Bitcoin ATM Operators in Nevada Requires License to Operate

[Mantas_IUNGO]

US State of Nevada Financial Institutions Division has recently issued a statement concerning the need for the protection of the general interest in view of the increasing adoption of blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies.

The regulator's statement implies that even Bitcoin ATM operators are required to get their licenses before they can legally operate.

According to the NFID,

"Any entity that facilitates the transmission of or holds fiat or digital currency by way of brick-and-mortar,
kiosk, mobile, internet or any other means, should contact the NFID to request a licensure determination."

[1714933065]

1714933065

[1714933065]

1714933065

[1714933065]

1714933065

[btc_angela]

So what do you expect? Today we have a lot of regulations coming around and it could do good things for the whole crypto sphere per se. I think there has been discussions about this one years ago if ATM really requires licenses before it can operate. But for me its pretty obvious, its a business so certainly a license issues by the state is needed and it could set a precedent for other state to follow this rule as well, win-win situation.

[oaz7t]

Sounds pretty valid circular by NFID. I mean this will at least ensure that ATM those are being installed are not forged and you can do the transactions with full confidence. That will be ensured by NFID authority before issuing any certificate to them.

[Harlot]

Isn't this obvious? I mean a business for it to be fully operational legally they still need to undergo some kind of licensing or at least acquired a husiness permit to operate. Businesses don't come out like mushrooms where a person with a capital can just start right away we have laws in check for them to run legally and also be monitored woth their taxes which in this case also the buyers since they are also buying assets for the said Bitcoin atms. I don't even know why they have news about it, are there any Bitcoin atms running ilegally in Nevada lately?

[goinmerry]

The regulator's statement implies that even Bitcoin ATM operators are required to get their licenses before they can legally operate.

Of course, it's a business. There is no exception to that even for Bitcoin operators. They need to be registered and follow the regulations.

Bitcoin ATM involves money. No way the government will just allow to install it somewhere without knowledge. Aside from it's useful, it can be used too illegally. For those who are against here, they are not looking on a big picture and will just stand to their beliefs that bitcoin should never be regulated.

[bryant.coleman]

No surprise there. Most of the countries have license requirements for similar operations. The big question is whether this license procurement is a time taking process, or an easy one. I don't think that there is too much red tape and bureaucracy in the United States and therefore this should not be a concern for the ATM operators. This can be mutually beneficial as well. If no license is required, then there is a good chance that scammers can enter in to this field as well. In general I am against regularization, but in some cases for the safety of the customers regularization needs to be implemented. And cryptocurrency ATM is one of the fields where I think regularization is needed quite badly.

[eaLiTy]

In general I am against regularization, but in some cases for the safety of the customers regularization needs to be implemented. And cryptocurrency ATM is one of the fields where I think regularization is needed quite badly.

Everyone will be on the same page when it comes regulations being implemented to stifle the growth, no one really likes regulation but with everything there are always two side, the regulation is required to protect the end user as you do not need scammers lurking around trying to find victims and we are less than ten years old and we have already seen billions of dollars stolen. But cryptocurrency ATM is a physical machine and most of them i know are installed in stores, it is an instant procedure and i never heard any complaints so far and why do you think regulation is need badly  .

[sheenshane]

You should attach links for further references.
Here: https://cointelegraph.com/news/nevada-regulators-say-bitcoin-atms-will-need-license-to-operate
         https://www.nevadacurrent.com/2019/08/28/nevada-targets-unlicensed-cryptocurrency-atms/

Having ATM machines for bitcoin is a part of a business, so it is obvious that they will require to comply with licenses for their business.
It is better to require licenses than they are going to ban as I read before, Bitcoin ATMs machines need to be banned since they are aiding money laundering. So, I will not surprise this news and let's accept the fact that it is a part of a business that must have license for better security on us(as a user).

[Kakmakr]

This will only be bad if the Fiat ATM operators does not require any license, but I think it is applicable to any operation that handles Fiat transmission. Bitcoin to Bitcoin transactions cannot be regulated, because there are no Fiat currencies involved and how do you regulate something that cannot be controlled or monitored? < How will they know if I send bitcoins from my Ledger to a Paper wallet > 

It gets complicated when Fiat gets involved, because Fiat is very regulated and controlled by third parties like Banks. These third parties have loads of checks and balances and customers have to adhere to strict KYC/AML regulations. 

[hugeblack]

It is an exchange regulation relationship  (between cash and cryptocurrencies,) so it is necessary to have a license, especially with the growing interest in cryptocurrencies.

This indicates the development of crypto industry in that state, which led to the emergence of such commercial activities and therefore the need for some licenses to continue.

There are no restrictions on currencies and the news is not focused on cryptos but rather the method of conversion.

[RealMalatesta]

Isn't this obvious? I mean a business for it to be fully operational legally they still need to undergo some kind of licensing or at least acquired a husiness permit to operate. Businesses don't come out like mushrooms where a person with a capital can just start right away we have laws in check for them to run legally and also be monitored woth their taxes which in this case also the buyers since they are also buying assets for the said Bitcoin atms. I don't even know why they have news about it, are there any Bitcoin atms running ilegally in Nevada lately?

If they don’t license companies even If they are the owner of the company, people would operate the company in a lawless manner, and one of the reason why they do register companies is for taxing purpose.

If they don't license them, there is no way that they will be able to tax the company, and if you really see the purpose of this  licensing, it is for taxing, and you already know the stand of government as regards cryptocurrency, it is better that the license the atm operator now, because this is still part of this regulation that we are talking of , before any scammer will just create a company now for the same purpose and would have scammed people  before they even know that the atm operator is not the real one, so you see why we have to be licensed.

[dunfida]

Put some link source on next time for your thread not to be deleted by mods or would be pointed out by plagiarizing
https://cointelegraph.com/news/nevada-regulators-say-bitcoin-atms-will-need-license-to-operate

Majority of countries will look on requiring btc atm owners to comply with the law if they do tend to built up business which i do believe
that most btc atms nowadays do already follow this.

[el kaka22]

It doesn't sound too bad, I mean every business has to get some licenses, for example a cafe has to get license for being clean, I know it sounds like given right now but at the time when it was introduced people probably saw it as useless because you know which places are actually clean (the high end places for example) and you all know how "clean" some other horrible places are as well.

So all in all, I think getting a license is not a bad deal, they won't ask for too much stuff, if you are abiding the law it would be like couple days of waiting followed by getting some papers and getting them signed by some people and so forth, typical stuff that doesn't take too long and you would be able to get one without a problem, everyone should be following the laws.

[figmentofmyass]

It doesn't sound too bad, I mean every business has to get some licenses, for example a cafe has to get license for being clean, I know it sounds like given right now but at the time when it was introduced people probably saw it as useless because you know which places are actually clean (the high end places for example) and you all know how "clean" some other horrible places are as well.

So all in all, I think getting a license is not a bad deal, they won't ask for too much stuff, if you are abiding the law it would be like couple days of waiting followed by getting some papers and getting them signed by some people and so forth, typical stuff that doesn't take too long and you would be able to get one without a problem, everyone should be following the laws.

a money transmitter license is a much bigger barrier to entry than a permit to run a cafe. nevada's fees and bonding requirements aren't as bad as some states, but they're nothing to sneeze at either. this is a breakdown of the costs:

$375 application fee
$300 fee to commissioner
$300 annual assessment for examination costs

Bonding requirements for money transmitters in the state of Nevada include a $10,000 surety bond plus an additional $5,000 bond for each location, not amounting to more than $250,000.

[Baofeng]

Locally, one bank here installed a crypto ATM. But before they can installed a fully operated machine, they have to undergo and follow regulations, i.e. here, the our central banks reminded that operators of crypto ATM's are considered to be "virtual currency exchanges', and as such as covered by circular and memorandum.

So I guess it's obvious that ATM operators are going to be subjected to laws that pertains to operating a crypto ATM machine wherever you are. And if you don't comply, you will be a target:

https://www.nevadacurrent.com/2019/08/28/nevada-targets-unlicensed-cryptocurrency-atms/

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/80th2019/Bills/SB/SB195.pdf

[jseverson]

But cryptocurrency ATM is a physical machine and most of them i know are installed in stores, it is an instant procedure and i never heard any complaints so far and why do you think regulation is need badly  .

It's not that they're needed, authorities are just implementing already-existing laws. Bitcoin ATMs were recently ruled to be "an entity that facilitates the transmission of or holds fiat or digital currency by way of brick-and-mortar, kiosk, mobile, internet or any other means", and thus will have to comply to regulatory measures. Regular ATMs, and even money transmitters that have nothing to do with cryptocurrency are subject to the same regulation.

But yeah, they're apparently only applying this to Bitcoin ATMs because they failed to pass specific legislature for their licensing, according to this article. Pretty dirty move if true.

[Finestream]

Every business nowadays requires license by the government before it can start to operate.
Same thing is happening here, they just say for protection purposes but the real purpose is to collect tax on the business operators.

They don't have a choice but to get a license, as long as the procedure is not hard to follow, then I think it's still justifiable.
The fact that the government already allows this business, it means they are supporting the technology and hopefully this will help to gain adoption.

[Indamuck]

Anything in America that even deals slightly with money needs some type of license or certification.  You even need a license to braid someone's hair legally.  They gatekeep poor people out from having their own businesses by making pricey certificates and licenses.

[BitHodler]

So I guess it's obvious that ATM operators are going to be subjected to laws that pertains to operating a crypto ATM machine wherever you are. And if you don't comply, you will be a target:

It's obvious to people with some understanding of how things work legally, but not to the average person who's believe is that crypto isn't a financial instrument similar to fiat in that regard.

I still get people locally to ask me why this or that is necessary when they sign up to an exchange. People first have to understand what crypto actually is in order to then understand that crypto businesses are in fact financial institutions.

The days where you can use an exchange or an ATM freely without limits are nearly over. The first step is lowering the amounts you can withdraw, where the next step is full KYC verification or nothing.

[vintages]

It's still part of the regulation process a lot of us have been expecting.
It may seems tedious or controlling but looking at it from another angle, it is more like the only legal way it will work with scam prevention.
And as time goes on, you should expect more of it to come. That's the price we pay for having and using Bitcoin as a currency like every other fiat.