Localbitcoins: Goodbye, New York

[Denker]

http://localbitcoins.blogspot.de/2015/08/goodbye-new-york.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Localbitcoinscom+%28LocalBitcoins.com%29

We’re sad to say that due to regulators another region has had to be blocked from LocalBitcoins. From today onwards users from New York are no longer allowed to use LocalBitcoins because of the legislation known as the BitLicense (23 NYCRR 200) which makes it a federal offense to sell virtual currency to people living in New York unless you have applied for the license.

This new regulation would require anyone selling Bitcoins through our service to acquire the BitLicense if they sell Bitcoins to residents of New York. As the Bitlicense is time consuming, expensive and difficult to obtain for anything but large companies we’ve taken the decision to protect our US based traders and not allow New York based users to use our service.

If you reside in the US, you will get a one-time pop up notification requiring you to confirm whether or not you live in New York. All new users will equally have to answer the same question.

This is an unfortunate state of affairs and we hope that the regulation will in the future accommodate small time bitcoin sellers who do not have the possibility to comply with regulations made for big financial institutions.

 For the time being though, we bid New York farewell.

– The LocalBitcoins team

[okae]

i cant remember but there was another post about it i mean about some exchanges that move away from NY.

obviously from my point of view they are doing what i would do if i was them, NY laws havent sense if you are running an exchange, at least for me.

Bitlicense is just like a pain in the a*s, in the otehr side i was expecting to see things like that...

[MF Doom]

So here comes the attacks from us gvt.  at the very least they want to end the anonymity of btc (not that the nsa couldn't already track btc users)

[moni3z]

NY has always had stupid licensing rules for money transfer since they protect Wallstreet lobbyists. Stop voting for Chuck Schumer

[altcoinhosting2]

wasn't there the same kind of warning on multipool.us... I didn't read the text, since it was only aimed at US miners....

[ikydesu]

NY gov will be the biggest enemy for Bitcoin. Maybe they are too afraid about money laundring and something anon act.

[Amph]

i cant remember but there was another post about it i mean about some exchanges that move away from NY.

obviously from my point of view they are doing what i would do if i was them, NY laws havent sense if you are running an exchange, at least for me.

Bitlicense is just like a pain in the a*s, in the otehr side i was expecting to see things like that...

they were Kraken and bitfinex, which said no to that license, but it due mostly to cost for adopting it, i doubt they really are against what it is offering

but i was wondering couldn't NY citizens just use a proxy/vpn shit like that?

[pedrog]

i cant remember but there was another post about it i mean about some exchanges that move away from NY.

obviously from my point of view they are doing what i would do if i was them, NY laws havent sense if you are running an exchange, at least for me.

Bitlicense is just like a pain in the a*s, in the otehr side i was expecting to see things like that...

they were Kraken and bitfinex, which said no to that license, but it due mostly to cost for adopting it, i doubt they really are against what it is offering

but i was wondering couldn't NY citizens just use a proxy/vpn shit like that?

I don't think IP address is relevant, residence, fiscal residence, bank account, I think those are the relevant factors.

If I go to NY, I'll still be able to do my bitcoin business as none of those things are in NY.

[jdebunt]

the worrying part is that every Bitcoin seller in the New York area would need to apply for a BitLicense. That's a bit overkill imo.

[Mayer Amschel]

Concrete jungle?

Now it really is an ancient jungle.

[BitcoinBarrel]

Keep calm, cuz....

[RodeoX]

So here comes the attacks from us gvt.  at the very least they want to end the anonymity of btc (not that the nsa couldn't already track btc users)

Nope. The U.S. Gov. has nothing to do with this. It is an NYC law. At the federal level the only rule is that you must pay capitol gains. Which is really the best rule we could have hoped for. Capitol gains is normally about 15% vs. income tax at about 30%.

[umair01]

the start of a bold move perhaps , I think after New York , other states might also try to emulate their respective law by doing so and this is a bad start if others follow

[bitcoin1387]

That and a little problematic for those who live in New York.

[jdebunt]

This is what you get with fractured policymaking. New York won't be the only one though, California will probably take the same route

[umair01]

This is what you get with fractured policymaking. New York won't be the only one though, California will probably take the same route

I'm afraid this is true , other states make the same mistakes by following New York and then its matter of time before some other countries to the same

[jdebunt]

I'm afraid this is true , other states make the same mistakes by following New York and then its matter of time before some other countries to the same

Just because there is an example, that doesn't make it a right one but we'll see how it plays out I guess

[MF Doom]

So here comes the attacks from us gvt.  at the very least they want to end the anonymity of btc (not that the nsa couldn't already track btc users)

Nope. The U.S. Gov. has nothing to do with this. It is an NYC law. At the federal level the only rule is that you must pay capitol gains. Which is really the best rule we could have hoped for. Capitol gains is normally about 15% vs. income tax at about 30%.

makes it a federal offense to sell virtual currency to people living in New York unless you have applied for the license.

There has got to be some sort of federal law, thus the us gvt involvement

[umair01]

I'm afraid this is true , other states make the same mistakes by following New York and then its matter of time before some other countries to the same

Just because there is an example, that doesn't make it a right one but we'll see how it plays out I guess

I really hope this would be the case in future as to stop further damage to the users of bitcoin community

[sherbyspark]

This is what you get with fractured policymaking. New York won't be the only one though, California will probably take the same route

If they see its affecting bitcoin, then they might actually consider other states too.