BitPay no longer serving banned countries

[gentlemand]

That could be the reason, but I would have thought being based in the EU (and not using the US banking system) would be enough to be unaffected by US sanctions. Perhaps they have investors based in the US, or EU sanctions against Iran are strong enough to prevent them from servicing people from that country.

Having one single American customer is enough to get 1000 Hellfire missiles raining down on your ass. Doesn't matter if you're based elsewhere. The world will be a better place when US brutality is finally shut down.

[PrimeNumber7]

I could not find anything for Bangladesh, but the rest of the countries appear to have banned bitcoin/cryptocurrencies in one way or another.
Indonesia has banned payment gateways from accepting bitcoin according to the above wiki article.

Yes but Localbitcoins doesn't need to make use of the legacy financial system of these countries to serve users there, they could easily ignore the law and let people transact at their own risk.

I am not aware of Localbitcoins banning trading in any country except for Iran, which I believe is most probably due to sanctions against the Iran government.

It is my understanding it is BitPay (a payment processor that helps businesses accept bitcoin and convert it into local fiat) has banned using their service in the countries referenced in the OP. The article OmegaStarScream referenced actually explains the reason why they banned using their service from certain countries:

BitPay also complies with local regulations which ban cryptocurrency. If your country has banned bitcoin or cryptocurrency use in general, we cannot offer our services to your business or customers.

Currently, BitPay cannot service merchants or users that are based in the following countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Ecuador, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco, Nepal, and Vietnam.

The article also says they cannot do business with any person or business based in a country sanctioned on the OFAC list. BitPay should also be checking the OFAC list against specific individuals/businesses they are doing business with, even if not based out of a banned country; they might do this even if they don't specifically say they do in the article.

[buwaytress]

Damn, that's tough news. I'm not sure whether to feel glad I'm not on that list, though several of those actually are really near me. Feels rather arbitrary though, to include an innocent like say, Nepal, and yet not the usual suspects on the axis of evil (heh) like DPRK or Rep of Iran.

Just another reason to really not be happy with Bitpay, but as we're stuck with them for now until merchants wisen up and get better payment processors, guess we just got to bite down on the bit.

[LeGaulois]

Yes but Localbitcoins doesn't need to make use of the legacy financial system of these countries to serve users there, they could easily ignore the law and let people transact at their own risk.

Yeah, Localbitcoins is the confusing one, having recently blocked users from Iran.  Would it be something to do with them technically qualifying as an escrow for all the trades there?  It wouldn't surprise me if part of the US sanctions against Iran included preventing companies from offering escrow services to Iranian residents.

I don't think so. If we think out of the box and out of the crypto industry, it would mean there are other entities restricted in a similar way. I am referring to the banks and to the payments services (prepaid account, prepaid card, EMIs,..). I don't remember to read about a situation like this.

It could be considered ironic knowing there are surely either a bank, a Mutual Fund Yield, a firm, or whatever from the US operating there.
And the fact there is a good chance that Iran, as an Oil Exporter, holds part of the American debt (with others Oils Exporters)

As the adage says: "Follow the Money"

It's the same thing when it's about the fight with North Korea (for its rare-earth metal (maybe the only country worldwide with REM, 'needed for all kind of technologies)) and with China (for idk, economic stuff, or because China is the 2nd country holding the US debt.)

[figmentofmyass]

Yeah, Localbitcoins is the confusing one, having recently blocked users from Iran.  Would it be something to do with them technically qualifying as an escrow for all the trades there?  It wouldn't surprise me if part of the US sanctions against Iran included preventing companies from offering escrow services to Iranian residents.

That could be the reason, but I would have thought being based in the EU (and not using the US banking system) would be enough to be unaffected by US sanctions. Perhaps they have investors based in the US, or EU sanctions against Iran are strong enough to prevent them from servicing people from that country.

from a PR standpoint, i'm fairly sure localbitcoins does not want to be on a USA sanctions list, regardless of whether it directly affects their cash flow. that would be a PR nightmare. so if that's where the pressure is coming from, i believe they would fall in line immediately.

i wouldn't be surprised either, considering the threat of secondary sanctions the OFAC made for anyone dealing with designated iranians, whether in bitcoin or fiat currency.

as far as EU sanctions go, some still remain in force, although i'm not sure which ones: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/iran/

[PrimeNumber7]

from a PR standpoint, i'm fairly sure localbitcoins does not want to be on a USA sanctions list, regardless of whether it directly affects their cash flow. that would be a PR nightmare. so if that's where the pressure is coming from, i believe they would fall in line immediately.

Local Bitcoins has many employees located in the US and in jurisdictions the US can exert pressure over. If a company such as Local Bitcoins were to help a company evade sanctions, it would be sanctioned, and would be unable to use the banking system, including to pay for hosting, payroll and the like. The US could also sanction its employees, who would be unable to use any bank.

In short, PR is the last thing local bitcoins would be worried about if it was on the OFAC sanctions list, or was otherwise sanctioned by the US. It would fail almost immediately.

[Kavelj22]

Some of those countries are near to me and I know many users who will not be happy hearing the news.
Am not a bitpay user, but I used to pay bitpay invoices when converting my BTC to Neteller/Skrill or make deposit in my NameShip account. If am a citizen of one of the mentioned countries, does this mean that i will not anymore be able to pay those invoices or use a Bitpay wallet?

[OmegaStarScream]

Some of those countries are near to me and I know many users who will not be happy hearing the news.
Am not a bitpay user, but I used to pay bitpay invoices when converting my BTC to Neteller/Skrill or make deposit in my NameShip account. If am a citizen of one of the mentioned country, does this mean that will not anymore able to pay those invoices or have a Bitpay wallet?

I'm not entirely sure about Bitpay wallet but maybe Copay would still be functional as it's open source. And yes, that means that you won't be able to pay invoices anymore, at least, not without changing your IP address using a VPN.

Big services like Skrill or Neteller probably did or will remove BTC as a payment method for depositing in the mentioned countries and in that case, a VPN won't be much help.

[figmentofmyass]

from a PR standpoint, i'm fairly sure localbitcoins does not want to be on a USA sanctions list, regardless of whether it directly affects their cash flow. that would be a PR nightmare. so if that's where the pressure is coming from, i believe they would fall in line immediately.

Local Bitcoins has many employees located in the US and in jurisdictions the US can exert pressure over. If a company such as Local Bitcoins were to help a company evade sanctions, it would be sanctioned, and would be unable to use the banking system, including to pay for hosting, payroll and the like. The US could also sanction its employees, who would be unable to use any bank.

In short, PR is the last thing local bitcoins would be worried about if it was on the OFAC sanctions list, or was otherwise sanctioned by the US. It would fail almost immediately.

lol, you think anyone would use localbitcoins anymore if the USA designated them as a sanctioned entity? they would be a complete pariah. it would be an immediate death sentence for their brand. the banking system and paying overheads are an afterthought since sanctions would immediately kill all customer demand for localbitcoin's services. like i said, PR nightmare, one which would never be recovered from.

you ignored the point btw. i said regardless of whether it directly affects their cash flow. i wasn't saying sanctions wouldn't affect them. at all.

[malevolent]

Local Bitcoins has many employees located in the US and in jurisdictions the US can exert pressure over. If a company such as Local Bitcoins were to help a company evade sanctions, it would be sanctioned, and would be unable to use the banking system, including to pay for hosting, payroll and the like. The US could also sanction its employees, who would be unable to use any bank.
In short, PR is the last thing local bitcoins would be worried about if it was on the OFAC sanctions list, or was otherwise sanctioned by the US. It would fail almost immediately.

LBC has any key employees outside Finland? Last time I checked only some of their customer support employees were located abroad, and only in poorer countries.

They could just stick with smaller EU hosting companies without US presence.

lol, you think anyone would use localbitcoins anymore if the USA designated them as a sanctioned entity? they would be a complete pariah. it would be an immediate death sentence for their brand. the banking system and paying overheads are an afterthought since sanctions would immediately kill all customer demand for localbitcoin's services. like i said, PR nightmare, one which would never be recovered from.

People outside the US would still use it, maybe even more gladly so. When they got blocked in Russia they posted instructions on how to evade the blockage: https://localbitcoins.com/blog/roskomnadzor-bans-localbitcoins-in-russia/

If they really wanted to they'd come up with something.

Meanwhile UK-based hodlhodl.com, even if they're irrelevant, decided to take the initiative and welcome Iranians with open arms:

https://medium.com/@hodlhodl/hodl-hodls-official-statement-for-iranian-traders-9429603079c

[PrimeNumber7]

Local Bitcoins has many employees located in the US and in jurisdictions the US can exert pressure over. If a company such as Local Bitcoins were to help a company evade sanctions, it would be sanctioned, and would be unable to use the banking system, including to pay for hosting, payroll and the like. The US could also sanction its employees, who would be unable to use any bank.
In short, PR is the last thing local bitcoins would be worried about if it was on the OFAC sanctions list, or was otherwise sanctioned by the US. It would fail almost immediately.

LBC has any key employees outside Finland? Last time I checked only some of their customer support employees were located abroad, and only in poorer countries.

According to linkedin, they have four employees in the US, one is a "cryptocurrency trader" (I would not count this), one is a "Project Manager" and I cannot see the job titles of the other two. Job titles and companies are self reported on Linkedin, so this may not be reliable, but I don't see why someone would pretend to be a project manager at LocalBitcoins.

They also have an opening for a Russian speaking customer support agent in mexico.