The EU wants transparency on Cryptocurrencies

[gantez]

The EU's idea of digital money purse is hard to really carry out. But we can understand this news. Now the European Union countries are paying more and more attention to digital currency. As we all know, the European Union's economy has been very bad in the past ten years. They may be eager to find new economic engines by using bitcoin as a breakthrough.

your analysis may be true, because bitcoin will be good in the future, so indeed this is a breakthrough to improve the economy in EU, we can imagine if they go early and btc soaring, it really helps economy in that EU country

The EU wants to secure the operation of bitcoin and regulation of digital currency before they start investing as a unit. They want to protect their euro currency.

[kolesozw]

Stumbled upon this article today.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/security/20180404STO00913/plenary-vote-stricter-eu-rules-on-money-laundering-and-terrorism-financing

According to the European Parliament, in order to fight money laundering and terrorism financing, they proposed a new legislation to regulate cryptocurrencies. Quoting from the article:

The new legislation would also require virtual currency exchange platforms and custodian wallet providers to exercise due diligence and end the anonymity associated with such exchanges. “Now we say that platform providers and those who keep bitcoins in their wallet need to know their customers just as banks do. It is quite revolutionary,” explains Sargentini.

In simple words, they actually want wallet providers to require more information from us, similar to banks.

What are your thoughts on this? Could this ever happen?

They were commenting a tighter legislation rules from months.
This will only lead to more and better Decentralized Exchanges (DEX). I'm supporting it somehow. Because now I'm paying Capital Gain Tax anyway.

[vintages]

We needed them to regulate cryptocurrency not make it as something equivalent to a local currency. If they are talking  more about identity verification in exchange for traders, then, it's not a new thing cause we already have it. But for identity verification for every bitcoin or any cryptocurrency spent, then it's unacceptable. It's like wanting  to control every investor and how they spend their coins.

[merchantofzeny]

Definitely just for the taxes, the EU is tanking and would like to squeeze as much money from people. Somebody mentioned about hardware wallets, that would seem to be a harder one to regulate compared to exchanges. Even if they require retailers KYC, since these are physical objects, it's possible you can just say it got "stolen". They also might have a hard time tracking down money in the deep, basically those that were bought f2f and never passed through exchanges.

EU is working hard on privacy, blockchain and cryptocurrencies. With regards to this article, I think they want to track activities mostly for tax purposes. Terrorism is just an excuse: terrorists are much more likely to use USD or EUR than crypto

But of course they'll never say that. They'll never emphasize that remittance companies like Western Union and banks like HSBC has admitted to laundering money to who knows where and only got off with fines, basically slap on the wrist. Crypto is a good scapegoat since not everyone's familiar with it. Fear of the unknown.

[pitiflin]

This would happen, easily. Bittrex did it. Poloniex did it. Soon other exchanges did it.
If EU wants KYC details, they can get it only from the exchanges in EU. They won't be able to get the KYC details from overseas exchanges unless subpoenad. There's a loophole in everything. 

[pvk444]

At the beginning of your post to say correctly. It is contrary to all what was created by bitcoin. To allow the legalization of cryptocurrencies is a betrayal. I think you're wrong. Any regulation of the cryptocurrency from the state will lead to a decline in demand. Moreover, it can kill bitcoin. We can't let that happen.

I see your point, but I strongly disagree. Even if we give up the idea of complete privacy and anonymity in cryptocurrencies and accept some level of state control to combat money laundering and tax evasion, crypocurrencies still provide useful features normal money can't and the decentralized blockchain can be a formidable competitor to normal payment systems.

At the end there needs to be a compromise. States will not allow the growth of the cryptocurrency market and it's ecosystem without having some form of control over it. And as long as that control is the minimal amount of control to prevent illegal activities, I for one am fine with that. This does not lead to the supply of cryptos being managed by central bank, and thus THAT aspect of Satoshis principle still remains in tact.

I have argued on another thread already that without allowing some form of state control / transparency bitcoin and cryptos will never become a major factor in the economy and will remain a fairly marginal toy. States can easily turn off any in- and out-bound flows to and from the crypto ecosystem. Ask yourself the simple question what would happen if it would be impossible to legally move fiat (say USD) into and out of the crypto markets?  Any holdings in crypto currency would be stuck (businesses would refuse to sell goods, as they can't turn cryptos into fiat either) and there would be never any new money flowing into crypto either. Scary? Well, all it takes is for the major national regulators to establish a few simple restrictions for financial institutions to allow any related transactions.

So rather than saying that with regulation bitcoin will die, I believe the opposite to be true, which taht without accepting some regulation, cryptocurrencies cannot survive.

[BennyK]

Stumbled upon this article today.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/security/20180404STO00913/plenary-vote-stricter-eu-rules-on-money-laundering-and-terrorism-financing

According to the European Parliament, in order to fight money laundering and terrorism financing, they proposed a new legislation to regulate cryptocurrencies. Quoting from the article:

The new legislation would also require virtual currency exchange platforms and custodian wallet providers to exercise due diligence and end the anonymity associated with such exchanges. “Now we say that platform providers and those who keep bitcoins in their wallet need to know their customers just as banks do. It is quite revolutionary,” explains Sargentini.

In simple words, they actually want wallet providers to require more information from us, similar to banks.

What are your thoughts on this? Could this ever happen?

The European Union wants to make a smart move on the crypto market. This implementation is to secure the cryptocurrency for them to take hold of it. It's quite unclear how they are going to achieve this KYC on exchanges and for the wallet developers because most of these bodies operate outside their jurisdiction.

[JL421]

Who cares there are already existing exchanges which are not completely regulated and it clear that in the coming future as well there is no way there are going to regulate it , I'm not against the idea of regulations but making it same like banks is the worst idea they should try to make something unique which satisfies us as well as them

[crzy]

This would happen, easily. Bittrex did it. Poloniex did it. Soon other exchanges did it.
If EU wants KYC details, they can get it only from the exchanges in EU. They won't be able to get the KYC details from overseas exchanges unless subpoenad. There's a loophole in everything. 

I still hope that KYC will be used in good things and I know EU can’t control this market since exchanges are beyond their jurisdiction. Maybe EU wants to regulate cryptocurrency that will benefit them in the long run.

[Happiest]

If this happens,  cryptocurrency will loss more investors. Many investors who invested in this digital currency are into it because of the features of no or less identity leakage. Many people respect and love their privacy,  which is the reason why most aren't interested in credit cards or trading cryptocurrency with exchanges because of KYC. If identify verification is mandated in every time one wants to spend his/her coin, then many people will abandon cryptocurrency.

[Indrawan77]

Wow the rules really strict, and we all need to submit documents to be able to used crypto, in the end crypto will be like fiat, nothing special anymore, this could drive away the investors, buy this is a logical decision, and the government is going to used money laundering reason to force the regulation, after the documents submission the next things will be taxing crypto users

[pvk444]

The financing of money laundering and terrorism is a huge problem all over the world, we know that but i think the demands of the European Parliament are not related to these issues, they are just excuses. They want our information because they want to manage our money, it's their job.

Assuming these regulations would be implemented, how would they "manage our money"?

[Ultegra134]

The financing of money laundering and terrorism is a huge problem all over the world, we know that but i think the demands of the European Parliament are not related to these issues, they are just excuses. They want our information because they want to manage our money, it's their job.

Assuming these regulations would be implemented, how would they "manage our money"?

I actually find really hard to even pass these regulations due to the nature of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. It's almost impossible to track our every move while at the same time there are several ways to store your funds offline, supposing the governments could actually track online storage/wallets. I don't doubt that something won't happen towards the regulation of crypto, buy I do doubt its effectivity.

[pvk444]

The financing of money laundering and terrorism is a huge problem all over the world, we know that but i think the demands of the European Parliament are not related to these issues, they are just excuses. They want our information because they want to manage our money, it's their job.

Assuming these regulations would be implemented, how would they "manage our money"?

I actually find really hard to even pass these regulations due to the nature of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. It's almost impossible to track our every move while at the same time there are several ways to store your funds offline, supposing the governments could actually track online storage/wallets. I don't doubt that something won't happen towards the regulation of crypto, buy I do doubt its effectivity.

Not that hard at all. Regulator just has to make sure that no money flows into or out of cryptocurrencies without the transparency of transactions.

They don't need to track your movements directly. If there is, however, no way to take money out of cryptocurrency without transparency, such transparency will be enforced indirectly.

Assume you are a business. You only sell against bitcoin, but the bills (eg electricity, web hosting, wages, taxes etc) are in USD, so you will need to exchange the btc income for usd and move that usd to your bank account to pay the bills. The regulator can force banks  not to accept any usd tranfers from any cryptoexchange without proof of providence.

[magneto]

Not surprising that they are trying to do this, legislations on exchange regulation is already pretty draconian, and they are just trying to do the same on wallets.

Bitcoin itself is completely transparent, much more transparent than the fiat banking system. But obviously, people on the bitcoin network cannot be identified by anything other than an address, which can be created infinitely.

Services such as exchanges and hosted wallets can definitely track their customers. However, it's impossible for them to conduct any sort of KYC/AML on you if you hold your private keys and you sign your own transactions, since the bitcoin network itself does not require KYC. All in all, avoid hosted wallets and exchanges as much as possible for storing funds.

[jeronimosuykens]

The financing of money laundering and terrorism is a huge problem all over the world, we know that but i think the demands of the European Parliament are not related to these issues, they are just excuses. They want our information because they want to manage our money, it's their job.

Assuming these regulations would be implemented, how would they "manage our money"?

I see this problem in two different directions.
First, if there are legal regulations on cryptocurrency, this market will be secured and investors will be more secure when entering the market, which will make the market grow stronger.
Second, if managed, the cryptocurrency and confidentiality will no longer exist because the government will control the transaction, which will upset the unwilling investors.

[hao2067755834]

This is certainly going to happen, and there is a lot of terrorism in Europe, and they are likely to be able to move money through digital encryption.

The European Union wants to monitor digital encryption to prevent criminal activity.

[bamboylee]

Is there a way they could implement kyc on wallets? If the wallets are not based on EU then they will not comply with that regulation.

KYC on exchanges should be because there are lots of movements of money in there. But KYC on wallets os an overkill.

[4abrec]

Stumbled upon this article today.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/security/20180404STO00913/plenary-vote-stricter-eu-rules-on-money-laundering-and-terrorism-financing

According to the European Parliament, in order to fight money laundering and terrorism financing, they proposed a new legislation to regulate cryptocurrencies. Quoting from the article:

The new legislation would also require virtual currency exchange platforms and custodian wallet providers to exercise due diligence and end the anonymity associated with such exchanges. “Now we say that platform providers and those who keep bitcoins in their wallet need to know their customers just as banks do. It is quite revolutionary,” explains Sargentini.

In simple words, they actually want wallet providers to require more information from us, similar to banks.

What are your thoughts on this? Could this ever happen?

This is a very correct government action! I believe that transparency should be, but within the reasonable, that is not everyone needs to know about my income.

[shams]

I have listened to this news and I think this is a good step for the county as they are making bitcoin legal and asking people to provide more information to them about their bitcoin and all I think it’s a good step to avoid money laundering.