I predict stricter regulations for bitcoin and the cryptospace for 2021-2024

[squatter]

Though, more regulations mean less users. Hope that it will not happen like i think

It's actually the opposite. People would flock Bitcoin because of this regulations. The fact that they are going to make a stricter regulations means they are actually acknowledging Bitcoin and that's a terrific news to all.

Indeed. Gensler (Biden's nominee for SEC chair) has actually pitched that himself -- that Bitcoin being fully regulated by the CFTC or SEC will trigger mainstream adoption.

"Regulation isn't so bad. It'll make you rich." That's supposed to make this bitter pill easier to swallow.

[Wawa2013]

With the Bitcoin price having managed to rise above $ 40k, this is sure to make the government even more stringent in making regulations regarding
Bitcoin and the crypto space. Because the government does not want Bitcoin to threaten fiat and the banking system, which has long been one of
the ways for the government to get profit, and also the banking system can manage the finances of its citizens.

But I don't think this is a threat, because Bitcoin users always have a way to always be able to make transactions. Because it is not new for
the government to make strict regulations related to Bitcoin, the government has done this several times. Even some government countries have
banned Bitcoin, but this has not stopped their residents from using Bitcoin.

[bbc.reporter]

Though, more regulations mean less users. Hope that it will not happen like i think

It's actually the opposite. People would flock Bitcoin because of this regulations. The fact that they are going to make a stricter regulations means they are actually acknowledging Bitcoin and that's a terrific news to all. Government acknowledging Bitcoin is a go signal to consider for people who thinks Bitcoin as something bad.

Hehehe it would be not as uncomplicated as that, I reckon. Also, if you are in bitcoin only to get rich quick, this is good for people like you. However, there are people who got in the cryptospace who are in for something else. This is why I reckon some people in the bitcoin community are going somewhere else.

[pooya87]

Yes,but more regulations over the centralized exchanges means that decentralized exchanges will have to be regulated as well,or declared illegal.The government officials aren't that stupid.They know that imposing more regulations would mean more people moving into non-regulated crypto exchange platforms,so the officials will have to find a way to regulate the DEX marketplaces.
KYC policies like ID verification might not be sufficient for the "big government" anymore.
Be ready for mandatory address verification.

Except that they can't do that.
When bitcoin itself is not illegal, when fiat is not illegal, when swapping bitcoin for fiat and vice versa is not illegal, the government can not make some of the methods used for doing this exchange illegal either. It's like saying yard-sales are illegal!
Keep in mind that regulations aren't the problem, KYC exists everywhere else and a centralized bitcoin exchange should be no different. Stupid regulations are the problem that will definitely push people away.

[Lorence.xD]

With the Bitcoin price having managed to rise above $ 40k, this is sure to make the government even more stringent in making regulations regarding
Bitcoin and the crypto space. Because the government does not want Bitcoin to threaten fiat and the banking system, which has long been one of
the ways for the government to get profit, and also the banking system can manage the finances of its citizens.

It is not the prices that makes this regulations in motion. For me, it is the entry of institutional investors in the bitcoin market, the price is just a secondary. If you have control over this institutional investors then you will have the power to make waves even if the government does not own a bitcoin, this regulations will be the reason that some institutional investors will go to the route of corruption called lobbying. Even if the case that bitcoin threatens banking system, I think that their days are numbered because more and more people every day are learning the dark side of our archaic financial system.

But I don't think this is a threat, because Bitcoin users always have a way to always be able to make transactions. Because it is not new for
the government to make strict regulations related to Bitcoin, the government has done this several times. Even some government countries have
banned Bitcoin, but this has not stopped their residents from using Bitcoin.

The real threat for bitcoin which I already mentioned is lobbying. The problem with those governments that banned bitcoin outright is that it will put the people who use it in a stranglehold that will only make them try to break free while those who will put a regulation will be able to control the users in a subtle manner.

[irixo10]

Come to think of it, how much do they really want to regulate Bitcoin or are they trying to say that, they are aware of the potential of Bitcoin but trying to play around it to suit them better, hence the regulation, I mean you can't regulate what you don't acknowledge, right?. Also, on the other hand, I think all these regulations are just to limit the usage of cryptocurrencies in order to make their fiat currency more powerful, because the more Bitcoin grows, the more it attracts huge attention, the more it keeps being on their radar, but I don't think there is much to worry since decentralization is the key here. Also, talking about regulations and freedom this might compel developers to go strictly on decentralized solutions or services such that the true idea the crypto space was created for will be on full force, because the more people knows they can do what they want without bothering about the government the more they will embrace Bitcoin and other decentralized services; we might be seeing more from decentralized exchanges etc.

[amishmanish]

If the wall street and American millionaires have so much stake in bitcoin that the Govt is potentially afraid of it then it can only mean one thing: The wealth has soared to such a extent that Govt is not comfortable with the "cut" it got from all that appreciation.

Its hard to know how much of the BTC price is affected by rich OGs in America or the bankers who have been buying it since 2013-14. The most that the Govt can probably do is to ask people to put into public their holdings or risk investigations. This will lead to a bit of selling and a few Americans applying for Visas.  This can also lead to a bit of dip, which I feel is good for the rest of the world and for me.

What else can be done to regulate it? Would they go to the extent of price regulation or holding regulation? What exactly should the community be afraid of when we talk about "regulation"?

[figmentofmyass]

The most that the Govt can probably do is to ask people to put into public their holdings or risk investigations.

is that not terrifying? we aren't required to declare our personal gold holdings, or the stocks we own (at least if they are held in the USA). forcing people to declare their holdings is one step away from legally confiscating them...

What else can be done to regulate it? Would they go to the extent of price regulation or holding regulation? What exactly should the community be afraid of when we talk about "regulation"?

money transmission and tax stuff. a lot of people are totally disregarding tax laws and the IRS knows it. that's what all the AML regulation is really about IMO---forcing exchanges to KYC so they can do proper tax investigations.

once stuff like the FATF travel rule is widely enforced and all the major exchanges are doing tax reporting, the fun and games are over.

[bbc.reporter]

Yes,but more regulations over the centralized exchanges means that decentralized exchanges will have to be regulated as well,or declared illegal.The government officials aren't that stupid.They know that imposing more regulations would mean more people moving into non-regulated crypto exchange platforms,so the officials will have to find a way to regulate the DEX marketplaces.
KYC policies like ID verification might not be sufficient for the "big government" anymore.
Be ready for mandatory address verification.

Except that they can't do that.
When bitcoin itself is not illegal, when fiat is not illegal, when swapping bitcoin for fiat and vice versa is not illegal, the government can not make some of the methods used for doing this exchange illegal either. It's like saying yard-sales are illegal!
Keep in mind that regulations aren't the problem, KYC exists everywhere else and a centralized bitcoin exchange should be no different. Stupid regulations are the problem that will definitely push people away.

Agreed, and it appears that Janet Yellen, the future treasury secretary of the United States will push for stupid regulations to curtail the use of cryptocoins. There are news articles already implying she will support taxation of unrealized gains. Who would want to hold bitcoin and other cryptocoins with a law like that?

[amishmanish]

The most that the Govt can probably do is to ask people to put into public their holdings or risk investigations.

is that not terrifying? we aren't required to declare our personal gold holdings, or the stocks we own (at least if they are held in the USA). forcing people to declare their holdings is one step away from legally confiscating them...

I wrote that before I watched "Dirty Money" just last night on Netflix. There's an episode where Jared Kushner's company forces one of their tenants into a litigation and the court "garnishes" the bank account of the single mother of three to pay the illegal fine. With that viewpoint, I can see how it is terrifying to know that none of your money will ever be free from Govt intervention. It also made me better understand why US citizens are so adamant about keeping Bitcoin holdings private. It is an insurance from Govt tyranny. The rest of the world doesn't experience this at the levels of working class people as much as developed world. This is the reason that people like us, at times, forget to appreciate the privacy of Bitcoin.

Going back to my original point though, What i meant is that as the Govt comes to realize that US citizens hold a lot of value, they will do everything in their power to get their hands on it. If the price of bitcoin gets to a million, Will it let it go unchallenged that a set of people have so much power?? Bitcoin holdings are enormously concentrated right now. If this "rich-list" is correct, 62% of all coins are in wallets with >100 BTC belonging to some 16000 addresses (including Satoshi's million).

Is that sustainable without organized and motivated actions from such OG hodlers themselves? Is that healthy for the society??

What else can be done to regulate it? Would they go to the extent of price regulation or holding regulation? What exactly should the community be afraid of when we talk about "regulation"?

money transmission and tax stuff. a lot of people are totally disregarding tax laws and the IRS knows it. that's what all the AML regulation is really about IMO---forcing exchanges to KYC so they can do proper tax investigations.

once stuff like the FATF travel rule is widely enforced and all the major exchanges are doing tax reporting, the fun and games are over.

I guess that this means people will need to be ready to organize some sort of legal defense to justify their right to privacy AND to hold Bitcoin as Bitcoin because it is not Government issued money. It is just code that they choose to value. Like a valuable piece of art. Though, that too is taxable if you auction it off for millions. Now i see that it is going to be difficult.

Do people have a plan??

[figmentofmyass]

Going back to my original point though, What i meant is that as the Govt comes to realize that US citizens hold a lot of value, they will do everything in their power to get their hands on it. If the price of bitcoin gets to a million, Will it let it go unchallenged that a set of people have so much power?? Bitcoin holdings are enormously concentrated right now. If this "rich-list" is correct, 62% of all coins are in wallets with >100 BTC belonging to some 16000 addresses (including Satoshi's million).

Is that sustainable without organized and motivated actions from such OG hodlers themselves? Is that healthy for the society??

the concentration of wealth in society is already quite perverse. i don't think bitcoin will change that, although i do think bitcoin's concentration of wealth will continue dropping over time as early adopters distribute their coins to an exponentially larger number of late adopters.

money transmission and tax stuff. a lot of people are totally disregarding tax laws and the IRS knows it. that's what all the AML regulation is really about IMO---forcing exchanges to KYC so they can do proper tax investigations.

once stuff like the FATF travel rule is widely enforced and all the major exchanges are doing tax reporting, the fun and games are over.

I guess that this means people will need to be ready to organize some sort of legal defense to justify their right to privacy AND to hold Bitcoin as Bitcoin because it is not Government issued money. It is just code that they choose to value. Like a valuable piece of art. Though, that too is taxable if you auction it off for millions. Now i see that it is going to be difficult.

Do people have a plan??

at this point, my top priority is not being low hanging fruit. there is a lot of easy pickings out there.

i've been trying to structure my tax situation in an ideal way and also leave some emergency coins stashed away off the books. unfortunately, things move so fast in bitcoin land that i haven't quite reached all my goals in those departments.

[0t3p0t]

That is an excellent news.

The more regulation governments push on the cryptocurrency market and the more strict they are, the more developers are going to work on decentralized solutions for people to use. Basically it speeds up the process and it pushes a lot more people towards these alternative solutions which means instead of taking years for something like a DEX or a Decentralized Marketplace, etc to complete they could take 6 months.

Agree. That is what strengthens the weakness in any field not just in crypto space. If there is a bug there will always be a new update for it to get fixed same with decentralization and the intervention of government on Bitcoin sad to say regulations will only work on local exchanges.

[SaShiRaJaVu]

Agreed, and it appears that Janet Yellen, the future treasury secretary of the United States will push for stupid regulations to curtail the use of cryptocoins. There are news articles already implying she will support taxation of unrealized gains. Who would want to hold bitcoin and other cryptocoins with a law like that?

I have seen this discussion going on in the social media and you never know if they impose heavy tax on the gains from cryptocurrency thereby forcing the financial institutions to dump the coins in the market. Usually when we hear these kind of news the market goes down drastically but we have seen a correction today while this statement was made a few days earlier.

Even in India there were reports that the government is planning to implement stupid regulations by levying heavy tax on bitcoin trading. The next couple of years is crucial for the market as we might see major changes in the market.

[ilhamsugihamin]

If I don't really care about the rules in the US because I'm also not an American,
But if the US gives some new rules and they are very strict, of course it is very dangerous for all of us because if the new rules are given too strict in the crypto world and make enthusiasts go to eat people in the crypto world will be few and I hope that will not happen.

[bbc.reporter]

@ilhamsugihamin. You have missed the whole point on why this might have a bad outcome. The cryptospace will become fragmented similar to how the financial system is fragmented instead of being one whole ecosystem for payments and finance for users without the banks.

[Sithara007]

Coindesk is saying that the correction from $42,000 to $32,000 was caused by the double spent event reported by BitMEX. But from the pattern I saw, it more closely corresponds to the reaction towards the statement from Janet Yellen. A few days back, she made a statement hinting that measures would be taken to outlaw the trading and transfer of Bitcoin. A number of institutional investors took a serious note of this statement.

[7788bitcoin]

Coindesk is saying that the correction from $42,000 to $32,000 was caused by the double spent event reported by BitMEX. But from the pattern I saw, it more closely corresponds to the reaction towards the statement from Janet Yellen. A few days back, she made a statement hinting that measures would be taken to outlaw the trading and transfer of Bitcoin. A number of institutional investors took a serious note of this statement.

The BitMeX blunder is exposed by now, i cannot understand their research team coming out with serious allegations about the network without understanding the basics, they have no idea about RBF and so is the reason they came up with this verdict and they exposed their expertise  .
The statement by Janet Yellen is series as they have the power to implement the regulation they want.

[CarnagexD]

Not so sure about that, bitcoin may get imposed on of stricter rules and regulations but that wouldn't stop it from prevailing as the people's very own currency. Then again, since US is a strong country with a majority of investors and supporters being Americans, this will definitely put bitcoin to a very bad spot.

[Sebas.tian]

The truth is: there will be more decentralized platforms than what we have today if the government of the US decide to make Bitcoin regulations stricter than before. The democrat are globalist which made them to act this way whenever they get into power, hope they understand the danger of attempting to stop this technology.

[bbc.reporter]

Coindesk is saying that the correction from $42,000 to $32,000 was caused by the double spent event reported by BitMEX. But from the pattern I saw, it more closely corresponds to the reaction towards the statement from Janet Yellen. A few days back, she made a statement hinting that measures would be taken to outlaw the trading and transfer of Bitcoin. A number of institutional investors took a serious note of this statement.

The double spend news is clickbait. It might only be a whale or group of whales who decided that they want to sell their bitcoins because the profit might be enough for them already. Can it not be as simple as that?

@MicroGuy. I always see the argument for big blocks and decentralized exchanges, however, have never seen them used in volume that matters. We cannot be blind, the cryptospace is being regulated and controlled.