Bitcoin Forum
November 13, 2024, 10:01:50 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Oh NO!!! https://fastcash4bitcoins.com/ SUSPENDS THEIR BUSINESS  (Read 2235 times)
papaminer (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 250


Free World


View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 05:27:21 AM
 #1


This is so sad...

I hope they get this license fixed soon...

damn GOV!

Why are the GOV not going after online games that buy/sell their online currency?

For example DIABLO 3 Huh

฿: 1L7dSte4Rs4KyyxRCgrqSWYtkXdAb4Gy1z

MORE INFO ABOUT ME: BTC
The 4ner
aka newbitcoinqtuser
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500


R.I.P Silk Road 1.0


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 06:28:49 AM
 #2

No worries. BitCoin will take its natural course and go underground. Perhaps the world just isn't ready for BTC.
BIGMERVE
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
June 06, 2013, 12:45:32 AM
 #3


This is so sad...

I hope they get this license fixed soon...

damn GOV!

Why are the GOV not going after online games that buy/sell their online currency?

For example DIABLO 3 Huh

They will. It's explained in their thread that they are being investigated as a money transmitter. However, they are just a buyer/seller. So they will fix it up soon.

b!z
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582
Merit: 1010



View Profile
June 06, 2013, 03:34:43 AM
 #4

Feds are trying to control bitcoin  Roll Eyes
mprep
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612


In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce


View Profile WWW
June 06, 2013, 09:01:53 AM
 #5

Feds are trying to control bitcoin  Roll Eyes
That's a serious problem for the community.

worldinacoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 06, 2013, 09:05:02 AM
 #6

A lot seems to be closing down because of the regulations.  I guess in the end only those that operate like a bank will survive.  But the costs of compliance won't be cheap.
420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 06, 2013, 07:44:38 PM
 #7


They will. It's explained in their thread that they are being investigated as a money transmitter. However, they are just a buyer/seller. So they will fix it up soon.

what is the difference?

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
BIGMERVE
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
June 07, 2013, 01:32:12 AM
 #8


They will. It's explained in their thread that they are being investigated as a money transmitter. However, they are just a buyer/seller. So they will fix it up soon.

what is the difference?

It makes a big difference to the US government. A money transmitter has to be highly regulated to prevent laundering.

420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 07, 2013, 03:19:21 AM
 #9


They will. It's explained in their thread that they are being investigated as a money transmitter. However, they are just a buyer/seller. So they will fix it up soon.

what is the difference?

It makes a big difference to the US government. A money transmitter has to be highly regulated to prevent laundering.

the physical difference that makes them 'just a buyer/seller' rather than money transmitter

interestingly, kepdia says only 48 states regulate money transmitters,
so what are the 2 states that do not?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_transmitter

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 07, 2013, 03:25:46 AM
 #10


They will. It's explained in their thread that they are being investigated as a money transmitter. However, they are just a buyer/seller. So they will fix it up soon.

what is the difference?

It makes a big difference to the US government. A money transmitter has to be highly regulated to prevent laundering.

the physical difference that makes them 'just a buyer/seller' rather than money transmitter

interestingly, kepdia says only 48 states regulate money transmitters,
so what are the 2 states that do not?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_transmitter


New Mexico & South Carolina.
420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 08, 2013, 10:00:59 PM
 #11

so DT do you know if any exchanges are trying to start in those states? or would that not matter because of federal regulations

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 08, 2013, 10:04:29 PM
 #12

so DT do you know if any exchanges are trying to start in those states? or would that not matter because of federal regulations

Well Federal Regs ALWAYS apply no matter what state you are in unless the activity is limited to intrastate and I am sure the feds will even argue that point (banking networks are interstate, national banks are interstate, etc).  On the state level it is far more complex.  Many states regulate out of state entities which provide services to the resident of the state.  Some don't and only regulate entities within a physical presence in the state.  The two states above don't have any regs on MTs.  The definitions of every state are slightly different meaning an activity could fall within the definition in one state and not in another.  The US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and DC also license MTs so although 2 states don't there are 51 licenses total  (plus finCEN registration).  For lack of a better term it is a giant mess because the Feds "shouldn't" regulate economic activity inside a state and states shouldn't regulate activity between the states however both do so you end up with up to 55 different agencies all regulating the same thing.

So honestly this is why most entities just take 2 years, spend $10M and get a license in all states which have one regardless of it they need to or not.  
2weiX
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1005

this space intentionally left blank


View Profile
June 08, 2013, 10:06:10 PM
 #13

being investigated as a money transmitter.
However, they are just a buyer/seller.


notice something?
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 08, 2013, 10:14:55 PM
 #14

being investigated as a money transmitter.
However, they are just a buyer/seller.

notice something?

A currency dealer buys and sells foreign currency.  Are they a money transmitter?
A precious metals dealer buyers and sells precious metals.  Are they are money transmitter?
A money order issuers, buys and sells (issues and redeems) money orders.  Are they a money transmitter?
A stock broker buys and sells financial instruments.  Are they a money transmitter?

(The answer for all four of these is no).
420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 08, 2013, 11:04:42 PM
 #15

being investigated as a money transmitter.
However, they are just a buyer/seller.

notice something?

A currency dealer buys and sells foreign currency.  Are they a money transmitter?
A precious metals dealer buyers and sells precious metals.  Are they are money transmitter?
A money order issuers, buys and sells (issues and redeems) money orders.  Are they a money transmitter?
A stock broker buys and sells financial instruments.  Are they a money transmitter?

(The answer for all four of these is no).

then what is a money transmitter

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
Bitco
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 746
Merit: 253



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 02:35:34 AM
 #16

A currency dealer buys and sells foreign currency.  Are they a money transmitter?
A precious metals dealer buyers and sells precious metals.  Are they are money transmitter?
A money order issuers, buys and sells (issues and redeems) money orders.  Are they a money transmitter?
A stock broker buys and sells financial instruments.  Are they a money transmitter?

(The answer for all four of these is no).
In many states, money orders are considered money transmission.  In Pennsylvania, money transmission only means money orders.  It's fairly certain that the PA legislature wasn't thinking of the internet when they passed that law in 1965.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 09, 2013, 03:24:02 AM
Last edit: June 09, 2013, 04:14:55 AM by DeathAndTaxes
 #17

then what is a money transmitter

It depends on who's definition.  Generally speaking well written statutes will define key terms but there are a lot of horribly written laws on the books.  At the federal level it is defines as:

Quote
(5) Money transmitter —(i) In general. (A) A person that provides money transmission services. The term “money transmission services” means the acceptance of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency from one person and the transmission of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency to another location or person by any means. “Any means” includes, but is not limited to, through a financial agency or institution; a Federal Reserve Bank or other facility of one or more Federal Reserve Banks, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or both; an electronic funds transfer network; or an informal value transfer system;

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=1874ed9b8ba25f5cf9527e5e39a28df8&rgn=div5&view=text&node=31:3.1.6.1.2&idno=31#31:3.1.6.1.2.1.3.1

FinCEN guidance in April states that it is their interpretation that the conversion of virtual currency into real currency or real currency into virtual currency meets this definition.

In WA (for the purpose of state laws/regs/licensing) however it is defined simply as this:
Quote
(19) "Money transmitter" means a person that is engaged in money transmission.

Hmm.  Well that doesn't tell us a whole lot.  Lets see if money transmission is defined.

Quote
(18) "Money transmission" means receiving money or its equivalent value to transmit, deliver, or instruct to be delivered the money or its equivalent value to another location, inside or outside the United States, by any means including but not limited to by wire, facsimile, or electronic transfer. "Money transmission" does not include the provision solely of connection services to the internet, telecommunications services, or network access. "Money transmission" includes selling, issuing, or acting as an intermediary for open loop stored value devices and payment instruments, but not closed loop stored value devices.

Does exchanging BTC for USD meets this definition.  Well it depends on what "money" is doesn't it.  Luckily that is defined as well.

Quote
(16) "Money" means a medium of exchange that is authorized or adopted by the United States or a foreign government or other recognized medium of exchange. "Money" includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more governments.

So is Bitcoin "money" under WA law?  Well a case could be made that it isn't as no government, international body, intergovernmental organization has stated Bitcoin is "money".   Virtual currency yes but money no.  Still WA is one of those states that likely it won't be decided until either it ends up in court or the law is ammended to be more explicit.

Lets look at another example state, Utah:

Quote
This rule applies to any individual or other party who issues, sells or offers to sell within the state any instrument for the purpose of effecting payments to third parties, including, but not limited to, money orders, traveler's checks, and the wire transmission of money.

Key word is "for the purpose of payments to third parties.  If there is no third party then is there a money transmitter?  This isn't legal advice but a credible case could be made that a company (the first party) buying Bitcoins from you (the second party) and paying the proceeds in USD to the same party (you) would not meet the definition of money transmitter under UT law.  

Some states are just mute on the entire topic.  In Alaska's general code for example the words "money transmitter" simply don't exist.  Under Alaskan law there is no such thing as a money transmitter any more then there is a flux capacitor repairman.

TL/DR:  So the answer really depends on "according to who" and in what context.  The important thing is that no two states define "money transmitter", "money transmission", or even "money" the same.  Some definitions are very specific and exclude Bitcoin by omission, some definitions like WA are vague and really can only be definitively decided in court.  Some definitions are so asininely broad that "money transmission" could include just about anything including the buying, selling, or exchanging of bennie babies ... if a prosecutor so wanted.  
    
    
DISCLAIMER:  I AM NOT A LAWYER.  IF YOU NEED LEGAL ADVICE ON YOUR PARTICULAR SITUATION THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION IS TO RETAIN INDEPENDENT LEGAL COUNSEL.  PERIOD.  The above post is just intended to be educational and highlight that context matters. 
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
June 09, 2013, 04:08:21 AM
 #18

then what is a money transmitter

It depends on who's definition.  Generally speaking well written statutes will define key terms but there are a lot of horribly written laws on the books.  At the federal level it is defines as:

Quote
(5) Money transmitter —(i) In general. (A) A person that provides money transmission services. The term “money transmission services” means the acceptance of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency from one person and the transmission of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency to another location or person by any means. “Any means” includes, but is not limited to, through a financial agency or institution; a Federal Reserve Bank or other facility of one or more Federal Reserve Banks, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or both; an electronic funds transfer network; or an informal value transfer system;

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=1874ed9b8ba25f5cf9527e5e39a28df8&rgn=div5&view=text&node=31:3.1.6.1.2&idno=31#31:3.1.6.1.2.1.3.1

FinCEN guidance in April states that it is their interpretation that the conversion of virtual currency into real currency or real currency into virtual currency meets this definition.

In WA (for the purpose of state laws/regs/licensing) however it is defined simply as this:
Quote
(19) "Money transmitter" means a person that is engaged in money transmission.

Hmm.  Well that doesn't tell us a whole lot.  Lets see if money transmission is defined.

Quote
(18) "Money transmission" means receiving money or its equivalent value to transmit, deliver, or instruct to be delivered the money or its equivalent value to another location, inside or outside the United States, by any means including but not limited to by wire, facsimile, or electronic transfer. "Money transmission" does not include the provision solely of connection services to the internet, telecommunications services, or network access. "Money transmission" includes selling, issuing, or acting as an intermediary for open loop stored value devices and payment instruments, but not closed loop stored value devices.

Does exchanging BTC for USD meets this definition.  Well it depends on what "money" is doesn't it.  Luckily that is defined as well.

Quote
(16) "Money" means a medium of exchange that is authorized or adopted by the United States or a foreign government or other recognized medium of exchange. "Money" includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more governments.

So is Bitcoin "money" under WA law?  Well a case could be made that it isn't as no government, international body, intergovernmental organization has stated Bitcoin is "money".   Virtual currency yes but money no.  Still WA is one of those states that likely it won't be decided until either it ends up in court or the law is ammended to be more explicit.

Lets look at another example state.

Quote
This rule applies to any individual or other party who issues, sells or offers to sell within the state any instrument for the purpose of effecting payments to third parties, including, but not limited to, money orders, traveler's checks, and the wire transmission of money.

Key word is "for the purpose of payments to third parties.  If there is no third party then is there a money transmitter?  This isn't legal advice but a credible case could be made that a company (the first party) buying Bitcoins from you (the second party) and paying the proceeds in USD to the same party (you) would not meet the definition of money transmitter under UT law.  

Some states are just mute on the entire topic.  In Alaska's general code for example the words "money transmitter" simply don't exist.  Under Alaskan law there is no such thing as a money transmitter any more then there is a flux capacitor repairman.

TL/DR:  So the answer really depends on "according to who" and in what context.  The important thing is that no two states define "money transmitter", "money transmission", or even "money" the same.  Some definitions are very specific and exclude Bitcoin by omission, some definitions like WA are vague and really can only be definitively decided in court.  Some definitions are so asininely broad that "money transmission" could include just about anything including the buying, selling, or exchanging of bennie babies ... if a prosecutor so wanted.  



You can be pissy sometimes but I have to admit that I appreciate your explanations on a variety of subjects. This is concise, well thought out and educational. 

repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 09, 2013, 11:10:03 AM
 #19


A currency dealer buys and sells foreign currency.  Are they a money transmitter?
A precious metals dealer buyers and sells precious metals.  Are they are money transmitter?
A money order issuers, buys and sells (issues and redeems) money orders.  Are they a money transmitter?
A stock broker buys and sells financial instruments.  Are they a money transmitter?

(The answer for all four of these is no).

Although that's true, those kinds of businesses are often regulated under other financial services laws which require AML/KYC compliance (even jewellers are now required to report large transactions in many FATF member countries).  The FinCEN guidance statement doesn't really limit the application of financial services regulations to Bitcoin enterprises.  A business may successfully argue that it isn't a money transmitter, only to find that it needs some other kind of financial services licence to operate (the examples you gave are regulated).

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
World
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 743
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 10:46:33 PM
 #20

It looks very complicated  Shocked
Pelle Braendgaard & Panel Bitcoin 2013 

Supporting people with beautiful creative ideas. Bitcoin is because of the developers,exchanges,merchants,miners,investors,users,machines and blockchain technologies work together.
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!