Bitcoin Forum
September 30, 2016, 10:01:27 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.0 (New!) [Torrent]. Make sure you verify it.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: New EU directive on electronic money - 2009/110/EG  (Read 4199 times)
Timo Y
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


bitcoin - the aerogel of money


View Profile
October 28, 2010, 03:27:49 PM
 #1

Will BTC fall under new regulations for electronic money when this Directive comes into effect?

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:267:0007:0017:EN:PDF

Quote
Article 2(2)

‘electronic money’ means electronically, including
magnetically, stored monetary value as represented by a
claim on the issuer which is issued on receipt of funds for
the purpose of making payment transactions as defined in
point 5 of Article 4 of Directive 2007/64/EC, and which is
accepted by a natural or legal person other than the electronic
money issuer;

Bitcoin does not confer any kind of claim, whether on the "issuer" (be it an exchange or a miner), the developers, or any other Bitcoin user.  Neither it is issued on receipt of funds.

So it seems to me that BTC does not fulfil the directive's definition of "electronic money" and that legally it should be considered an electronic commodity.

However, if it does, this directive would imply that an amateur cannot legally mine Bitcoins!

GPG ID: FA868D77   bitcoin-otc:forever-d
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1475272887
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475272887

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475272887
Reply with quote  #2

1475272887
Report to moderator
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
October 28, 2010, 03:37:36 PM
 #2

It was bound to happen.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
October 28, 2010, 03:48:59 PM
 #3

It won't be long before EU try to regulate bitcoin too!

Damn governments. Alway thinks that they have the right to regulate everything and anything.

grondilu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134


View Profile
October 28, 2010, 04:08:17 PM
 #4

Damn governments. Alway thinks that they have the right to regulate everything and anything.

+1

F.ck.ng b.st.rds.   I hate them.
ploum
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378



View Profile WWW
October 28, 2010, 07:29:48 PM
 #5

Bitcoin does not confer any kind of claim, whether on the "issuer" (be it an exchange or a miner), the developers, or any other Bitcoin user.  Neither it is issued on receipt of funds.

It is if you are trading bitcoin for money.  The whole market of bitcoin is not affected by the definition but the real money/bitcoin interface will. As a consequence, bitcoin *is* electronic money as long as someone is willing to buy it for real money.

Quote
So it seems to me that BTC does not fulfil the directive's definition of "electronic money" and that legally it should be considered an electronic commodity.

They were quite clever in the definition. It's commodity only if the "issuer" accept it against goods or services. Meaning that pre-payed accound and stuffs like that are not affected.

Quote
However, if it does, this directive would imply that an amateur cannot legally mine Bitcoins!

Not a big problem : how will they proove that you generated bitcoin ? Also, if I understood correctly, this would not be a problem anymore as soon as all bitcoin are generated, isn't it ?

What are the other consequences of such a law ? For example, what does it imply for MtGox if they were in EU ?

Blog posts about Bitcoin - 1KdRBbhjo72CqKTrFsQed6s9NMrvwvrUkq
ploum
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378



View Profile WWW
October 28, 2010, 07:57:43 PM
 #6

I'm also wondering if this affects Flattr (which is EU based)

Blog posts about Bitcoin - 1KdRBbhjo72CqKTrFsQed6s9NMrvwvrUkq
Anonymous
Guest

October 28, 2010, 10:08:11 PM
 #7

 Bitcoin is the perfect vehicle for bribery of public officials. Because they are so corrupt they should embrace it.

>insert sarcasm


The moral of the story -When you can pay off politicians with bitcoins they might view things differently.

FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
October 29, 2010, 08:26:52 AM
 #8


It is if you are trading bitcoin for money.  The whole market of bitcoin is not affected by the definition but the real money/bitcoin interface will. As a consequence, bitcoin *is* electronic money as long as someone is willing to buy it for real money.


I've seen this claim on the boards before. Do you think this directive really applies to anything that can be sold for money? So pancakes, flowers, and kisses ARE money if someone trades them for money?

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
ploum
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378



View Profile WWW
October 29, 2010, 09:26:13 AM
 #9

I've seen this claim on the boards before. Do you think this directive really applies to anything that can be sold for money? So pancakes, flowers, and kisses ARE money if someone trades them for money?

If you buy pancakes and that they can be used in other unrelated places to "buy" goods or services, then those pancakes are money.

The difference is that, at least, you can eat your pancake. With Euro, dollars or bitcoins, you can't.

Blog posts about Bitcoin - 1KdRBbhjo72CqKTrFsQed6s9NMrvwvrUkq
ribuck
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
October 29, 2010, 11:06:11 AM
 #10

With Bitcoin, where is the "claim on the issuer" referred to in article 2(2)?
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
October 29, 2010, 11:09:44 AM
 #11

I've seen this claim on the boards before. Do you think this directive really applies to anything that can be sold for money? So pancakes, flowers, and kisses ARE money if someone trades them for money?

If you buy pancakes and that they can be used in other unrelated places to "buy" goods or services, then those pancakes are money.

The difference is that, at least, you can eat your pancake. With Euro, dollars or bitcoins, you can't.

Okay, in my house and at least one other pancakes are traded for many things including oz of OJ and sexual favors so I guess they are money now.


Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
grondilu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134


View Profile
October 29, 2010, 11:26:20 AM
 #12

I've seen this claim on the boards before. Do you think this directive really applies to anything that can be sold for money? So pancakes, flowers, and kisses ARE money if someone trades them for money?

If you buy pancakes and that they can be used in other unrelated places to "buy" goods or services, then those pancakes are money.

The difference is that, at least, you can eat your pancake. With Euro, dollars or bitcoins, you can't.

Okay, in my house and at least one other pancakes are traded for many things including oz of OJ and sexual favors so I guess they are money now.


In addition to that, I think it's amazing that a law can forbid an action not regarding what this action "is", but only regarding what it is "claimed" to be.  It's like punishing "intention", not "acts".  In french that's what we call a "délit d'intention".  I very much think such a thing is unconstitutionnal.

What people have in mind is never a crime.  Crime is what people do, not the reason why they do it.
Anonymous
Guest

October 29, 2010, 12:04:22 PM
 #13

nelisky
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554


View Profile
October 29, 2010, 12:49:48 PM
 #14



Now try to make a hat out of Bitcoins Smiley
Anonymous
Guest

October 29, 2010, 01:01:58 PM
 #15



Now try to make a hat out of Bitcoins Smiley

haha! I should have thought of that!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!