|
February 26, 2021, 01:15:06 PM |
|
For the state, the use of a crypt, in the sense we are talking about (anonymity, decentralization, inability to influence transactions) is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE. the first two arguments relate to the security of the financial system, and there will be no solution here, the third is at least related to the work of the fiscal service. A simple example: Company A buys from Company B, a product that is priced at $ 100,000. TODAY, let's say it's 2 cue ball. How to pay taxes if it is almost impossible to determine the cost of goods. Why? And here are at least 2 options: - the company bought bitcoin when it was worth $ 3,000. - the company made a direct exchange of ETH for BTC through the liquidity pool, and ETH mined or bought 5 years ago. How are taxes calculated? You can, of course, go according to the invoice value in fiat, but this also does not work out very correctly if the calculation was another asset, which only at the moment was equated to $ 100,000. And there will be so many such nuances that the fiscal services and courts will be inundated with claims and litigation, at least because the state is always interested in collecting more taxes, and business in reducing them.
|