MTGOX: enable SEPA withdraw

[AniceInovation]

Hello.

When will you enable SEPA withdraw?
I do understand when you say the bank of france disabled your account, and that you can't pay, and that the only solution is to wait.
But now, SEPA option to add funds is working for some weeks (so you have an account), but you still haven't enabled the opposite.

When will you enable it?

[Coinbuck @ BTCLot]

They kept delaying this so I had to switch to another exchange.

[Technomage]

Have you guys seen the new AML policy they have? I'm already verified but new verified applicants are required to send some type of 3rd party verified documents, it's totally ridiculous. I've been very patient with Mt. Gox but I think it's becoming more and more difficult for casual and honest users to do anything at Mt. Gox.

It might be that they can't really do much about it, they are the biggest exchange and thus under the biggest pressures legally. But regardless of the reason, we are forced to start using the smaller exchanges and services more. This is actually healthy for Bitcoin, we need more distribution.

[AniceInovation]

If they want 3rd party documents they should just request them.
Anyway, there's no problem withdrawing the money trough International transfer, so for a hacker it's all the same.

MTGOX, i want my money without paying a ridiculous amount of taxes.
I want it now.

[repentance]

Have you guys seen the new AML policy they have? I'm already verified but new verified applicants are required to send some type of 3rd party verified documents, it's totally ridiculous. I've been very patient with Mt. Gox but I think it's becoming more and more difficult for casual and honest users to do anything at Mt. Gox.

It might be that they can't really do much about it, they are the biggest exchange and thus under the biggest pressures legally. But regardless of the reason, we are forced to start using the smaller exchanges and services more. This is actually healthy for Bitcoin, we need more distribution.

It's honestly about time they started doing this.  It's pretty standard everywhere else that when you can't directly sight ID documents the copies must be notarised by someone authorised to do so.

At some point it seems inevitable that they will need to verify the identities of all of their customers.  The smaller exchanges might be able to go a bit longer without coming under the same pressure from their financial institutions, but people really need to understand that the exchanges can't remain in business if their accounts are always at risk of being frozen.  If one of the main things they can do to minimise that risk is toughen up the verification requirements for their users, then they're going to do that - doing anything else would put both user funds and their own business at unacceptable risk.

[Mt.Gox Support]

Have you guys seen the new AML policy they have? I'm already verified but new verified applicants are required to send some type of 3rd party verified documents, it's totally ridiculous. I've been very patient with Mt. Gox but I think it's becoming more and more difficult for casual and honest users to do anything at Mt. Gox.

It might be that they can't really do much about it, they are the biggest exchange and thus under the biggest pressures legally. But regardless of the reason, we are forced to start using the smaller exchanges and services more. This is actually healthy for Bitcoin, we need more distribution.

It's honestly about time they started doing this.  It's pretty standard everywhere else that when you can't directly sight ID documents the copies must be notarised by someone authorised to do so.

At some point it seems inevitable that they will need to verify the identities of all of their customers.  The smaller exchanges might be able to go a bit longer without coming under the same pressure from their financial institutions, but people really need to understand that the exchanges can't remain in business if their accounts are always at risk of being frozen.  If one of the main things they can do to minimise that risk is toughen up the verification requirements for their users, then they're going to do that - doing anything else would put both user funds and their own business at unacceptable risk.

Thank you for understanding the situation...

[realnowhereman]

Why not do something better though?

For example: in the UK when you sign someone else's passport application (and the back of their photo) you must supply your own passport number.

In other words, they're creating a web of trust (about 20 years late).

We're on the cutting edge with Bitcoins; why are we doing things the old fashioned way?  And why trust notary signatures from some random lawyer you don't know half way around the world?

Here's a suggestion:

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• Verify an account with a public key with whatever meat-space mechanism you like
• Supply a field to allow upload of a photo of a signature
• Verified user-A signs (physically) the notary document for unverified user B; takes a photo and signs that photo with their PGP key.  User-B can upload this photo + digital signature at their leisure.
• Mt.Gox can now compare the digitally-signed photo of User-A's pen-signature against the digitally-signed photo of the signature on User-B's proof-of-identity.
• User-B uploads their public key, which user-A will have signed as well.

Bitcoin users usually know each other (it's a word-of-mouth technology); so there is huge scope for this sort of thing.

When the feds come knocking, you have a chain of signatures, both digital and real, that can lead you back to someone who was verified by sight of a passport, or whatever AML documents you want.

[Technomage]

It's honestly about time they started doing this.  It's pretty standard everywhere else that when you can't directly sight ID documents the copies must be notarised by someone authorised to do so.

It's not standard. I've never in my life had to submit 3rd party verified documents to anywhere and I've been a professional gambler for many years. This is in fact the first time I've heard of a site that has this requirement. I've used a large number of online payment processors and online casinos, ranging from small to very large. This is perhaps the standard at a Swiss bank but no, I can pretty much guarantee that it's not the standard in general.

I do admit that I've perhaps been a bit too harsh on Mt. Gox, it's likely that they are forced to do this. They do suffer the consequences regardless which will be a drastic drop in regular users. To me this is telling of a deeper issue, either Bitcoin is really used for illegal stuff a lot or the establishment is cracking down on Bitcoin harder than we realize. Or both.

Hopefully the smaller exchanges can avoid adding requirements like these.

[kronosvl]

Why not do something better though?

For example: in the UK when you sign someone else's passport application (and the back of their photo) you must supply your own passport number.

In other words, they're creating a web of trust (about 20 years late).

We're on the cutting edge with Bitcoins; why are we doing things the old fashioned way?  And why trust notary signatures from some random lawyer you don't know half way around the world?

Here's a suggestion:

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• Verify an account with a public key with whatever meat-space mechanism you like
• Supply a field to allow upload of a photo of a signature
• Verified user-A signs (physically) the notary document for unverified user B; takes a photo and signs that photo with their PGP key.  User-B can upload this photo + digital signature at their leisure.
• Mt.Gox can now compare the digitally-signed photo of User-A's pen-signature against the digitally-signed photo of the signature on User-B's proof-of-identity.
• User-B uploads their public key, which user-A will have signed as well.

Bitcoin users usually know each other (it's a word-of-mouth technology); so there is huge scope for this sort of thing.

When the feds come knocking, you have a chain of signatures, both digital and real, that can lead you back to someone who was verified by sight of a passport, or whatever AML documents you want.

That is an excellent idea

[kokjo]

Why not do something better though?

For example: in the UK when you sign someone else's passport application (and the back of their photo) you must supply your own passport number.

In other words, they're creating a web of trust (about 20 years late).

We're on the cutting edge with Bitcoins; why are we doing things the old fashioned way?  And why trust notary signatures from some random lawyer you don't know half way around the world?

Here's a suggestion:

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• Verify an account with a public key with whatever meat-space mechanism you like
• Supply a field to allow upload of a photo of a signature
• Verified user-A signs (physically) the notary document for unverified user B; takes a photo and signs that photo with their PGP key.  User-B can upload this photo + digital signature at their leisure.
• Mt.Gox can now compare the digitally-signed photo of User-A's pen-signature against the digitally-signed photo of the signature on User-B's proof-of-identity.
• User-B uploads their public key, which user-A will have signed as well.

Bitcoin users usually know each other (it's a word-of-mouth technology); so there is huge scope for this sort of thing.

When the feds come knocking, you have a chain of signatures, both digital and real, that can lead you back to someone who was verified by sight of a passport, or whatever AML documents you want.

That is an excellent idea

True! but it is likely not to be implemented, because of bureaucracy/lack of understanding from people with authority.

[realnowhereman]

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• ...

That is an excellent idea

True! but it is likely not to be implemented, because of bureaucracy/lack of understanding from people with authority.

It only needs Mt.Gox; not any external authority.

[kokjo]

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• ...

That is an excellent idea

True! but it is likely not to be implemented, because of bureaucracy/lack of understanding from people with authority.

It only needs Mt.Gox; not any external authority.

No, cause AML bureaucrats, will shut them down then. if they does not comply with the rules.

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

I switched to intersango, I don't like the price, but it's better than NOT being able to withdraw.

[kokjo]

I switched to intersango, I don't like the price, but it's better than NOT being able to withdraw.

why withdraw? can't you just not exchange them to local money, locally?

[realnowhereman]

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• ...

That is an excellent idea

True! but it is likely not to be implemented, because of bureaucracy/lack of understanding from people with authority.

It only needs Mt.Gox; not any external authority.

No, cause AML bureaucrats, will shut them down then. if they does not comply with the rules.

There is no "rule" that you must get your documents signed by a notary.  I suspect Mt.Gox are overcorrecting so they don't get in trouble in the future.  I'm merely arguing that they could overcorrect a different way... a bitcoin way.

For example, here's what a forex company wants for supporting documents
http://www.fxcm.co.uk/spread-betting-account.jsp#step2

• Photocopy of government ID
• Proof of residence -- recent bills from major utilities

I see no notary-signature required.

[kokjo]

• Supply a field in each Mt.Gox account for a PGP public key
• ...

That is an excellent idea

True! but it is likely not to be implemented, because of bureaucracy/lack of understanding from people with authority.

It only needs Mt.Gox; not any external authority.

No, cause AML bureaucrats, will shut them down then. if they does not comply with the rules.

There is no "rule" that you must get your documents signed by a notary.  I suspect Mt.Gox are overcorrecting so they don't get in trouble in the future.  I'm merely arguing that they could overcorrect a different way... a bitcoin way.

For example, here's what a forex company wants for supporting documents
http://www.fxcm.co.uk/spread-betting-account.jsp#step2

• Photocopy of government ID
• Proof of residence -- recent bills from major utilities

I see no notary-signature required.

they require the same thing as mtgox: passport + electricity bill.

i don't think that a gpg signature, even though its more binding, can a substitute for passport + electricity bill, in a bureaucrats mind.

[realnowhereman]

they require the same thing as mtgox: passport + electricity bill.

i don't think that a gpg signature, even though its more binding, can a substitute for passport + electricity bill, in a bureaucrats mind.

Perhaps you should reread my suggestion; and reread what Mt.Gox is asking for.

Due to a increased amount of forged documents being received by our AML department, we will be adding extra provisions to our AML requirements starting immediately.

Going forward:

• Your notarization must include the wording “Notarization for the purpose of verifying on MtGox.com”
• Notarization alone will not suffice; we need an Apostille. Notaries can do this in most countries (please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostille_convention)

Please be advised that documents received without the above may not be accepted as valid account approval documentation.

Seriously -- a signature on an "Apostille"?  There are reports that that would cost about $60 -- plus thanks to their crazy "for the purposes of Mt.Gox" requirement, that signature would be useless for any other purpose in the future.

I wasn't saying that the passport+electricity bill could be removed; I was saying that the signature from a notary could be removed, and replaced with the digital signature of another verified Mt.Gox user and be just as good.

Let's remember that what they're trying to fight against is that someone photoshops a passport and electricity bill.  The physical signature is to verify that real documents exist.  That can be done using a web-of-trust system, since once someone is verified you can send the cops round when they commit fraud... that would include saying you saw a real passport when you didn't.

Jeez, offer verified customers a couple of bitcoins to act as a physical document verifier.

[Technomage]

Seriously -- a signature on an "Apostille"?  There are reports that that would cost about $60 -- plus thanks to their crazy "for the purposes of Mt.Gox" requirement, that signature would be useless for any other purpose in the future.

I wasn't saying that the passport+electricity bill could be removed; I was saying that the signature from a notary could be removed, and replaced with the digital signature of another verified Mt.Gox user and be just as good.

Let's remember that what they're trying to fight against is that someone photoshops a passport and electricity bill.  The physical signature is to verify that real documents exist.  That can be done using a web-of-trust system, since once someone is verified you can send the cops round when they commit fraud... that would include saying you saw a real passport when you didn't.

Jeez, offer verified customers a couple of bitcoins to act as a physical document verifier.

+100

[byronbb]

It's honestly about time they started doing this.  It's pretty standard everywhere else that when you can't directly sight ID documents the copies must be notarised by someone authorised to do so.

It's not standard. I've never in my life had to submit 3rd party verified documents to anywhere and I've been a professional gambler for many years. This is in fact the first time I've heard of a site that has this requirement. I've used a large number of online payment processors and online casinos, ranging from small to very large. This is perhaps the standard at a Swiss bank but no, I can pretty much guarantee that it's not the standard in general.

I find it hard to belive this considering I have been an amateur gambler for many years and have had to do this for Betfair, SportsInteraction, Bet365, and WilliamHill.

[AniceInovation]

Thank you for understanding the situation...

Who said i didn't? I do! You need more proof that i am the real owner.
Tell me what more documents you need and i will provide them.

Telling me you don't know when you will enable SEPA withdraw is not the answer.