Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[d_eddie]

Netherlands drops plan to tax unrealized Bitcoin gains after investor backlash

This looks like click bait to me. On Dutch sites, all I've seen is the state secretary saying "we can't do it any other way". Right. If that's true, they shouldn't tax it at all!

I don't understand what you mean. I assume you're better informed on this, given your background, so I'll ask.

Click bait as in they haven't really dropped it and are still going along?
They can't do what any other way than how?

The only Dutch source I found about this says they can't drop this crazy idea:

De Tweede Kamer behandelt al een wetsvoorstel om Box 3 te hervormen. Omdat het kabinet de nieuwe regels snel wil aanpassen, wil het met een zogenoemde novelle een paar wijzigingen aan dat wetsvoorstel toevoegen.

Die snelle route is alleen mogelijk voor onderwerpen waarvoor de bestaande wet al een juridische basis biedt. Voor directe crypto ontbreekt die basis, zei Eerenberg: “Omdat dat gewoon feitelijk niet kan.”

De Box 3-wet bevat al een uitzondering voor waardepapieren van start-ups en scale-ups. Die kan relatief eenvoudig worden uitgebreid naar andere financiële instrumenten, zoals beursgenoteerde aandelen. Voor directe bitcoin en andere cryptomunten ontbreekt zo’n aanknopingspunt.

“Crypto, cognac, goud, zilver, allemaal andere dingen waar mensen in zouden kunnen beleggen. Pokémon-kaarten. Het zat niet in de wet”, legde de staatssecretaris uit.

Voor crypto en die andere bezittingen is een bredere wetswijziging nodig. In de snelle route blijven ze daarom onder de vermogensaanwasbelasting vallen. Daarbij telt een waardestijging mee, ook als de belegging nog niet is verkocht.

They're claiming crypto isn't included in the new law yet, and changing that would require changing more laws.

You mean: The new law which would exclude crypto from the assets taxed for unrealized gains. Therefore, crypto (and most importantly, btc) still taxed for immaterial, paper gains. Did I get that right?

And of course, the only thing they can do quickly is increasing taxes, not improving things.
So long story short: if Bitcoin goes up this year, I pay about 2.1% tax on the total value. If it goes up next year, I pay 2.7% on the total value. If it goes up in 2028, I pay 36% on the increase in value that year. The same in 2029. But if it drops in any of those years, I don't pay tax. If it drops a lot, my cost base is a lot lower in 2030. So if it goes up a lot in 2030 and I sell, I'll pay tax again on the same increase I paid taxes on so many times already.
HODLing is a lot easier if you're not being taxed on paper gains year after year.

Is the law already effective? I know The Netherlands have a wealth tax that runs independently from income or capital gain (that's horrific enough), but do you already have a tax on paper gains too?

If it is so, good luck to your government keeping the capital from fleeing the country. They'll be left taxing the few guys too unlucky to be able to leave (holding significant Dutch real estate or other assets deeply tied to the country, or too poor to afford a flight for their finances or to make it worthwile).

My bet is they will chicken out of major absurd monstrosities after smelling the air.

Also, Homer made an interesting comment about constitutional issues. Is that factor relevant in the context of this law/bill?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[OutOfMemory]

Also, Homer made an interesting comment about constitutional issues. Is that factor relevant in the context of this law/bill?

IIRC that constitutional question was on me, though i am constantly mixing up nicknames myself, probably way more than anybody else here  
Regardless, AFAIR Loyce replied that NL don't have an effective constitutional court.

EDIT: Which is a shame for a democratic country, imo.

[LoyceV]

You mean: The new law which would exclude crypto from the assets taxed for unrealized gains. Therefore, crypto (and most importantly, btc) still taxed for immaterial, paper gains. Did I get that right?

Correct.

Is the law already effective? I know The Netherlands have a wealth tax that runs independently from income or capital gain (that's horrific enough), but do you already have a tax on paper gains too?

It's not effective yet. Officially we don't have a wealth tax, but it kinda comes down to having a wealth tax. That's the thing they want to replace by taxing paper gains.

If it is so, good luck to your government keeping the capital from fleeing the country.

From what I've seen, this really is the limit for many people. "The rich" were always able to evade taxes here, but now middle class is being squeezed hard enough to make it worth leaving for more people.

They'll be left taxing the few guys too unlucky to be able to leave (holding significant Dutch real estate or other assets deeply tied to the country, or too poor to afford a flight for their finances or to make it worthwile).

That's the irony: holding Dutch real estate is totally fine if you don't live here. None of this applies to foreign asset owners.
And if you're too poor to afford a flight, you're probably on the receiving end of government money so it doesn't affect you either.

My bet is they will chicken out of major absurd monstrosities after smelling the air.

I doubt it. It's not the first time the Dutch government hits a small part of the population extremely hard financially. Many people don't care, so they get away with it.
I saw another theory on Youtube today: they exclude self-custody gold and crypto on purpose, because they don't want people to be able to "leave the system".

Also, Homer made an interesting comment about constitutional issues. Is that factor relevant in the context of this law/bill?

Nope.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[cAPSLOCK]

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[xhomerx10]

You mean: The new law which would exclude crypto from the assets taxed for unrealized gains. Therefore, crypto (and most importantly, btc) still taxed for immaterial, paper gains. Did I get that right?

Correct.

Is the law already effective? I know The Netherlands have a wealth tax that runs independently from income or capital gain (that's horrific enough), but do you already have a tax on paper gains too?

It's not effective yet. Officially we don't have a wealth tax, but it kinda comes down to having a wealth tax. That's the thing they want to replace by taxing paper gains.

If it is so, good luck to your government keeping the capital from fleeing the country.

From what I've seen, this really is the limit for many people. "The rich" were always able to evade taxes here, but now middle class is being squeezed hard enough to make it worth leaving for more people.

They'll be left taxing the few guys too unlucky to be able to leave (holding significant Dutch real estate or other assets deeply tied to the country, or too poor to afford a flight for their finances or to make it worthwile).

That's the irony: holding Dutch real estate is totally fine if you don't live here. None of this applies to foreign asset owners.
And if you're too poor to afford a flight, you're probably on the receiving end of government money so it doesn't affect you either.

My bet is they will chicken out of major absurd monstrosities after smelling the air.

I doubt it. It's not the first time the Dutch government hits a small part of the population extremely hard financially. Many people don't care, so they get away with it.
I saw another theory on Youtube today: they exclude self-custody gold and crypto on purpose, because they don't want people to be able to "leave the system".

Also, Homer made an interesting comment about constitutional issues. Is that factor relevant in the context of this law/bill?

Nope.

 Sorry to beat a dead horse... this will be my last post on this particular subject though:

 If being taxed on fictional unrealized gains based on your total holdings minus a tax-free allowance using a fictional rate of return isn't a wealth tax then we are playing word games.  The Netherlands has had a wealth tax for 25 years.  They are in the process of being freed from the tyranny of wealth confiscation by lazy politicians.

 Also 'nope' doesn't really tell the story.  The constitution is certainly relevant even if the supreme court can't rule on laws from a constitutional standpoint.

  The law as currently written is a direct violation of the Dutch constitution period.  While the supreme court is barred from making rulings on the constitutionality of laws passed by Dutch politicians, Article 94 of the Dutch Constitution states that international treaty provisions take direct precedence over statutory Dutch laws.  Since the Council of Europe's convention on human rights bars the same conduct, the supreme court ruled that the new law violated human rights in international treaty provisions.  It's just a roundabout way of saying you are violating the constitution without actually saying you are violating the constitution.  The constitution itself provides the workaround.

[xzy887]

If Satoshi Nakamoto were alive and he opened his BTC account, he would die of a stroke upon seeing his wealth.
 Is he even alive ?

[Hueristic]

If Satoshi Nakamoto were alive and he opened his BTC account, he would die of a stroke upon seeing his wealth.
Is he even alive ?

No

[asUHWEceyc]

To be fair, iron fisted management by long game scammers is probably better than those who would be more inclined to "improve bitcoin" like gav and hearn before

I mean, if you like driving your Ferrari with the handbrake on, sure.

True

Well, they're certainly not done unfortunately. Cook can be the fall guy for organizational redemption, and so others can siphon funds on the side concurrently. The Liquid hack is a bail-in and DoJ 47 has been bought with memecoins! =D

[JayJuanGee]

If Satoshi Nakamoto were alive and he opened his BTC account, he would die of a stroke upon seeing his wealth.
 Is he even alive ?

How do you imagine Satoshi's "bitcoin account"?  Are you imagining that Satoshi, if he were to be alive, would go to a wallet.dat file and then see his whole bitcoin balance, and that would be Satoshi's "bitcoin account"?  or might he have some other arrangement or maybe multiple "bitcoin accounts"?


By the way, our bitcoin price performance for the past 17-24-ish hours had gone through an UPpity into the lower $87ks and then a correction back to our current $83ks/$84ks territories, so largely bringing the BTC prices back to their earlier range. 

A fake out?  A test balloon?  What do we want to call it? 

There has not been a new high for this "local top" yet.. which we would have to go higher than $87,374 in order to get that moniker for the month... are the bears getting worried, yet?..   For sure, there are a good number of us (arguably normal bitcoiner accumulator/HODLers) who still do not have enough confidence to proclaim that the bottom is in, yet, even though there seem to be some of us (referring to the bears) who are still highly into prayers that more down might be in the books.. and they are looking a wee bit like losers, even though some of them may well proclaim themselves as winners, even if they have not really bought back in, yet, with any meaningful level of conviction.. to the extent that their trading stories can be believed, anyhow.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[xhomerx10]

If Satoshi Nakamoto were alive and he opened his BTC account, he would die of a stroke upon seeing his wealth.
 Is he even alive ?

 Are you the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, John Healey?

 https://www.yahoo.com/news/videos/healey-brands-farage-liz-truss-113906846.html

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com