Government regulations discourage Bitcoin payments

[Hypnosis00]

Because Bitcoin was originally designed for peer-to-peer transactions I think that as more people use Bitcoin for payments demand will grow and Bitcoins value will rise and eventually people will see Bitcoin as a store of value.

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin. Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

[Zigabel]

Because Bitcoin was originally designed for peer-to-peer transactions I think that as more people use Bitcoin for payments demand will grow and Bitcoins value will rise and eventually people will see Bitcoin as a store of value.

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

Many persons really does wants to use Bitcoin for payments but adoption has been one challenge that seem to have stopped many and that is why there's a lot of advocacy out there for adoption. If Bitcoin has gained probably global adoption,  it becomes easier to spend it like you do with your fiat, at that point you can go out there with your Bitcoin known everyone is willing to accept it as a form of payment, so when you walk into a store or you are been offered a service,  you can opt to pay for it eith Bitcoin without having to feel you are doing  something awkward or illegal because there are countries where its considered as such using it to make payments.

So in the mean time, seeing that its does better with value over time, people now prefer to make it a store of value against inflation and other monetary economic situations that may arise. Even with Fiat if invested over a period of time, it could be taxed when there's a value increase on it,  this we can see in traditional banks when you fix deposit your funds,  so that isn't much of a reason for Satoshi to feel disappointed,  it only needs some more time and Bitcoin will be exactly what you are thinking it should  be (as a payment method).

Mind you, in some countries,  its now a legal means of payment,  so people pay with Bitcoin and its considered a legal tender there, so Bitcoin as a payment method hasn't been defeat after all, its still in process and some has adopted it already.

[YOSHIE]

Government regulations discourage Bitcoin payments

Of course, it is certain that when there is a difference between the legal status of Bitcoin and the legal status of the government, such a situation will hinder and will limit the use of Bitcoin and other crypto assets as a means of payment as is currently done in general.

Not to mention government regulations that refer to the official tax sector, whether they apply to trading transactions, exchange platforms and so on, when regulations impose rules on exchange platforms and other things, This will automatically hinder and many exchange platforms will close due to government regulatory policies. This has already happened, as has happened with Binance and other exchange platforms.

For example, China implements full control regulations on Bitcoin transactions and other cryptocurrencies, every flow of funds from crypto assets is monitored to prevent illegal fund flows, they do all this knowing that Bitcoin is decentralized, this will of course have an impact and could hinder payments in Bitcoin because it is regulated directly by the state.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

Bitcoin transactions have been never ruined by governments and if you can see any ruin from this chart, please tell me.
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactions.html#alltime

Number of transactions in blockchain per day is almost x 4 since 2018, is it an indicator of ruin?

Governments did not succeed with their attempts to filter and censor Bitcoin transactions, together with increasing transactions number daily over years, there is no ruin by any reason, not only by governments.
https://b10c.me/projects/016-miningpool-observer/

[Comeacross]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

I agree we focus more on store of value but I don't think government is responsible for it absolutely. Their regulations make it worse actually but what's happening now is bound to happen even without their regulations. Do you really think people will spend their coin back then at lower price if they know it would increase this higher later? Of course not, everyone will hold it and that's not on government. Government made the payment part inconvenient for people but most people won't just use it as a payment option either because of its potential.

[Alpha Marine]

I don't agree that the government is responsible for making Bitcoin a store of value. They might have played a role, but it is a very small role.
It's normal behaviour for people to start holding anything that appreciates over time. If the dollar starts appreciating so much against other currencies over a long time, you would see that people will start holdingg the dollar just as they hold Bitcoin. It doesn't mean people won't spend the dollar, but they would preferee to hold it.
Obviously, it would be different with the dollar because it is already a legal tender.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin.

Capital gains, simply means "profit on your capital". If you spend it then you have not made any profit off of your bitcoin, so there is no way you can pay capital gains tax from it.
You only pay tax when you have made a profit from your bitcoin holding. So you don't pay capital gains tax on Bitcoin you spend, except you've held it long enough to get profit.

[Mrbluntzy]

For real, you can not force people to spend their Bitcoin when they don't want to and I don't think that government regulation is the only reason why people are not spending their Bitcoin in daily purchase of various need, I think the main reason is value appreciation, with the high inflation rate and devaluation of fiat money, people are transferring their money into a good asset which will not be affected by inflation and that's one big reason why people are holding their Bitcoin instead of using it for payment.

Bitcoin is decentralized, can still be used for p2p payment when both parties agrees, so Satoshi wouldn't be disappointed that people are holding Bitcoin, P2P transaction was not the only purpose of Bitcoin. One of the reasons for Bitcoin is so that individuals can have control of their money, so when you have a large percent of your money in Bitcoin, you are in total control of it, you don't need the bank to spend your money.

[boyptc]

Anything that is profitable and has monetary value, the government will intervene. That's expected when the price of bitcoin cannot be ignored anymore because it just keeps on rising.

I don't think that the government ruined bitcoin for its transaction but the decentralization.

And that is because when we deposit it to the exchanges and we want to buy/sell it, we're all required to verify our identities (KYC).

[uneng]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

It has always been like that, with or without governments' regulations. Historically, Bitcoin has been mainly adopted as investment, and not as P2P daily currency. And it's not due to governments' interference. Even before such intromissions, adopters avoided using BTC as currency, because transactions' fees, low acceptance among sellers and services providers and high volatility of BTC's price.

After all, even though in theory everything looks perfect, in real world nothing works 100% nicely or 100% badly. There are pros and cons in how Bitcoin has been being adopted and shaped along the years. Satoshi Nakamoto must be aware about that...

[_act_]

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin. Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

If you convert the bitcoin to fiat, first it will be taxed after you converted it, and also it will be taxed if you use the bitcoin converted to fiat is used to buy something just as fiat are taxed.

People prefer to just hold bitcoin instead. Some people still use bitcoin sometimes to buy some things. It may not be common, but use it when they have the opportunity to use.

[legiteum]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

Oh yes, the first thing you should look at when your product fails to solve some problem is... blame the government. 

The reality here is that Bitcoin is far too slow and too expensive to realistically handle any significant portion of the world's daily payments, and there are far better products that handle this instead.

Bitcoin is not now, nor will ever be a mechanism for mainstream payments. That is not a government conspiracy, that's just computer architecture.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin.

LOL, you rant about Bitcoin not taking off as a payment and you blame... a tax law designed for investments. Pick a lane, man.

Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

"Satoshi", who is most likely a US government employee or group of employees, probably doesn't care one way or another. He/they are not allowed to spend their Bitcoin and will never profit from it nor will they lose money if it goes down in price.

Bitcoin was created back when digital currencies were illegal, and because of that the peer-to-peer architecture was necessary to evade law enforcement. Now that digital currencies are perfectly legal, this architecture is no longer necessary. Hence the original design goal of Bitcoin is no longer relevant. Hence this would be like asking the inventors of Coca Cola, which they invented to be a cough syrup, if how they felt about it being used as a soft drink. I suspect their answer would be:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[salad daging]

I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

Not destructive, but the government can not control it, so that's why until now most governments will not accept bitcoin payments in a country.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin. Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

Which country is it when you hold bitcoin continues to rise in price then the government will impose taxes? I have not looked for any information, which is clear when you want to exchange to fiat in cash then the tax is imposed on the exchange, that's why the government strictly regulates the exchange in order to get taxes from there.

[jossiel]

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin.

This is a crazy rule and basis of taxation. It seems that as long as you've got a touch move on those bitcoins that you've used for transactions, they think that it still remains on you.

Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

I think he's happy because it's still used for payments.

And the adoption has grown wild including the governments. While the purpose is still valued and used, it's a choice of most of us that holding it is the better idea.

[Renampun]

Regulations in most countries basically don't encourage Bitcoin payments... Most countries prefer regulations that emphasize Bitcoin as an investment asset rather than a digital currency to prevent more people from using Bitcoin as payment instead of their own currency... For example, in my country, it is prohibited to use other than the country's official currency for payments, and violating it can be subject to sanctions... These regulations somewhat hinder people from using Bitcoin for payments because they don't want to deal with potential legal issues just for using Bitcoin in their transactions.

[mindrust]

P2P will be the only option for us if countries start taxing purchases made by bitcoin... Back to square one... I knew they wouldn't let that shit go so easily. You know what, we were better off without any government regulation on crypto. It was much, much better than this. Crypto exchanges were going down, getting hacked every once in a while and lately we don't see that much anymore but it is because there are only a handful of crypto exchanges left and starting a crypto exchange is as hard as getting a banking license nowadays, probably even harder.

I keep my coins in a cold wallet. I won't send them to exchanges and I don't need to. I'll figure a way to spend them and If I can't, they'll stay there in the cold wallet forever.

[Ronsbit]

The government truly does not encourage the use of Bitcoin for payment, they only encourage it as an asset or commodity that can be traded which is otherwise a store of value. No government would want their own local currency to be sidelined by their own nationals or citizens for a digital currency which is understandable hence they see Bitcoin as a commodity to trade o so that they don't stop their citizens from owning Bitcoin. As far as they get their tax from the platform that ply the Bitcoin trades, they have nothing to worry about as all they are just after is to get revenue to run the government and platforms that does business with crypto within such jurisdiction definitely would comply to the government regulations because they too want to benefit from the crypto community.

[UpTober]

Personally, I don't really like paying with Bitcoin because I am buying Bitcoin consistently for a purpose and if I keep paying with Bitcoin regularly before that purpose is fulfilled, I think it is a barrier for me to hold Bitcoin for a long time and an investment expense. The government is providing many payment facilities, in that case, if they do not provide payment facilities through Bitcoin or the users do not feel the convenience, then it will not be bad. There are many countries where the approval of Bitcoin is completely banned by the government, but people in those countries also save Bitcoin and they also keep Bitcoin for a specific purpose. So I think such complaints should not be made against the government for paying with Bitcoin.

[hmbdofficial]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin. Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

To me this thread is somehow not different from this
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5597193.msg67251702#msg67251702

This topic was also earlier created today in this same board and it discussions will probably be no different with that will be said to you here.

You should also visit the thread if you want more opinion on your first paragraph question.

[adultcrypto]

Governments still have their reservations about bitcoin because they have not completely figured out how to monitor and control bitcoin transactions in terms taxation and other levies. Due to the way bitcoin is design, it is absolutely difficult for government to control everything, so there is no way they will happily allow bitcoin to flourish. This is why they fight everything that aid privacy in bitcoin beause that keep them in the dark. It is rather unfortunate that we are heading towards full regulation of bitcoin and that is one area I think Satoshi will feel bad that the purpose of his work is getting defeated.

[Odogwu-Blockchain]

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

No, there are medium where Bitcoin is used for payment of digital goods and services, I've seen great numbers of platform where Bitcoin is used to purchase site domain on whogohost platforms and other hosting sites. These vendors appreciates the important of crypto by accepting it for purchasing products.

The problem with this is that, few numbers of users are actually using Bitcoin to purchase than store of value. Almost everywhere in the space are talking about value and not real a means of payment.