G20 Calls for Crypto Regulation Recommendations By July

[franky1]

if that happens, then it will all come down to how many do what and also it will depend on how they perform.
for example everyone knows premined altcoins are generally not good options but as long as they are getting pumped well, people invest in them.

this will also be the same. for example if registered ICOs were 5% of the total and the rest of them get pumped more nobody will ever invest in that 5% specially if that registration may end up forcing the investors to pay taxes

putting funds into trendon shavers BT&S was a 100% tax
putting funds into bitcoinica was a 100% tax
putting funds into intersango was a 100% tax
putting funds into mtgox was a 100% tax
putting funds into butterfly labs was a 100%
putting funds into mintpal was a 100% tax
putting funds into cryptorush was a 100% tax
putting funds into cryptsy was a 100% tax
none of which were truly legit

but atleast for MTGox there was a name/face and physical location to slap some lawsuit on him. regulations wouldnt have done customers any favours. but consumer protection practices helped

[Kakmakr]

Well I would want to see some central authority making the decisions on what ICOs are verified <KYC/AML> and which is not. If investors wants to decide in which ones they want to invest, then they just access that database to see if they are registered and verified by that authority.

The scam ICOs are doing a lot more harm than having a centralized authority to make those decisions. This is not the ideal solution, but it will help to reduce scams. Self regulation as suggested by the Winkelvoss twins are not going to work, because they lack the teeth to enforce criminal prosecution.

[pooya87]

~
putting funds into trendon shavers BT&S was a 100% tax
putting funds into bitcoinica was a 100% tax
putting funds into intersango was a 100% tax
putting funds into mtgox was a 100% tax
putting funds into butterfly labs was a 100%
putting funds into mintpal was a 100% tax
putting funds into cryptorush was a 100% tax
putting funds into cryptsy was a 100% tax
none of which were truly legit

but atleast for MTGox there was a name/face and physical location to slap some lawsuit on him. regulations wouldnt have done customers any favours. but consumer protection practices helped

yeah i can see what you mean. but i am saying the dynamics of the market can change if they regulate it and it may not change much.

besides the ICO tokens are already different from real altcoins. people are mostly trading them in a decentralized manner and i doubt that that can be subjected to any kind of taxation since you don't register anywhere.
for example all these ethereum ICO tokens are being traded mostly on EtherDelta, Waves tokens are being exchanges on its own platform which also has an exchange built in (if i am not mistaken), and others have similar popular solutions.

[franky1]

yeah i can see what you mean. but i am saying the dynamics of the market can change if they regulate it and it may not change much.

besides the ICO tokens are already different from real altcoins. people are mostly trading them in a decentralized manner and i doubt that that can be subjected to any kind of taxation since you don't register anywhere.
for example all these ethereum ICO tokens are being traded mostly on EtherDelta, Waves tokens are being exchanges on its own platform which also has an exchange built in (if i am not mistaken), and others have similar popular solutions.

im not disagreeing with you. what im saying is people that want centralised services(exchanges) and legitimacy. should not advocate for regulation as it wont help them. regulations are not about consumer protection (how many people got to keep their house mortgage free when the housing crises of banks doing illegal mortgages.. even though the banks were "regulated", how many bankers got arrested.....)
regulations are meaningless

all that will help is consumer protections

so for the regulation advocates that will only trade on ICO's that are registered companies. its better to advocate for consumer protections (office locations, customer service and consumer liability insurance and asset coverage insurance (yes these are separate to the priority of regulations because the purpose of regulations is AML.. consumer protections is separate and comes second place priority not first)

as for those that want decentralised unregistered boiler room high risk high returns, well thats like high risk moonshine during the prohibition era or street corner opioids instead of doctors proscribed. they take the risks they take the losses..
but the importance is that registered exchanges should protect consumer FIRST(insurance/office address/hold selves liable if defrauding a customer) and then do the AML policy second..

again just asking for regulations is meaningless and unhelpful

[rommelzkie]

If all of this regulation by the government i think that bitcoin will soar it price again and more likely to break and create a new ATH (All time High). It is very good to buy at his level.

[Snaic]

As I expected, at this stage, the summit of the G20 countries could not solve anything without preliminary preparation of information on the issue of the crypto currency. The fact that they are going to consider the issue of the Crypto-currency after July and intend to recognize it as an asset, in principle, will be quite good. It's good that they are not opposed to the introduction of the crypto currency, and its recognition even in the status of the asset will allow it to be officially used in these countries. The crypto currency will no longer be treated as a fraud and this will already be a good start. Regulation of the crypto currency is inevitably unavoidable.

[HasHe]

2. ICO's where an obvious founding team can be identified, will have their asset treated like a security/company shares.
meaning the teams website would have to disclose a real location address and register itself legitimately to be able to offer "pre-sale"/premined assets
this will kill off all the scammy ico's that say "gimme money now and in 6 months we give you 10billion coins"

i do wish this was actually possible but we are talking about a decentralized system which nobody can control, and that means anybody can still continue creating their shitty ICO and ask for money from gullible people.
we may end up seeing two different sets of ICOs, the registered ones and the unregistered ones but it certainly won't kill off any scams.

Actually the governments are more concerned about regulating cryptos not only to save their people's interests but also not to lose taxing revenues which they enjoyed these much days from the public even if they deposit their money in the banks.Cryptos have evolved nowadays even as a challenge to the governments.At first,they tried to ban it.But when they found it to be practically not possible,they have come forward to regulate cryptos.They also know that only a combined effect of regulation from more countries would help to get positive results from cryptos.

[zhanyiguai261315]

There are countries that don't regulate cryptocurrencies! They believe that the encryption of digital currency regulation has lost its due features!

The G20 first recognised the technological innovation of the underlying cryptocurrency, but they simply acknowledged that digital cryptocurrencies are assets!

[George Khelashvili]

G20 Calls for Crypto Regulation Recommendations By July

After this I think many things will change in crypto world

[warning_btc]

First he say dont need regulate crypto, now he say deadline is july ?

[simaislam]

 believe what is going to happen is this:
1. businesses handling FIAT(legal tender) will be subject to MONEY Service business regulations even if the part of the transaction involves cryptocurruncies.
meaning crypto assets will be treated as a currency asset as oppose to a retail product

2. ICO's where an obvious founding team can be identified, will have their asset treated like a security/company shares.
meaning the teams website would have to disclose a real location address and register itself legitimately to be able to offer "pre-sale"/premined assets
this will kill off all the scammy ico's that say "gimme money now and in 6 months we give you 10billion coins"

solutions to not have regulation headaches
1a. dont sell coins for fiat. instead have exchanges 'price' a coin against bread/bottled water(a cost of living index)
1b. wallet developers should develop wallets that grab fresh UTXO sets of certain main coins. to then use as a lit wallet of multiple coins to then allow coin swaps decentralised away from central website/exchanges

2a. dont offer/do premines
2b. dont do pre-payment/pre-orders
2c. dont set prices before a coin is mined. just release the sourcecode and let the community find its way. like bitcoin 2009-2010 did

then users can freely choose if they want to use centralised(regulated) services for convenience/security/speed.

[ragavancoin]

I think also if G20 calls for crypto regulations in July it's will be good for all crypto traders and investors, than which country are going to adopt the crypto currency that get more benefits thru Blockchain technology.

[gidaahmad]

Something that has been waiting for many people. Because this event will make the crypto world more legally viewed, for G20 countries. Let's pray that things can go well. Because the Regulation is very important.