IMF Chief Lagarde: Global Cryptocurrency Regulation Is Inevitable

[danilogmachado]

IMF Chief Lagarde: Global Cryptocurrency Regulation Is Inevitable

Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, stated that international regulatory action on cryptocurrencies is "inevitable." Lagarde, also said that the IMF's concerns over cryptocurrencies stem largely from their potential use in illicit financial activities. In an interview with CNNMoney on Feb. 11, she said:

"We are actively engaging in anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. And that reinforces our determination to work on those two directions."

[1714704799]

1714704799

[1714704799]

1714704799

[emuLOAD]

so... nothing new?

[rlim475]

Here is the article with the interview http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/11/investing/lagarde-bitcoin-regulation/index.html

There are next to no unregulated markets in the world. Any market that comes about will inevitably be regulated at some point, it's a no brainer.

Anyone have insight in to what she means by moving from an entity based to an activity based method of regulation? Presumably looking for regulation to fall on individuals instead of corporations?

[andrei56]

IMF Chief Lagarde: Global Cryptocurrency Regulation Is Inevitable

Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, stated that international regulatory action on cryptocurrencies is "inevitable." Lagarde, also said that the IMF's concerns over cryptocurrencies stem largely from their potential use in illicit financial activities. In an interview with CNNMoney on Feb. 11, she said:

"We are actively engaging in anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. And that reinforces our determination to work on those two directions."

We all know it is coming but that is not the real issue the issue is if they are going to be able to enforce those regulations, how are they going to control something that does not have physical form and that can be stored in a piece of paper or even your brain, this is nothing like the war on drugs, they cannot win, there is not a central server they can take, and they cannot check the computers of every single person and that is also inevitable.

[jseverson]

Anyone have insight in to what she means by moving from an entity based to an activity based method of regulation? Presumably looking for regulation to fall on individuals instead of corporations?

Where did you get this though? I don't see it in the article you've linked.

Either way, entity based regulation entails identifying systematically important firms and monitoring them, while an activity based method identifies all potentially risky activities by any firm and monitors them.

In this context, the systematically important firms are probably the exchanges, and shifting to an activity based method would probably mean they will monitor all cryptocurrency trading, regardless if exchanges are involved. I could be wrong though.

[Nilda]

I’m ok with regulations. One of many thing that stops people from investing in cryptocurrency is legitimacy. Most people  don’t want to put their time, effort and money on something that does not have a physical form and is not recognised by the government.

[CrazyCryppa]

She's right and in my opinion it's fantastic for Cryptocurrencies in general. Less scammy ICO's and brings increased credibility to the space.

[followmenot]

Actually many people think bad about regulations but I think that regulations will increase financial embrace and many people will by crypto, not just for gambling, but as regular fund investments.

[rlim475]

Anyone have insight in to what she means by moving from an entity based to an activity based method of regulation? Presumably looking for regulation to fall on individuals instead of corporations?

Where did you get this though? I don't see it in the article you've linked.

Either way, entity based regulation entails identifying systematically important firms and monitoring them, while an activity based method identifies all potentially risky activities by any firm and monitors them.

In this context, the systematically important firms are probably the exchanges, and shifting to an activity based method would probably mean they will monitor all cryptocurrency trading, regardless if exchanges are involved. I could be wrong though.

She mentions it in the video that's embedded above the body of the article. Within the same link.

Thank you for the context. It seems like both approached would have their benefits and disadvantages. Immediately it seems as though an entity based approach would be much easier to manage but would mean a lot of activity goes under the radar. An activity based approach would solve this but would seemingly take a lot more work to monitor and also be much harder to accurately cover within the law.

[Nkan25]

This is inevitable seeing as more and more institutional investors gain interest and the more scams like bitconnect affect other investors. The problem is old bureaucratic institutions always struggle with implementing the regulation on technology they can't wrap their head around. Technical blockchain experts linking up with regulators would help smooth this transition. Regulation is good in that it brings new money, but the crappy taxes come with it. Either way, their is nothing really stopping it.

[coingrowth]

Regulating bitcoin is good step for any govt in this world it gives KYC and protect us from anti-laundering laws and protect future from cybersecurity

[bitart]

I’m ok with regulations. One of many thing that stops people from investing in cryptocurrency is legitimacy. Most people  don’t want to put their time, effort and money on something that does not have a physical form and is not recognised by the government.

That's a good point, I also know a lot of people who know bitcoin, read the news about bitcoin but as long as they can't do the whole bitcoin thing officially, they won't risk their time and money. They say as soon as the government regulates it, they will be the first to invest into the technology. Also, we need some kind of regulation, in order to make buying and selling bitcoin easier for average people. And average people needs education, if they want to join the crypto market, in order to avoid unnecessary losses and to manage the risks of the crypto world properly. This will help the mass adoption on the long run.

[zhanyiguai261315]

So far, the IMF has advocated a balanced approach to cryptocurrency regulation, and ms Lagarde has voiced support for the use of blockchains in finance. This is like the innovation of financial management, the high and new financial technology do not seek full blame.

[yesuidanggan]

The President, who didn't do a good job last year, caused panic and a stock market crash.

In 18 years, still the demon sex is not changed, still in an attempt to demonize digital currency, this does not continue to drive the history to reverse the car? .

Does she want to trigger a bigger crash? .

[andrei56]

I’m ok with regulations. One of many thing that stops people from investing in cryptocurrency is legitimacy. Most people  don’t want to put their time, effort and money on something that does not have a physical form and is not recognised by the government.

That's a good point, I also know a lot of people who know bitcoin, read the news about bitcoin but as long as they can't do the whole bitcoin thing officially, they won't risk their time and money. They say as soon as the government regulates it, they will be the first to invest into the technology. Also, we need some kind of regulation, in order to make buying and selling bitcoin easier for average people. And average people needs education, if they want to join the crypto market, in order to avoid unnecessary losses and to manage the risks of the crypto world properly. This will help the mass adoption on the long run.

That is fine but while they are waiting it could be too late after all bitcoin will not stop when it begins to skyrocket you need to be ready and have bitcoin in store or the next time you see the price you will need to pay way bigger prices than before, this happened in December and it will happen again, besides even if regulation is put in place that does not mean we are going to get any kind of protection from the government in case we lose our money.

[mostkey]

Actually many people think bad about regulations but I think that regulations will increase financial embrace and many people will by crypto, not just for gambling, but as regular fund investments.

there are several possibilities if the rules on crypto have been applied permanently.
1. the price of crypto will be destroyed. thus causing losses on previous investments
2. crypto will increase with increasing user because of security with regulation that has been applied