Senators push through bill with surprise crypto tax amendment

[uneng]

This is a strange news story. I thought they had already implemented tax reporting on transactions larger than $10,000 many months ago.

The infrastructure bill in question is a whopping 2,700 pages long. Its doubtful lawmakers, experts or analysts will have a chance to read everything contained in the bill before its voted on.

If regulation regarding cryptocurrencies were snuck into the bill at the last minute, I would expect it to address stablecoins. Which regulators seemed very concerned about only a short time ago.

Well, if this new bill was only about tax reporting on transactions above 10,000$ I think it would be pointless, since the currently law already forces any crypto enthusiast to report transactions above that value. But since you said there are 2700 pages in this bill I suspect there might be many hidden traps among the little letters presented there.
As I saw recently, crypto community experts said the text is ambiguous and it's not possible to know how this this bill would work in practice after voted in the senate. Personally I suspect the government is trying to create more bureaucracy, so autonomous crypto enthusiasts will have to hire a broker or similar professionals to be able to comply with the new rules.

That is what the government calls "to create new jobs". In fact they just create new useless expenses for the common citizens to pay.

[1714943955]

1714943955

[1714943955]

1714943955

[1714943955]

1714943955

[Sithara007]

As far as I could see, the new proposal is for mainstream exchanges such as Binance. Those who want anonymity would not be using centralized exchanges anyway. They would rather go for DEX platforms and P2P exchanges. Also, as someone already pointed out, these new regulations make hardly any difference for the users in the United States. They are supposed to report each and every cryptocurrency transaction in the IT return. These new laws should make a difference only for the non-US users.

[ven7net]

It is probably worth admitting that most of the negative or bad news and statements about third-party cryptocurrencies are fiction. On the one hand, this is good, since there is still no influence on cryptocurrencies or it is not strong, and on the other hand, it is bad because it confuses many investors. There is a version that in the USA there is now a struggle between bankers and digital specialists, and probably such news is part of this struggle. But still, no matter how it was in reality, it is likely that sooner or later the owners of cryptocurrencies can be forced to pay taxes, if, of course, everyone wants cryptocurrencies to be accepted all over the world.

[Kyraishi]

Even more compliance hoops for centralised exchanges to jump through.

However, this is not unexpected. For bitcoin to gain mainstream credibility, the regulation will inevitably have to come and the government is obviously wanting to milk as much revenue out of the current crypto boom as well.

Absolutely nothing you can do about it as a user. If you don't like being tracked, then perhaps it's time to start endorsing DEXs.

[Vishnu.Reang]

It is probably worth admitting that most of the negative or bad news and statements about third-party cryptocurrencies are fiction. On the one hand, this is good, since there is still no influence on cryptocurrencies or it is not strong, and on the other hand, it is bad because it confuses many investors. There is a version that in the USA there is now a struggle between bankers and digital specialists, and probably such news is part of this struggle. But still, no matter how it was in reality, it is likely that sooner or later the owners of cryptocurrencies can be forced to pay taxes, if, of course, everyone wants cryptocurrencies to be accepted all over the world.

See.. the problem is that cryptocurrency enthusiasts doesn't want to pay taxes. The real issue here is that they believe that cryptocurrency should not be classified as a speculative asset. They want cryptocurrency to be classified as a currency, which would mean lower tax rates on any gains from it. This is something El Salvador has done recently. They classified Bitcoin as a currency, on par with the US Dollar. But I don't think that the other countries would agree to that classification. The users in these countries are still liable to pay capital gains taxes on their gains from cryptocurrency.

[Coyster]

However, this is not unexpected. For bitcoin to gain mainstream credibility, the regulation will inevitably have to come and the government is obviously wanting to milk as much revenue out of the current crypto boom as well.

I don't think this regulations mean Bitcoin is growing towards mainstream adoption, in my opinion, I believe most regulations issued by the government is either for their own benefit, and to somewhat control whatever it is they are regulating, and in the case of Bitcoin that the government is already aware that they cannot control and that it's user have freedom of their funds, they have resorted to issuing regulations and launching CBDC's. Bitcoin would get to mainstream adoption, but that is when majority of people around the world understand and appreciate the advantages that come with the responsibility of "being their own bank".

[sana54210]

It is probably worth admitting that most of the negative or bad news and statements about third-party cryptocurrencies are fiction. On the one hand, this is good, since there is still no influence on cryptocurrencies or it is not strong, and on the other hand, it is bad because it confuses many investors. There is a version that in the USA there is now a struggle between bankers and digital specialists, and probably such news is part of this struggle. But still, no matter how it was in reality, it is likely that sooner or later the owners of cryptocurrencies can be forced to pay taxes, if, of course, everyone wants cryptocurrencies to be accepted all over the world.

See.. the problem is that cryptocurrency enthusiasts doesn't want to pay taxes. The real issue here is that they believe that cryptocurrency should not be classified as a speculative asset. They want cryptocurrency to be classified as a currency, which would mean lower tax rates on any gains from it. This is something El Salvador has done recently. They classified Bitcoin as a currency, on par with the US Dollar. But I don't think that the other countries would agree to that classification. The users in these countries are still liable to pay capital gains taxes on their gains from cryptocurrency.

Well, if people used it more like currency then I would understand it, but most of the people who own crypto usually use it to make money, while they are asking it to be considered like a currency, unfortunately you can't just use something to make a profit like an asset while asking for it to be a currency without using it like a currency. I use it like a currency and it makes sense for me to get it considered like a currency because of that, however at the same time I can't just say the same for the other people.

I get that many people do not want to pay taxes on crypto, I never paid any taxes on it for example, being making crytpo profit for how many years I do not know but I never paid any tax on it, yet at the same time I know what I am doing, I am keeping it under certain level and I am still notifying without paying taxes, so if anyone asks then I can say I notified it.

[Sterbens]

It is probably worth admitting that most of the negative or bad news and statements about third-party cryptocurrencies are fiction. On the one hand, this is good, since there is still no influence on cryptocurrencies or it is not strong, and on the other hand, it is bad because it confuses many investors. There is a version that in the USA there is now a struggle between bankers and digital specialists, and probably such news is part of this struggle. But still, no matter how it was in reality, it is likely that sooner or later the owners of cryptocurrencies can be forced to pay taxes, if, of course, everyone wants cryptocurrencies to be accepted all over the world.

Maybe if you simplified the tax by a few points, it wouldn't be a problem. While certainly, some will not accept crypto tax laws, apart from controlling ownership, we couldn't have moved more freely either. Indeed, if you refer to the development cycle, there will be requirements to be accepted in several countries on conditions that should not be too burdensome.

For example, taxes from exchanges that are licensed to operate in the country, not from crypto users, because users may not necessarily be able to overcome the tax value in a large class while crypto ownership does not reach the percentage limit a person must pay taxes.

[Alert31]

I think the crypto community now needs to get ready to embrace such laws around the world where crypto incomes will have to be reported in your tax filing. Few months back, EU lawmakers also made a comment that crypto transactions must be made traceable. So I think more and more countries will take such drastic step to boost their tax income as well as to fight the illegitimate use of cryptos.

It's simple from the mindset of a ruler. No government will be happy to see a parallel monetary system that is not controlled by them. As cryptocurrency is getting more and more popular, expect more stringent legal sanctions to squeeze the juice out of it. Natural and expected.

But here the amendment has not yet been approved. So still a room for breather is available!

If ever the taxation in crypto will happen worldwide, I think it is much better than banning it. Also if it will implement by the government, people will trust more in crypto and don't have fear anymore to use it. Although the decentralization of bitcoin and other currency will be destroyed because government regulation, I think it will be fine as long as we can use it. Fortunately, our government here in our country still not ta.ke any action regarding crypto but we can still use it freely although banks still not accept it

[alviemery96]

I was really surprised when I read this article of yours, this would be a very good thing for our cryptocurrency platform, but on the other hand I always fear that if BTC is subject to By law, it seems we have lost the decentralization of cryptocurrencies as well as the financial freedom of all of us. this makes me very confused.