2014-07-04 Bloomberg.com - Bitcoin Faces Regulatory Backlash as EU Tells Banks..

[kiko]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/bitcoin-faces-regulatory-backlash-as-eu-tells-banks-to-stay-away.html

The European Commission signaled it will try to impose rules on virtual currencies such as Bitcoin after the bloc’s banking regulator ordered lenders to shun them.

“It’s imperative to move quickly on this issue,” Chantal Hughes, a spokeswoman for Financial Services Commissioner Michel Barnier, said by e-mail today. “The potential for money laundering and terrorist financing is too serious to ignore.”

[1715033697]

1715033697

[1715033697]

1715033697

[1715033697]

1715033697

[LiteCoinGuy]

regulate what you want, other countries will have other rules. bitcoin will survive. and even this regulation will help BTC in the long run.

[samson]

Fuck Eu !

[FeedbackLoop]

“It’s imperative to move quickly on this issue,” Chantal Hughes, a spokeswoman for Financial Services Commissioner Michel Barnier, said by e-mail today. “The potential for money laundering and terrorist financing is too serious to ignore.”

Glad to see the EU going after the "City of London", HSBC, JP Morgan and the Vatican. The actual (not potential) money laundering and dubious financing are too serious to ignore. Glad to see the EU finally moving on that front.

Also I think this Chantal Hughes, the Mouth of Sau... mouth of Michel Barnier le forgot something... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

[Ron~Popeil]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/bitcoin-faces-regulatory-backlash-as-eu-tells-banks-to-stay-away.html

The European Commission signaled it will try to impose rules on virtual currencies such as Bitcoin after the bloc’s banking regulator ordered lenders to shun them.

“It’s imperative to move quickly on this issue,” Chantal Hughes, a spokeswoman for Financial Services Commissioner Michel Barnier, said by e-mail today. “The potential for money laundering and terrorist financing is too serious to ignore.”

Far more Euros and USD have been used for laundering and terrorism than any other currency. Same old scare tactics. These slime balls need to clean their own collective porch before they start messing around on ours.

[jbrnt]

Let them impose rules, regulation means it is not illegal. Their concerns are primarily on money laundering. They know they can't tag names to addresses, they can only indentify coin ownership at the fiat gateways (exchanges) and I believe that is where the regulation will focus.

[indiemax]

Fuck Eu !

classic Nuland quote,love it!

[LiteCoinGuy]

Let them impose rules, regulation means it is not illegal. Their concerns are primarily on money laundering. They know they can't tag names to addresses, they can only indentify coin ownership at the fiat gateways (exchanges) and I believe that is where the regulation will focus.

yep, i go with you 

[bitbouillion]

Legalize by regulating.

[Bored723]

Here is the EBA analysis the article refers to:
http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/657547/EBA-Op-2014-08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf

[notthematrix]

Offshore banking license http://www.aspenassurance.com/offshore-banking-licenses

Our Private Banking License can be achieved in a Quality Caribbean Jurisdiction for as low as $325,000 USD or BITCOIN equivalent which provides all the advantages of Bank ownership  

This is consmetic , it has to do with the political transparency wanted by the EU goverments...
The banks dont loike this organisation and if they can bypass it true offshore contructions they will...
so no problem here

[bitbouillion]

Here is the EBA analysis the article refers to:
http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/657547/EBA-Op-2014-08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf

Some passages sound very incompetent and hostile, like:

Inadequate IT safety: the IT systems, infrastructure, transaction ledger, VC protocol and encryption are either insecure, subject to fraud and manipulation, and , in the case of the protocol, can be changed through a majority of minders

I guess they mean "miners".

They also call it 26 times "VC scheme", and only 9 times "virtual currency".

[ALToids]

It's like it was written at 2AM with beer flowing through the veins.  I'm surprised they didn't pin 9/11 attacks on BTC

[Ron~Popeil]

It's like it was written at 2AM with beer flowing through the veins.  I'm surprised they didn't pin 9/11 attacks on BTC

You can almost count on that if the next terrorist attack is performed by people that have even heard of bit coin. Headlines screaming things like "bit coin wallet found on attackers computer" will be everywhere.

[LiteCoinGuy]

It's like it was written at 2AM with beer flowing through the veins.  I'm surprised they didn't pin 9/11 attacks on BTC

and it was written months ago. we are now "10 years" away from that in "crypto-time" 

[bitbouillion]

It's like it was written at 2AM with beer flowing through the veins.  I'm surprised they didn't pin 9/11 attacks on BTC

You can almost count on that if the next terrorist attack is performed by people that have even heard of bit coin. Headlines screaming things like "bit coin wallet found on attackers computer" will be everywhere.

They will even find paper wallets in the ashes.

[LiteCoinGuy]

It's like it was written at 2AM with beer flowing through the veins.  I'm surprised they didn't pin 9/11 attacks on BTC

You can almost count on that if the next terrorist attack is performed by people that have even heard of bit coin. Headlines screaming things like "bit coin wallet found on attackers computer" will be everywhere.

They will even find paper wallets in the ashes.

they were laminated. fireproof.

[ThomasCrowne]

Bitcoin's long-term viability has essentially nothing to do with what the EU decides.  It (or something like it) will survive despite what the EU "decrees".

Truly laughable

[RTRC]

Obviously, the majority, if not all, who have invested time and or money into bitcoin will not be phased by headlines such as this. But they aren't targeting us with their schemes to rid the world of bitcoin. They are targeting the morons who know absolutely nothing about bitcoin. First impressions are a HUGE deal as we all know. So if somebody who's only knowledge of bitcoin is that it is a virtual currency hears the words 'terrisom' and 'bitcoin' in the same headline, what do you predict that person's judgement of bitcoin will be?

Surely we would all like to think the person would do some research, read some other articles, and form an opinion with facts from trusted resources, but we all know that the majority of people are ignorant morons, so that won't happen. The more you condemn bitcoin, the more people who know nothing about it will be scared away. The limits the amount of future buyers thus reducing the number of bitcoin transactions making their own currency more valuable.

[Bit_Happy]

Obviously, the majority, if not all, who have invested time and or money into bitcoin will not be phased by headlines such as this. But they aren't targeting us with their schemes to rid the world of bitcoin. They are targeting the morons who know absolutely nothing about bitcoin. First impressions are a HUGE deal as we all know. So if somebody who's only knowledge of bitcoin is that it is a virtual currency hears the words 'terrisom' and 'bitcoin' in the same headline, what do you predict that person's judgement of bitcoin will be?

Surely we would all like to think the person would do some research, read some other articles, and form an opinion with facts from trusted resources, but we all know that the majority of people are ignorant morons, so that won't happen. The more you condemn bitcoin, the more people who know nothing about it will be scared away. The limits the amount of future buyers thus reducing the number of bitcoin transactions making their own currency more valuable.

The "amount of future BTC buyers" has almost no limit, since the fiat system is massively overloaded with debt. Old, tired propaganda will not work when people see Bitcoin rising much faster than gold.

[RTRC]

The "amount of future BTC buyers" has almost no limit, since the fiat system is massively overloaded with debt. Old, tired propaganda will not work when people see Bitcoin rising much faster than gold.

But how many people do you really think are keeping tabs on things like the price of gold and the price of bitcoin? Not everyone has money invested in Gold or silver and as a result, a lot of people could really care less what the value is. Unless if you tune in to a lot of business news channels, you're likely to here nothing about prices of things such as bitcoin and gold.

Everybody who has access to a QR code could be a future BTC buyer. Just because they could be doesn't mean they will be. Bitcoin had a rocky start. Many people made it out to be a scam. When I asked my parents what they thought of Bitcoin last winter, their first answer was just a monologue reiterating every bad headline from the media that came out during Bitcoins first couple of years. They knew nothing of what bitcoin was trading at and they had no clue how many people had begun accepting bitcoin as a payment. Go ask your average adult on the streets and I'm sure you'll hear the same response. The media is strong when it comes to convincing idiots to think a certain way.

[cjp]

To all you people who seem to like regulation so much, I'd like to point to the following texts in the proposal:

the creation of an entity that is accountable to the regulator would need to be a mandatory requirement for a VC scheme to be regulated as a financial service and for it to be allowed to interact with existing regulated financial services.

The entity would be called the ‘scheme governance authority’, which is a non-governmental entity that establishes and governs the rules for the use of a particular VC scheme. It is a legal person, and is responsible for maintaining the integrity of the central transaction ledger, the protocol, and any other core functional component of the scheme. The scheme governance authority would be required to comply with regulatory and supervisory requirements of various kinds to mitigate identified risks.

However, if a legal person is not able to exercise authority over market participants and is therefore unaccountable to a regulator for compliance purposes, it would be unreasonable to expect a regulator to guarantee integrity in their place.

So, what would happen if it turns out to be impossible in practice to establish an authority over Bitcoin? Would it make e.g. EU-based exchanges illegal? This sounds much like a disguised version of what China is doing.

It might be that the actual regulations will be such that the EU accepts a situation where the ‘scheme governance authority’ can not change Bitcoin's transaction rules, but can act as a centralized database to attach identity information to Bitcoin addresses, with compulsory cooperation of (EU-based) exchanges. The document doesn't seem to specify to what degree exchanges will be allowed to accept "mixed" coins and other coins with unclear origin (e.g. freshly mined coins).

[notthematrix]

To all you people who seem to like regulation so much, I'd like to point to the following texts in the proposal:

the creation of an entity that is accountable to the regulator would need to be a mandatory requirement for a VC scheme to be regulated as a financial service and for it to be allowed to interact with existing regulated financial services.

The entity would be called the ‘scheme governance authority’, which is a non-governmental entity that establishes and governs the rules for the use of a particular VC scheme. It is a legal person, and is responsible for maintaining the integrity of the central transaction ledger, the protocol, and any other core functional component of the scheme. The scheme governance authority would be required to comply with regulatory and supervisory requirements of various kinds to mitigate identified risks.

However, if a legal person is not able to exercise authority over market participants and is therefore unaccountable to a regulator for compliance purposes, it would be unreasonable to expect a regulator to guarantee integrity in their place.

So, what would happen if it turns out to be impossible in practice to establish an authority over Bitcoin? Would it make e.g. EU-based exchanges illegal? This sounds much like a disguised version of what China is doing.

It might be that the actual regulations will be such that the EU accepts a situation where the ‘scheme governance authority’ can not change Bitcoin's transaction rules, but can act as a centralized database to attach identity information to Bitcoin addresses, with compulsory cooperation of (EU-based) exchanges. The document doesn't seem to specify to what degree exchanges will be allowed to accept "mixed" coins and other coins with unclear origin (e.g. freshly mined coins).

Well this can technicly not be done since normal bitcoin wallets can have multiple adresses , and when one offshore exchange does allow normal transfers its useless ...
you are probalbly not aware that most btcoin exchanges have offshore banking license.
http://www.aspenassurance.com/offshore-banking-licenses buy one in bitcoins
so most people do not have a clue that government is power less against bitcoin because a bank in qatar has very different opionions as a bank in ilse of man , ukraine , brasil , russia , usa , european contry's...
so forget about this , multiple country's already opened up offshore banking for bitcoin.
so blocking is a past station even china has softned because of this here:
http://www.coindesk.com/btc-e-now-offers-trading-chinese-yuan/

[V.Kodoff]

Fuck Eu !

You must be americunt ?

[ThomasCrowne]

All the while every single one of those telling Banks not to work with crypto-based account(s) are undoubtedly picking up as much as they can on the down-low.

Question of the Have's not wanting to see the Have-Not's increase their respective station(s) in life I'm thinking.