Banks offering investing in Bitcoin

[dunfida]

Since they couldn't suppress Bitcoin, some banks are now endorsing investing in it. I remember seeing that I could buy and sell Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies if I remember correctly) straight from my business banking app when I was working on financials in some company a while ago. Now I wonder, do they just want to enter the market and profit off of it or are there some other intentions? Since they offer an exchange for business users, could it be possible that the system could be used so the government could actually tax Bitcoin by taxing the company investing in it trough the bank account?

Maybe I'm overthinking this, but when banks are involved with Bitcoin it always seems like an attempt of gaining some sort of control over it or push it to be more centralized in some way. And seeing more and more of them getting involved doesn't really comfort me.

What do you guys think, should banks even be in 'the game'?

If the banks agree to buy Bitcoin I think more investors will help accumulate the numbers. Because Bitcoin is not controlled by any owner or authority the only one who buys it (will own that piece of Bitcoin). So this change in bitcoin future is great because banks have created attention to bitcoin which is a plus point. Later on, Bitcoin futures will be dictated by the bank authorities as the number of investors increases and the Bitcoin price continues to peak overnight.

The best thing on such move will be the common man's involvement with bitcoin. Most of the time people doesn't trust something new, but it have big trust upon banks, I'm not sure on what basis is this happening. When bitcoin can be bought through banks surely it'll reach more people and they'll start investing. People who aren't much educated find this difficult to spend online. Banks helps them have a place where they can request help in person which isn't possible while using an exchange service.

Is this happening? If yes then it would really be a good thing about exposure and recognition of Bitcoins existence but if we do speak about its utility and application then going pass through banks would definitely
be removing the real essence of Bitcoins existence or actual utility. For sure for those people who doesnt have idea on what about Bitcoin is would definitely be having that kind of question and on the time that they would be able to make out some Bitcoin investments then the banks would really be still the ones who would be holding those coins or still simply means that you arent the ones who do own those coins
in the end of the line.

Sooner or later people who had invested Bitcoin would really be building up that kind of curiosity on which it would really be resulting on making up some realizations that Bitcoin isnt something that should be connected
by the banks and this is where they would be able to point out on what decentralization means.

[1715529948]

1715529948

[1715529948]

1715529948

[1715529948]

1715529948

[1715529948]

1715529948

[1715529948]

1715529948

[1715529948]

1715529948

[Blitzboy]

`

Is this happening? If yes then it would really be a good thing about exposure and recognition of Bitcoins existence but if we do speak about its utility and application then going pass through banks would definitely
be removing the real essence of Bitcoins existence or actual utility. For sure for those people who doesnt have idea on what about Bitcoin is would definitely be having that kind of question and on the time that they would be able to make out some Bitcoin investments then the banks would really be still the ones who would be holding those coins or still simply means that you arent the ones who do own those coins
in the end of the line.

Sooner or later people who had invested Bitcoin would really be building up that kind of curiosity on which it would really be resulting on making up some realizations that Bitcoin isnt something that should be connected
by the banks and this is where they would be able to point out on what decentralization means.

Your point on Bitcoin's route to popularity via banks is nice. Imagine a world where Bitcoin holders don't really own their Bitcoins? Talk about irony

But lets remember, we need to walk this tightrope with care. Yes, it seems like a smooth path to mass uptake, but it might lead to central control over Bitcoin - a total antithesis to its spirit.

While banks can't be sidelined in promoting Bitcoin, we must ensure it doesn't damage its fundamental value. Lets keep Bitcoin's true essence intact

[Cryptomultiplier]

Perhaps the banks are getting into it because they want to have a census on the numbers of users who should be taxed as first example to others who should come after.

It would be a very nice thing for this to work out on the contrary, but doesn't BTC have to be a legally recognized tender before banks can initiate such an idea? I wonder!

Further more, by banks deciding to allow such investment in BTC, is this not going against what decentralization is all about?

[Wend]

Further more, by banks deciding to allow such investment in BTC, is this not going against what decentralization is all about?

They provide investment services, or do they invest directly in bitcoin, it won't affect bitcoin decentralization. As long as they don't control the bitcoin network, no one can make bitcoin centralized. The fact that banks enter the market does not surprise me because their purpose as well as ours is for profit. It would be foolish if they ignored the huge profits from this market. Even though they have stated against bitcoin in the past but I never believe what they say, I just look at what they do, and it's not surprising that they provide services on bitcoin and invest in it.

[uneng]

Since they couldn't suppress Bitcoin, some banks are now endorsing investing in it. I remember seeing that I could buy and sell Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies if I remember correctly) straight from my business banking app when I was working on financials in some company a while ago. Now I wonder, do they just want to enter the market and profit off of it or are there some other intentions? Since they offer an exchange for business users, could it be possible that the system could be used so the government could actually tax Bitcoin by taxing the company investing in it trough the bank account?

Taxes are a side effect of Bitcoin adoption. Banks don't start dealing with BTC to generate more tax income for the government. It's just part of any financial investment or business. The main goal of banks when offering BTC investment is profit.

Maybe I'm overthinking this, but when banks are involved with Bitcoin it always seems like an attempt of gaining some sort of control over it or push it to be more centralized in some way. And seeing more and more of them getting involved doesn't really comfort me.

Indeed they take advantage of centralization, as they work as a middleman between the investor and Bitcoin. So it's interesting for them. On the other hand, we could think investors who are investing through banks don't have enough knowledge or will to learn and invest by themselves. So banks are actually doing a favour to increase BTC adoption.

What do you guys think, should banks even be in 'the game'?

Of course they should. Bitcoin is open to everyone. It's part of being decentralized.

[topbitcoin]

I don't know if they are tired of their fiat and offer bitcoin as an alternative investment offered by the bank, maybe the bank has a lot of bitcoin to be traded in its wallet, but we don't know what their goal is actually, whether they want to benefit from trade Or they want to manage Bitcoin bought by their customers, the transfer of people who trust more about banks will be easily controlled by them.

It would be a very nice thing for this to work out on the contrary, but doesn't BTC have to be a legally recognized tender before banks can initiate such an idea? I wonder!

Further more, by banks deciding to allow such investment in BTC, is this not going against what decentralization is all about?

Yes, the rules of the bank's financial institution to do this need to be legal support as their foundation in operating and what things can be traded, and that is necessary for approval from the government.

Where do you take the decentralization point? If you think that the bank has a power over BTC is the same as you save your bitcoin in centralized exchange, it can be said that is a place where you can sell and buy bitcoin, bitcoin remains decentral and no one can control it that spreads widespread.

[el kaka22]

Depends on the bank of course, but this is what I suggested many many years ago. We need some sort of governmental regulation where Banks could be like crypto exchanges. Lets assume you live in USA right? You want to buy a euro, or yuan, or ruble (well maybe not those because of sanctions and all) or Japanese yen etc etc, basically you can get the currency of other nations and have it in your account, it is allowed. It is allowed in my nation too, I can get euro, dollars or anything else I want.

This is why I honestly believe that the best thing to do in this case is to make sure Banks offer the same thing as well. That way banks basically allows you to buy and sell bitcoin, doesn't have to be all coins, just bitcoin itself is enough. Only problem is, would they actually have enough bitcoin on their books as they say they do.

[Crypto Library]

Maybe I'm overthinking this, but when banks are involved with Bitcoin it always seems like an attempt of gaining some sort of control over it or push it to be more centralized in some way. And seeing more and more of them getting involved doesn't really comfort me.
What do you guys think, should banks even be in 'the game'?

I don't feel bad about banks turning to cryptocurrency, rather I welcome it. Because when banks encourage people to adopt cryptocurrency, it will become more spread the more people will adopt it. As a result, the demand and market for Bitcoin will increase, which I think will be a plus point for cryptocurrency.
But if their main intention is something else, I think they won't be succeed on that, because with these steps, will spread cryptocurrency to more people and they won't even think about controlling it. Because I think Bitcoin is limited to less people, the more chances to control or flow its market flow, so its adoption increase will stop it.

[isaac_clarke22]

~

No matter what banks do, they're entirely entering an entirely opposite territory of where they belong and since they couldn't do anything about it, the least they could do is impose an unimaginable fees so that they could somehow do something about it.

Yes, they do want to profit off something from it and other intention is just like the usual incidents you hear like managing their user's PKs and like the usual freezing their wallets when something that they don't like happens. As much as I appreciate their "warm" welcome with crypto, I would not buy any forms of crypto through their means.

About the question of if they should be in game, everyone has the access to crypto anyways so there's not much we could do if banks want to be part of it.

[Ojima-ojo]

I have mixed feelings about bank involvement with citizens' Bitcoin assets, because as others also pointed out the possible centralization of their Bitcoin and possible control over the assets.

This step has a very high complication and even though it will make a push for mainstream adoption of Bitcoin and create public awareness of the advantage of using Bitcoin as an alternative but the gain of holding Bitcoin will come when the Bitcoin is held in a personal wallet and user hold the private keys because storing your Bitcoin with a third-party is a high-risk an activity at can lead to loss of your asset.

If we look at Bitcoin closely, we will discover that Bitcoin as an alternative to fiat currency has no connection with banks, and a Bitcoin holder doesn't necessarily need a bank to store Bitcoin.


So for that, the bank plays a minimal role in Bitcoin usage, which is at the point of payment/exchange.

[Smartvirus]

Maybe I'm overthinking this, but when banks are involved with Bitcoin it always seems like an attempt of gaining some sort of control over it or push it to be more centralized in some way. And seeing more and more of them getting involved doesn't really comfort me.

What do you guys think, should banks even be in 'the game'?

I would never trust a centralized system when it comes to have obvious relations with a decentralized system. The design for bitcoin or other decentralized crypto assets not to have some obvious connection with centralized systems. The most these centralized systems can work for the decentralized assets is serving for a gateway or some form of exchange. Other than that, it would be difficult for users looking out for means to stay off the hook of centralized system getting to trade their crypto assets using banks.

It could have an end to it. In the long run, statements could be released in accounts involved in crypto related transactions and so will the penalty be dished out as well.

[AmoreJaz]

I have mixed feelings about bank involvement with citizens' Bitcoin assets, because as others also pointed out the possible centralization of their Bitcoin and possible control over the assets.

This step has a very high complication and even though it will make a push for mainstream adoption of Bitcoin and create public awareness of the advantage of using Bitcoin as an alternative but the gain of holding Bitcoin will come when the Bitcoin is held in a personal wallet and user hold the private keys because storing your Bitcoin with a third-party is a high-risk an activity at can lead to loss of your asset.

If we look at Bitcoin closely, we will discover that Bitcoin as an alternative to fiat currency has no connection with banks, and a Bitcoin holder doesn't necessarily need a bank to store Bitcoin.


So for that, the bank plays a minimal role in Bitcoin usage, which is at the point of payment/exchange.

what i am seeing here is that banks are just trying to get a hold of some of their users to keep their funds within their realm. seeing that as btc will exist even without their intervention, what they can do is just join the market and offer related services to its users. it may create added credibility to the btc market particularly those non-crypto users. since banks are dipping their hand into this market, it means it is not a scam after all. hence, somehow, for me, it is also good considering this side. and when these people finally understand this market, they will surely get out their crypto funds out of the banks.

[Ale88]

Now I wonder, do they just want to enter the market and profit off of it or are there some other intentions? Since they offer an exchange for business users, could it be possible that the system could be used so the government could actually tax Bitcoin by taxing the company investing in it trough the bank account?

Banks are finally realizing that many people want to buy bitcoin and shutting down people's account won't benefit them at all. The banks with that way of doing business will end up like the dinosaurs did. The smart ones will just make some profit as usual. If the banks offers something is because they can make money out of it, as simple as that.

[Farma]

if banks do offer bitcoin investing, maybe that's good enough for people who want to invest in bitcoin but don't know how to use an exchange, or don't really trust exchanges. we know that the legality of banks that are supported by the state and also how they have full responsibility for the assets that we store there, so people might increase their level of trust in bitcoin.
Unfortunately, I think it will be difficult for banks to accept a decentralized system, especially that it has a centralized system. they probably wouldn't take the risk of the volatile rate of bitcoin rising and falling rapidly. I think that eventually quite a lot of people who are not very familiar with this investment see their money dwindling fast, or add up fast. however, if banks do get into the game, it might be a pretty good development going forward.

[Wiwo]

Banks are in for the profits and possibly banks could vecome one of the institutional investor in bitcoin if the central banks will allow that to happen, first we may not see the impact of this onnthe value of bitcoin if the bank does not have direct bond in Bitcoin if their going to just ve a third-party service provider like this new stated, the bank have little to no role in this other than being the custtody for the bitcoin and in that regards.

It will still be hard since most bitcoin holders already have the knowledge of self custodyof their bitcoin, so no one is going to use such service from the bank, and if the bank want ti participate their should make direct investment in bitcoin.

[carlfebz2]

Banks are in for the profits and possibly banks could vecome one of the institutional investor in bitcoin if the central banks will allow that to happen, first we may not see the impact of this onnthe value of bitcoin if the bank does not have direct bond in Bitcoin if their going to just ve a third-party service provider like this new stated, the bank have little to no role in this other than being the custtody for the bitcoin and in that regards.

It will still be hard since most bitcoin holders already have the knowledge of self custodyof their bitcoin, so no one is going to use such service from the bank, and if the bank want ti participate their should make direct investment in bitcoin.

They are really indeed for profits and since these institutions are really that heavily regulated then they would be the main place on which the government would really be trying out to track everyone who did purchase out their coins on which it would really be that normal that there would be some sort of monitoring considering that they've been attached or regulated which it wouldnt really be that surprising that to those who had purchased isnt something that totally anonymous. Banks doesnt really like to miss out on making profits and this is why they have seen that crypto space does have that earning opportunity which it would be
no surprise that they would really be offering such service. Its true that this is a good add up for more exposure but in overall essence of its usage or feature is totally contradictory.

[TravelMug]

Banks are in for the profits and possibly banks could vecome one of the institutional investor in bitcoin if the central banks will allow that to happen, first we may not see the impact of this onnthe value of bitcoin if the bank does not have direct bond in Bitcoin if their going to just ve a third-party service provider like this new stated, the bank have little to no role in this other than being the custtody for the bitcoin and in that regards.

It will still be hard since most bitcoin holders already have the knowledge of self custodyof their bitcoin, so no one is going to use such service from the bank, and if the bank want ti participate their should make direct investment in bitcoin.

They are really indeed for profits and since these institutions are really that heavily regulated then they would be the main place on which the government would really be trying out to track everyone who did purchase out their coins on which it would really be that normal that there would be some sort of monitoring considering that they've been attached or regulated which it wouldnt really be that surprising that to those who had purchased isnt something that totally anonymous. Banks doesnt really like to miss out on making profits and this is why they have seen that crypto space does have that earning opportunity which it would be
no surprise that they would really be offering such service. Its true that this is a good add up for more exposure but in overall essence of its usage or feature is totally contradictory.

Yes, it's the business side of it, that's why Banks are scrambling right now to get their hands on bitcoin. And perhaps there is a clamour from their customers. Even the CEO of Blackrock says that they got a hit on keywords like "bitcoin", more than "covid". And that is the main reason why they applied for ETF because they know the potential profits that they are going to make.

Although for us, it's just better to be our own bank, and self custody of bitcoin. Maybe for others though, they might have to trust banks or institutions to carry for them buying and selling bitcoin.

[LSDadventure]

Yes, it's the business side of it, that's why Banks are scrambling right now to get their hands on bitcoin. And perhaps there is a clamour from their customers. Even the CEO of Blackrock says that they got a hit on keywords like "bitcoin", more than "covid". And that is the main reason why they applied for ETF because they know the potential profits that they are going to make.

As a business, they must satisfy their customers and have to consider to launch new products for their customers. If new products are not prohibited by government and laws, they have no reasons to make their customer disappointed. They must show that they are ready to launch new products by effort like the latest ETF application. Even if the application is rejected by SEC, they will still get good feedback and satisfaction from their loyal customers.

If they are lazy and ignore all request from customers, their customers will move to other businesses.

[dezoel]

The very first thing that comes to my mind when I hear banks allowing their customers to make investments in Bitcoin through them is the taxation they want to put on them for doing so. They know that they can't tax everyone using centralized exchanges for buying and selling Bitcoins but if people use them as the intermediary for these sales and purchases, they can easily tax all the transactions going back and forth for Bitcoin buy and sells.

It is not something that would provide any benefits for the customers of the banks, though it will be promoted this way, we should know that they are implementing this for their own benefit, banks were never created to provide benefits to us but they use us to create revenue for their business.

[Pandu Geddon]

Great News, Bank is trusted organisation. People believe Bank is secure Institution. When Bank offering invest in Bitcoin it is vig good news for all cryptocurrency lovers. As Bank offering investing in Bitcoin so i think Bank will accept bitcoin and crypto. I think bank doing it as per customers demand. So it will be win win situation bank and customers all will be profitable i think. For it customers will be satisfied. So i think Bank’s offering investing in Bitcoin it is good idea and for it bank and investors all will benefited and they will happy.

even though the Bank is a trusted party, especially if the Bank is owned by the state. of course we will not doubt his reputation in financial management. but the system isn't it the same when we keep our Bitcoin in the exchange?
it is possible that Banks or government are collecting how many of their customers hold crypto assets. the state may have efforts to participate in maintaining the security of assets owned by customers. but maybe this is more towards tax income which in the future may be programmed by the government.