Fiat, Banks and the future of Cryptocurrencies

[pvk444]

As probably most people on this forum, I am fairly active in investing and trading in cryptocurrencies. I had some luck and made a little money with it, but I am now concerned to move some of the gains back to fiat.

In particular, I am working for a large, global bank (which shall remain unnamed for now). They are in the process of setting up new guidelines to deal with clients that engage in cryptocurrency markets. For instance, they are monitoring money inflow from cryptoexchanges and would reject any money that comes from non-approved exchanges (in particular those that don't have strong KYC procedures). Furthermore, for larger amounts, they would even require some proof how the gain was obtained.

A couple of critical items I want to raise for discussion:

1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?

[1713565415]

1713565415

[1713565415]

1713565415

[1713565415]

1713565415

[1713565415]

1713565415

[Lucius]

First I do not know why it is a problem to transfer some of your profit to fiat,you do not want to pay tax or your crypto exchange does not have KYC?

I think that banks are perhaps the most powerful institutions in the world,and if they want it is very easy for them to strike on cryptocurrency very hard.Imagine that all or most of worlds banks say that buying/selling cryptocurrency becomes illegal,it means no direct money flow from banks to exchanges and vice versa.People would have to find another way to to buy/sell crypto,so only to trade in person or maybe on ATMs.

So far banks still evaluate situation what to do with BTC and cryptocurrency in general,we see some news that they are not still seriously concerned(not losing to much profit I suppose),but if profits star to go down and Lightning Network really improve scalability and make transaction fast&cheap there will be some reaction from banks for sure.

Regarding ICO I do not have any opinion how would such scenario reflected on this kind of business,but in general they will also be affected if banks are set completely negative toward cryptocurrency.

[pvk444]

First I do not know why it is a problem to transfer some of your profit to fiat,you do not want to pay tax or your crypto exchange does not have KYC?

I think that banks are perhaps the most powerful institutions in the world,and if they want it is very easy for them to strike on cryptocurrency very hard.Imagine that all or most of worlds banks say that buying/selling cryptocurrency becomes illegal,it means no direct money flow from banks to exchanges and vice versa.People would have to find another way to to buy/sell crypto,so only to trade in person or maybe on ATMs.

So far banks still evaluate situation what to do with BTC and cryptocurrency in general,we see some news that they are not still seriously concerned(not losing to much profit I suppose),but if profits star to go down and Lightning Network really improve scalability and make transaction fast&cheap there will be some reaction from banks for sure.

Regarding ICO I do not have any opinion how would such scenario reflected on this kind of business,but in general they will also be affected if banks are set completely negative toward cryptocurrency.

I am still heavily invested in cryptos, but if wanted to move money back to fiat, there would be problems. It's not about taxes at all. It's all about the AML policies of banks. For instance, assume I have my main account with Coinbase. They have strong enough KYC to be on the banks "approved list". Let's assume I wanted to withdraw a few hundred thousand USD.

1. If I transfer the amount all at once (assume for the moment Coinbase does not have any restrictions), this inflow in my bank would raise red flags: unusually large amount from a crypto exchange. The bank's compliance team would then require to see some evidence how such a large amount was obtained or generated. In my case. I am dealing with a multitude of exchanges and a large portfolio of crytos and I would not be able to trace back where exactly the gains would be coming from.

2. If I do it piecemeal, it's even worse. After a few smaller transactions from a cryptoexchange, the banks alarm AML alarm bells will definitely go off. And very possibly the account would be frozen immediately.

As for your other points, although banks can't declare cryptos illegal, if all banks would stop any crypto-related in / outflows, cryptos would surely die. As long as cryptos are not BROADLY accepted as money (including, for instance, in your local grocery store; or at your car dealer; etc.), they will have to be changed in fiat at some point. But if no banks accept the inflow of such fiat generated by cryptos, there would be no possibility to get to that fiat money for anyone.

The constraints above I have described, are already reality at some of the largest, global banks. So this is not just what might happen, but what is happening. I know that my bank has cancelled client accounts that were not able to provide the background to how they made the gains, even though it might have been completely legal. And a colleague of mine at another bank had to stop a very lucrative trading strategy he was running as the frequent money flows in and out raised too many red AML flags at his bank.

[Kprawn]

There are many other ways to move bitcoins to fiat, you do not have to work through your Bank. {Do some research and ask

the right questions and you will find the answer} A lot of these methods are not exactly legal, so you should be aware of that.

In most countries there are more than one group of Banks. Some are even "Bitcoin-friendly"  ... I have yet to see one

Bank having total dominance in one specific country. They tried this in Australia and they were taken to court for

uncompetitive behaviour and the people won. 

[pvk444]

There are many other ways to move bitcoins to fiat, you do not have to work through your Bank. {Do some research and ask

the right questions and you will find the answer} A lot of these methods are not exactly legal, so you should be aware of that.

In most countries there are more than one group of Banks. Some are even "Bitcoin-friendly"  ... I have yet to see one

Bank having total dominance in one specific country. They tried this in Australia and they were taken to court for

uncompetitive behaviour and the people won. 

I am not interested in the "easy" route of illegal methods. And yes, some banks are bitcoin friendly. But the details and nuances here are important. My bank has also no issues accepting even large sums gained from cryptos. It is even know on the street as one of the more liberal banks with regards to ctyptos. I know of one case where somebody invested a few thousand USD in Monero at an early stage, and pulled out a few million. The bank questioned the origin of the money, and this person was able to show the flows from bank to exchange into ripple and bank. So all was OK.

But this "clean" flow is an exception. I have move my funds from one crypto into others and back, including some ICO's etc. There is no chance I would be able to provide a detailed trace to prove that I obtained my gains through legal means and unrelated to any AML.

With regards to the Australian Banks, I don't think it went to court. Do you have a reference?

I know NAB, ANZ, CBA and Westpac were in the spot light  :

https://www.smh.com.au/business/bitcoin-tensions-rise-as-investors-claim-banks-freezing-their-accounts-20171229-p4yy3z.html


And in there, the critical statement is the following:

“Where we cannot verify the origin of transfers we may act to ensure we comply with Australia’s anti money laundering obligations"

Again outlining the challenge that if somebody made large gains in cryptos over time, but cannot provide a detailed trace, they would have troubles getting to the money.

[usam_coiner]

flats is near to expire because bitcoin is gaining more fan following and investors are rushing toward bitcoin to make it the global coin of the world and i am sure banks will also exit when bitcoin will be implemented as currency and people are now really satisfied by using bitcoin,

[Lampaster]

I have not experienced such problems with the Bank. But I have friends from other countries who have been facing exchange problems lately. Those exchanges that work with Fiat constantly limit the list of countries to which Fiat can be sent after the exchange. They are motivated by the requirement of KYC.

[juragane]

As probably most people on this forum, I am fairly active in investing and trading in cryptocurrencies. I had some luck and made a little money with it, but I am now concerned to move some of the gains back to fiat.

In particular, I am working for a large, global bank (which shall remain unnamed for now). They are in the process of setting up new guidelines to deal with clients that engage in cryptocurrency markets. For instance, they are monitoring money inflow from cryptoexchanges and would reject any money that comes from non-approved exchanges (in particular those that don't have strong KYC procedures). Furthermore, for larger amounts, they would even require some proof how the gain was obtained.

A couple of critical items I want to raise for discussion:

1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?

it does not matter if you return to fiat that your personal choice, you play in cryptocurrency chances are not very know trick how to play it and if I say the highest income that I get from cryptocurrency while for fiat very little because the movement up and the turunya only little difference can not as much as cryptocurrency. chances are you need to learn more deeply how to play cryptocurrency experience is the best teacher.

[frowsiter]

1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

There is no as such complication that I have experienced recently however I will skip to other discussion points of your where I can add something. Like you said exchangers without KYC's will suffer or not. Well, I believe they will suffer in the future a lot because day by day the KYC and KYS as well getting very strict. In my country the exchangers which are not collecting the KYC of their customers are themselves getting under surveillance because regulatory bodies think that they are making some spurious action which may disturb the nation economy somewhat.

Pointing towards the next point, "ICO heavens" well I believe it has to undergo vigorous change rather than smooth implementation by the banks. These projects are already getting funds off the chart and banks may not be able to tolerate it if they fail in the ICO project.

[pvk444]

I have not experienced such problems with the Bank. But I have friends from other countries who have been facing exchange problems lately. Those exchanges that work with Fiat constantly limit the list of countries to which Fiat can be sent after the exchange. They are motivated by the requirement of KYC.

Good for you. Not asking for any details, but can you confirm that your inflows (i.e. from the crypto-gains translated into fiat to your bank account) have been "abnormal"? An example to illustate what I mean by that:

1) Assume you make USD 10'000 per month as a salary. If every few months you deposit 2k or 3k as a result of your gains, no bank would really care much.

2) However, if you started to deposit USD 15'000 every second week, or a lump some of say USD 1m from a crypto exchange, that would certainly trigger the alarm bells at many banks.

The second scenario is what I would label "abnormal" from a banks compliance perspective. And I would be surprised if a reputable bank would not react in such as case and demand some proof.

[charlotte04]

As probably most people on this forum, I am fairly active in investing and trading in cryptocurrencies. I had some luck and made a little money with it, but I am now concerned to move some of the gains back to fiat.

In particular, I am working for a large, global bank (which shall remain unnamed for now). They are in the process of setting up new guidelines to deal with clients that engage in cryptocurrency markets. For instance, they are monitoring money inflow from cryptoexchanges and would reject any money that comes from non-approved exchanges (in particular those that don't have strong KYC procedures). Furthermore, for larger amounts, they would even require some proof how the gain was obtained.

A couple of critical items I want to raise for discussion:

1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?

I do believe that those restrictions are bad for the society, those things are need to get us a secure transactions and for the criminals to be hard to be able to get their money from wrong doings.

[uncleduckerr]

While a bank could reject you it doesn't seem like that would be in their best interest at all. After all they are trying to get customers for their bank and if you are prominent and have lots of money will they are doing themselves a disservice. We have seen what lengths banks will go to with the HSBC cartel fiasco so lets not kid ourselves and say they won't handle some tainted money.

[pvk444]

While a bank could reject you it doesn't seem like that would be in their best interest at all. After all they are trying to get customers for their bank and if you are prominent and have lots of money will they are doing themselves a disservice. We have seen what lengths banks will go to with the HSBC cartel fiasco so lets not kid ourselves and say they won't handle some tainted money.

Not trying to defend banks, but I would think ensuring that no money laundering takes place on their watch is more important for them than keeping individual customers. And I am not talking here about the extremes, like super-ultra-high-net-worth customers, but the affluent crypto investor in general, having struck some "gold. For these normal affluent crypto investors who made perhaps even a few million, the bank would not do any special favors. If we would be starting to talk about 1bn or more ... then that would be another case all together.

[justin86]

Kyc requirement is not a big deal for most people, and if the money made is includes no illegal activity, then there is no difference as a income from others. Banks will not do that, this is a big loss for them

[gantez]

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?

I will talk about this end of your post and I believe such restrictions would propel stakeholders in crypto business to buckle up in their trade. Stakeholders like exchangers because that is actually where it starts from.

Then, this could bring in proper regulations from the government. For me, bank restrictions is good for a start.

[pvk444]

Kyc requirement is not a big deal for most people, and if the money made is includes no illegal activity, then there is no difference as a income from others. Banks will not do that, this is a big loss for them

But what you are stating is not reality. Many banks (particularly global operating banks) would be required to take a very conservative approach. If you, as a client, can't prove the source of your (unusual and unusually high) income, then they would be forced to prevent the deposit, or cancel your account all together. And with moving in and out of crypto currencies, the proof of legitimacy is becoming a very difficult task.

[Reid]

To summarize it all, they are preventing us from making money.  
No difference with using fiat.
I heard a lot about this. But since I have never gone to a larger scale of withdrawal then I haven't experienced it.
But I am also worrying and that is why I am reading threads like this. There will always be a time that we will end up getting bored or just want to feel the profit and then rest and I want that to be clean without having any issues, banks or any other means.

Now, this banks. It will always be the best way to get that large amount and they could stop anything you want to get through them without you explaining where you get it but there is this limit.
Will it work if I do it in different banks and not overflow the limit or they are all connected somehow?

[poplolnman]

flats is near to expire because bitcoin is gaining more fan following and investors are rushing toward bitcoin to make it the global coin of the world and i am sure banks will also exit when bitcoin will be implemented as currency and people are now really satisfied by using bitcoin,

The new era of cashless society yeah , still I'm a little bit doubt about this due how a lot of people keep thinking traditionally and won't welcome new things, new technology like electronic money, it would takes a long time . Anyway I personally haven't experience a strict service from the banks even they know about how I involve in crypto business.

[longwintershere]

As probably most people on this forum, I am fairly active in investing and trading in cryptocurrencies. I had some luck and made a little money with it, but I am now concerned to move some of the gains back to fiat.

In particular, I am working for a large, global bank (which shall remain unnamed for now). They are in the process of setting up new guidelines to deal with clients that engage in cryptocurrency markets. For instance, they are monitoring money inflow from cryptoexchanges and would reject any money that comes from non-approved exchanges (in particular those that don't have strong KYC procedures). Furthermore, for larger amounts, they would even require some proof how the gain was obtained.

A couple of critical items I want to raise for discussion:

1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?

this is the most obvious fud attempt I have ever seen on this forum. if you want to share some insight, well please do but saying that you made some money but you will probably exchange it back to fiat it's like calling to go short from your side haha

[mOgliE]

Hi,

I don't really think that the issue for banks is about money laundering. Because this happens in some countries and large, worldwide banks have no issues being involved, as long as they make profit. I rather think that they see bitcoin as a threat.

I don't really have a solution to offer, but I would say that it is good for cryptos... it means we are on the right tracks, important enough now for traditionnal financial institutions to react.

Not so bad for a geeky tool without any future!