What does the Ripple news mean for Premined, IPO, ICO coins? Did they follow KYC

[defaced]

How can this news be interpreted for the hundreds of premine coins that got sold anonymously for BTC? How many premined coins took KYC/AML precautions?

[Prosperityforall]

This is bad news for IPO, premined, and instamined coins in which the developer(s) profited.

[tokeweed]

Ripple isn't as compliant as we thought.  The news is also in coindesk http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-fines-ripple-labs-700000-bank-secrecy-act/

I wasn't aware Ripple Labs had a subsidiary named XRP II selling ripples on a whole sale basis.  I was under the impression they where doing forgivable loans with banking partners to use Ripple.

[defaced]

This is bad news for IPO, premined, and instamined coins in which the developer(s) profited.

I think them profiting is fine, its how they profited which might be their undoing. If I were a coindev with any type of ico, ipo id be pretty nervous right now.

[tokeweed]

Is it just me or did Ripple Labs got away with it.  FINCEN just gave them a 700K USD fine.  That's slap on the wrist.  If this was about Bitcoin, the accused would surely be sent to jail.  Remember Charlie Shrem...

[boxxa]

I think the biggest problems ICO coins have are tax liability. Anyone who took BTC and cashed it out needed to treat it as income and I bet a lot may have not and owe taxes if they ran with cash.

As for Ripple, the big complaint they got was not following money laundering requirements which is big if you are doing cash to BTC conversions or to any coin. This is not taken lightly by FinCEN and has always been a major point of doing exchanging and allowing people to launder money with the means that from what I understand Ripple had a way to cash in and out with coins.

I don't see how ICO/Premine/IPO is an issue with laundering unless you are based in the US and provide either a guarantee of profit or basing it off of trading by selling securities which is more of a SEC issue and falls under things like guaranteeing profit and other no nos.

This is probably going to be the start of a major push of regulations as we see more and more big players with stake which already have relationships with major government bodies. We see ones doing major transactions in the millions so 700k may be nothing but at this trickles down, we may see smaller guys get nailed with fines that bankrupt them.


Either way, I am not a lawyer so take this with a grain of salt.

[defaced]

Is it just me or did Ripple Labs got away with it.  FINCEN just gave them a 700K USD fine.  That's slap on the wrist.  If this was about Bitcoin, the accused would surely be sent to jail.  Remember Charlie Shrem...

maybe its all about the money, what about the others who cant afford that 700k fine.

[defaced]

I think the biggest problems ICO coins have are tax liability. Anyone who took BTC and cashed it out needed to treat it as income and I bet a lot may have not and owe taxes if they ran with cash.

As for Ripple, the big complaint they got was not following money laundering requirements which is big if you are doing cash to BTC conversions or to any coin. This is not taken lightly by FinCEN and has always been a major point of doing exchanging and allowing people to launder money with the means that from what I understand Ripple had a way to cash in and out with coins.

I don't see how ICO/Premine/IPO is an issue with laundering unless you are based in the US and provide either a guarantee of profit or basing it off of trading by selling securities which is more of a SEC issue and falls under things like guaranteeing profit and other no nos.

Yea its deff interesting how this news can be interpreted but I have a suspicion that we will find out sooner rather than later.

[box0214]

im curious to how does colored coins fall into this category?

say a local coffee shop issued a coffee coin that is redeemable only in their shop. how does that play out? in essence its just issuing store credit but its leveraging a crypto blockchain.

[bitcoin_bagholder]

Is it just me or did Ripple Labs got away with it.  FINCEN just gave them a 700K USD fine.  That's slap on the wrist.  If this was about Bitcoin, the accused would surely be sent to jail.  Remember Charlie Shrem...

Shrem was accused of knowingly helping to launder drug money. Don't remember what he plead to but I believe he admitted to it all. Bit different eh...

[defaced]

Is it just me or did Ripple Labs got away with it.  FINCEN just gave them a 700K USD fine.  That's slap on the wrist.  If this was about Bitcoin, the accused would surely be sent to jail.  Remember Charlie Shrem...

Shrem was accused of knowingly helping to launder drug money. Don't remember what he plead to but I believe he admitted to it all. Bit different eh...

 lil diff yea

[defaced]

im curious to how does colored coins fall into this category?

say a local coffee shop issued a coffee coin that is redeemable only in their shop. how does that play out? in essence its just issuing store credit but its leveraging a crypto blockchain.

that is an interesting concern

[siameze]

On the other hand, it could bring a refreshing wave of consolidation and focus. Get-rich-quick developers to be replaced with people who want to build the best possible systems?

[worth]

This is bad news for IPO, premined, and instamined coins in which the developer(s) profited.

I think them profiting is fine, its how they profited which might be their undoing. If I were a coindev with any type of ico, ipo id be pretty nervous right now.

Something like this has been expected for some time. I have a number of ideas I've wanted to explore by issuing a cryptocurrency and it's exactly this kind of thing that has really made me hesitate to do so.  Definitely in grey legal areas to say the least.

[spartak_t]

I'm not seeing it as a big problem for cryptocurrencies in general, but I think that exchanges might have some issues in near future.

[tokeweed]

I'm not seeing it as a big problem for cryptocurrencies in general, but I think that exchanges might have some issues in near future.

Will that mean going back to trading thru the forum and doing escrows?  Noooo..  (

[tokeweed]

This is bad news for IPO, premined, and instamined coins in which the developer(s) profited.

I think them profiting is fine, its how they profited which might be their undoing. If I were a coindev with any type of ico, ipo id be pretty nervous right now.

Something like this has been expected for some time. I have a number of ideas I've wanted to explore by issuing a cryptocurrency and it's exactly this kind of thing that has really made me hesitate to do so.  Definitely in grey legal areas to say the least.

You still can.  But be anonymous. 

[spartak_t]

I'm not seeing it as a big problem for cryptocurrencies in general, but I think that exchanges might have some issues in near future.

Will that mean going back to trading thru the forum and doing escrows?  Noooo..  (

Well, if they don't meet certain requirements we can have bigger problem so it can hurt cryptocurrencies after all.

[worth]

This is bad news for IPO, premined, and instamined coins in which the developer(s) profited.

I think them profiting is fine, its how they profited which might be their undoing. If I were a coindev with any type of ico, ipo id be pretty nervous right now.

Something like this has been expected for some time. I have a number of ideas I've wanted to explore by issuing a cryptocurrency and it's exactly this kind of thing that has really made me hesitate to do so.  Definitely in grey legal areas to say the least.

You still can.  But be anonymous. 

That wouldn't really work for the projects in mind (except maybe one of them) and then there's the question of remaining anonymous. Would also just prefer to do things above board and in my own name anyway.

[gjhiggins]

The news is also in coindesk http://www.coindesk.com/fincen-fines-ripple-labs-700000-bank-secrecy-act/

Thanks for including the link to the coindesk piece, it has what I think is a profoundly interesting additional detail:

The settlements dictate that “certain enhancements” to the Ripple Protocol need to take place “to appropriately monitor all future transactions”.

Such delicate phrasing.

And a classic quote from the FinCEN Director, impressive ability to keep a straight face.

“Innovation is laudable but only as long as it does not unreasonably expose our financial system to tech-smart criminals eager to abuse the latest and most complex products.”

Reading that evokes a very strong mental image of Tommy Lee Jones in MIB, “No ma’am, the FBI does not have a sense of humor that we are aware of.”

Cheers

Graham