Joe Biden intention to veto legislation permitting banks to custody crypto.

[Sim_card]

I can see from this information that the government of US have a big interest in cryptocurrency but they are doing as if they don't care about the profitable digital assets. Now I see the reason why they are having issues with exchanges, because they have seen the billions that exchanges are making a day. The ETF launch also broaden their knowledge to see how the world have moved their assets over to cryptocurrency, and now they are trying every means to see how they can regulate it.

It did not just stop at there, the government also want to have their own piece of cake, by having the intention that  banks should be permitted to be in custody of cryptocurrency. Is this another way in which Biden is thinking the government can be in control over the crpto space. I posted this topic here because it is bitcoin especially and altcoins that means cryptocurrency. What are your thoughts on this.

[franky1]

i dont see the US dropping crypto custody in US banks

the BIS (bank of international settlements) is getting ready to allow banks to be able to custodianise cryptos from january 2025
if america opposes it, it further separates america from integrating with the international financial networks. which means creating a bigger canyon between america and europe/asia which will then strengthen crypto's stance in things like the EU and brics commonwealths

[philipma1957]

i dont see the US dropping crypto custody in US banks

the BIS (bank of international settlements) is getting ready to allow banks to be able to custodianise cryptos from january 2025
if america opposes it, it further separates america from integrating with the international financial networks. which means creating a bigger canyon between america and europe/asia which will then strengthen crypto's stance in things like the EU and brics commonwealths

I guess I am pretty much fucked to be an American.

[avikz]

Not sure what will protect common investors and what will not! I strongly believe that any kind of involvement of non-crypto businesses into crypto market is harmful for the common people. It can be banks, stock exchanges, corporates etc.

The banking system is corrupt to the core. So even if they provide custodian services to the crypto users, there's no guarantee that the privacy will be protected. Governments can not be trusted when it comes crypto matters!

[Zlantann]

I can see from this information that the government of US have a big interest in cryptocurrency but they are doing as if they don't care about the profitable digital assets. Now I see the reason why they are having issues with exchanges, because they have seen the billions that exchanges are making a day. The ETF launch also broaden their knowledge to see how the world have moved their assets over to cryptocurrency, and now they are trying every means to see how they can regulate it.

It did not just stop at there, the government also want to have their own piece of cake, by having the intention that  banks should be permitted to be in custody of cryptocurrency. Is this another way in which Biden is thinking the government can be in control over the crpto space. I posted this topic here because it is bitcoin especially and altcoins that means cryptocurrency. What are your thoughts on this.

To veto a document doesn't mean to approve it but to disapprove it. This news or document shows that Joe Biden will not approve the legislation if it is presented to him as an approved bill from Congress for assent. This means that the government is not supporting banks to engage in crypto custody service. Except there a good regulations to guide banks as they offer such services, I think it will be risky to put cryptocurrencies in the custody of banks. Banks have a history of misusing customer's funds and I am disturbed that crypto deposits might be mismanaged by these banks.

[CODE200]

Wow, he's got the balls to be fighting against the masters of the country of USA to be declaring that he'll be vetoing this legislation, I hope that he does follow through, even though I feel like Joe is just a senile old man, I hope that he's normal enough to do what he's just promised to do. Man, banks are probably rolling in their suits and having tantrums like a baby because it will definitely be hurting them no matter what happens and I'm sure that things are going to be really bad for them if they don't contest this veto even under the table. I'm on Joe's side now, I'd love to see banks fail in their attempt to get into the cryptocurrency market.

[kryptqnick]

I think that, unfortunately, has nothing to do with Bitcoin or any real risks related to cryptos and has more to do with what falls under which authorities and regulations. The SEC regulates assets, and assets aren't something people normally have in their bank accounts. What they have is currencies, so maybe if banks store cryptos for people, it can be misinterpreted as if cryptos are now currencies in the US. That, in turn, can have big tax implications because fiat currencies aren't subject to taxation, as they're not considered assets.
I'm not saying that it's fair to limit banks like that, but I think there's a certain rationale behind such decisions.

[electronicash]

is the law going to mandate everyone to send their coins to banks? because if this is the case, it looks like this is going to start a protest which will likely be led by Trump.  i think no one will mind if banks own coins, they can buy or even turn themselves into an exchange offering higher prices than the major exchanges today. but requiring people like a crackdown on holders, not gonna make people send their BTC.

all governments will likely try to get hold of the control not just the US government. and time is running out because the adoption is also accelerating.

[m2017]

I can see from this information that the government of US have a big interest in cryptocurrency but they are doing as if they don't care about the profitable digital assets.

They have been partial to cryptocurrency for quite some time.

Now I see the reason why they are having issues with exchanges, because they have seen the billions that exchanges are making a day.

Nothing personal, just business the government of the U.S. is ousting a competitor in order to get its share of the cryptomarket.

The ETF launch also broaden their knowledge to see how the world have moved their assets over to cryptocurrency, and now they are trying every means to see how they can regulate it.

Money poured into cryptocurrencies is not invested in the traditional stock market, leaving the government without its taxes and its share. They have long wanted to regulate this area, but did not know how to do it, but it seems that now governments are systematically approaching this solution.

It did not just stop at there, the government also want to have their own piece of cake, by having the intention that  banks should be permitted to be in custody of cryptocurrency.

This function is already performed by exchangers, but outside their jurisdiction. Requiring banks to be in custody cryptocurrencies is similar to moving cryptocurrencies to government-controlled banks and displacing money exchangers as service providers. It’s curious, will cryptocurrencies as “out-of-bank money” ultimately end up in banks?

Is this another way in which Biden is thinking the government can be in control over the crpto space.

It will certainly be easier to control cryptocurrencies in your own banks than in foreign exchangers.

[Zlantann]

is the law going to mandate everyone to send their coins to banks? because if this is the case, it looks like this is going to start a protest which will likely be led by Trump.  i think no one will mind if banks own coins, they can buy or even turn themselves into an exchange offering higher prices than the major exchanges today. but requiring people like a crackdown on holders, not gonna make people send their BTC.

all governments will likely try to get hold of the control not just the US government. and time is running out because the adoption is also accelerating.

The proposal is not about forcing people to deposit their coins in a bank. It is a proposed law that will give banks the right to keep crypto for interested customers. And the president is not going to approve it based on the response from his office. Is Trump a supporter of decentralization or privacy? Trump has never been a supporter of Bitcoin, so I doubt if he would be at the forefront to oppose such law. Trump is an American politician who will be in support of government control and invasion of privacy. Never trust politicians because they only fight for their pockets and the interest of their cronies.

[coolcoinz]

Biden doesn't know anything about bitcoin. Everything he says is handed to him by people who want him to take this or that stance.

They should take Biden to an interview and ask him the simplest most basic questions ever because that's where they usually slip, like those guys who were talking in Congress how CO2 creates global warming and they asked them how much CO2 is is in air we breathe and each of them had a different opinion and they were all wrong

The proposal is not about forcing people to deposit their coins in a bank. It is a proposed law that will give banks the right to keep crypto for interested customers. And the president is not going to approve it based on the response from his office. Is Trump a supporter of decentralization or privacy? Trump has never been a supporter of Bitcoin, so I doubt if he would be at the forefront to oppose such law. Trump is an American politician who will be in support of government control and invasion of privacy. Never trust politicians because they only fight for their pockets and the interest of their cronies.

The president should be a supporter of freedom. If banks want to offer custody, they should be allowed to. I'm not going to give them my bitcoin, but if someone wants to why not let him?
How is the SEC protecting investors? It's all a joke.

[electronicash]

is the law going to mandate everyone to send their coins to banks? because if this is the case, it looks like this is going to start a protest which will likely be led by Trump.  i think no one will mind if banks own coins, they can buy or even turn themselves into an exchange offering higher prices than the major exchanges today. but requiring people like a crackdown on holders, not gonna make people send their BTC.

all governments will likely try to get hold of the control not just the US government. and time is running out because the adoption is also accelerating.

The proposal is not about forcing people to deposit their coins in a bank. It is a proposed law that will give banks the right to keep crypto for interested customers. And the president is not going to approve it based on the response from his office. Is Trump a supporter of decentralization or privacy? Trump has never been a supporter of Bitcoin, so I doubt if he would be at the forefront to oppose such law. Trump is an American politician who will be in support of government control and invasion of privacy. Never trust politicians because they only fight for their pockets and the interest of their cronies.

lawyers and lawmakers interpret bills differently, you just have to see where things may go when your government wants to control the people, they will control currency and cryptocurrency is currency.

Joe did have senses the day he said he would veto this law. and Trump just flipped, he teamed up with MATIC dev and some others i think, it could be for votes of course https://twitter.com/i/status/1788359051031761269

[iBaba]

i dont see the US dropping crypto custody in US banks

the BIS (bank of international settlements) is getting ready to allow banks to be able to custodianise cryptos from january 2025
if america opposes it, it further separates america from integrating with the international financial networks. which means creating a bigger canyon between america and europe/asia which will then strengthen crypto's stance in things like the EU and brics commonwealths

I feel like the United States of America can not always align with the Europe and Asia in all climes. Although, the Americans seems to always sought after options that will avail them with more opportunities and protect their national interests. It is against this backdrop that US will find it tough and oftentimes difficult to make some decisions as if related to the global audience. I also feel like US may likely not oppose it if it would affect their ties with the international market, but must also take a decision that will favour their national interests.

[PrivacyG]

I wonder why the hell we are even talking about this as if Biden was the one announcing or thinking about it.  How many of you Americans believe Biden controls this and not an entirely different entity?

To be honest.  I doubt they will veto the legislation.  Simply because they rather have people hold Cryptocurrency in a Bank than on a Centralized Exchange.  They have SO much more control over a Bank and they can grow deeper roots to gain further control.  I rather see Banks becoming THE choice for holding Bitcoin in a Custodial way.

[adaseb]

I saw a clip yesterday regarding Trump discussing bitcoin. He basically said that the democrats are against it. But he is fine with it. He said if you like your crypto you need to vote for Trump.

Now I know he was against it back when he was president but a year back he did that Trump NFTs and his stance has changed. So most likely he will either stay neutral or positive on his crypto legislation. I don’t think he would go against his word but you know how it is. Some politicians say anything to get elected and then they don’t keep their word.

[God bless u]

I can see from this information that the government of US have a big interest in cryptocurrency but they are doing as if they don't care about the profitable digital assets. Now I see the reason why they are having issues with exchanges, because they have seen the billions that exchanges are making a day. The ETF launch also broaden their knowledge to see how the world have moved their assets over to cryptocurrency, and now they are trying every means to see how they can regulate it.

It did not just stop at there, the government also want to have their own piece of cake, by having the intention that  banks should be permitted to be in custody of cryptocurrency. Is this another way in which Biden is thinking the government can be in control over the crpto space. I posted this topic here because it is bitcoin especially and altcoins that means cryptocurrency. What are your thoughts on this.

They have to do it now or after some time. There is a huge hype of crypto among people and if people are getting crypto over their head then the governments are forced to do it.

If they don't do it the banking system will be corrupted in the sense of profitability. In order to save their banking system and their so called system of interest they have to integrate crypto and banking system in some way and now there ready to do that.

[Z390]

I posted this topic here because it is bitcoin especially and altcoins that means cryptocurrency. What are your thoughts on this.

Fine-tune this as much as you want, Bitcoin is still a cryotocurrency, and that includes altcoins too.

I saw a clip yesterday regarding Trump discussing bitcoin. He basically said that the Democrats are against it. But he is fine with it. He said if you like your crypto you need to vote for Trump.

Now I know he was against it back when he was president but a year back he did that Trump NFTs and his stance has changed. So most likely he will either stay neutral or positive on his crypto legislation. I don’t think he would go against his word but you know how it is. Some politicians say anything to get elected and then they don’t keep their word.

Don't forget that years back trump called Bitcoin a scam in an interview, but let's just pretend that he lacked the knowledge at the time but now I think he is not far from who he was before, he saw a good opportunity and he took it.

Trump knew that the crypto space has a lot of followers, especially in the United states of America, if he have these crypto fans at his back there is a bigger chance that he would win the election, Trump is an opportunist.
Either ways thus will benefit crypto, so I have no choice that to hope that he wins, I think Sir Kennedy Junior won't have a chance to beat Biden but Trump does have the power, hopeful one of them wins instead of Biden.

[Ben Barubal]

is the law going to mandate everyone to send their coins to banks? because if this is the case, it looks like this is going to start a protest which will likely be led by Trump.  i think no one will mind if banks own coins, they can buy or even turn themselves into an exchange offering higher prices than the major exchanges today. but requiring people like a crackdown on holders, not gonna make people send their BTC.

all governments will likely try to get hold of the control not just the US government. and time is running out because the adoption is also accelerating.

     All the national governments are looking for; it is for them to have full control over the crypto investors who hold its assets like us. It's just that they can't do that because of the decentralization features that most cryptocurrencies have.

     Of course, once they have custody of our crypto assets, it will be in their favor, and at any moment they can freeze the accounts of crypto enthusiasts. It's that simple to think of.

[criptoevangelista]

This veto is basically pressure for people to acquire BTC exclusively via ETF and still buying from the few regulated places, in other words, the government thinks: you can have it, but you have to buy it from my "friend" and anything outside of that I will consider illegal .

I can't imagine a different future with the regulations, maybe there will come a time when it will be illegal to have native BTC.

[darkangel11]

This veto is basically pressure for people to acquire BTC exclusively via ETF and still buying from the few regulated places, in other words, the government thinks: you can have it, but you have to buy it from my "friend" and anything outside of that I will consider illegal .

I can't imagine a different future with the regulations, maybe there will come a time when it will be illegal to have native BTC.

That's also their approach when it comes to ETF redemption. You can have your spot ETF but when you exchange it you will have to sell it for USD and transact in USD. You can't get your bitcoin from the ETF and use that bitcoin to transact, that wouldn't be fair, right?
Trump said that he supports cryptocurrencies and won't ban so we can see a clear line between these two candidates. One wants to slow bitcoin down and the other wants to get bitcoiner's votes by praising it.
I wouldn't trust any of them, but I would rather vote for Trump in this situation