned by Calvin Ayre. A very quick scout of their site reveals it to predictably be a hub of conspiracy theories and misinformation.

For sure, mining cryptocurrency that uses the energy-intensive PoW algorithm will be banned in almost all countries.

The US is not synonymous with "all countries". Thankfully there remain many countries whose politicians aren't so backward thinking. Miners will simply uproot and move their operations (or just hide them from the government) as they did a few months ago with China.

In fact, more than 18 million bitcoins have already been mined. He can walk without the remaining three million.

The remaining bitcoin waiting to be mined are almost irrelevant. Without mining there can be no transactions.

[Sethrey]

It's hard to be a privacy coin without no KYC exchanges and upcoming regulations. But Cryptom from Utopia P2P https://u.is/en/currencies.html has its own decentralized no KYC exchange  and can't be tracked or blocked anyhow. And that's the best way out.

[so98nn]

Seems bad slap for US side. Well Asians are doing all ok (not you china) and I think sooner or later Europe or Asia would become the epicentre of crypto. The reason is simple, if such USA law is passed then most of the mining operations and most of billions of dollars will be squeezed out of USA. The only countries with good laws and regulations is Europe and some Asian countries who has graciously accepted bitcoin as well as crypto technology. I literally thought USA would overpower one more time with the crypto but it seems the roots are falling for the same. Different countries different views and all this is because of decentralised fear of the monetary system that could destroy any government.

[NotATether]

... and all this is because of decentralised fear of the monetary system that could destroy any government.

You mean "federal reserve", not entire governments.

Bitcoin doesn't offer anything that can preclude non-monetary functions of governments.