UK 10yr plan for BTC

[Cranky4u]

UK planning how to handle BTC integration into their economy...my 2 bobs worth is they just want to figure out how to tax BTC so they can get their cut.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/07/uk_government_to_assess_whether_virtual_currencies_should_be_regulated/

'I want to see whether we can make more use of them for the benefit of the UK economy and British consumers' from the UK article really means 'how can UK tax BTC'

[1715486995]

1715486995

[jaberwock]

government saying cryptos need to be regulated = we need new source of taxes because we are running out of money.

It is the main reason for many regulated markets we have.

[Steigerz]

Wow yet another way to screw over the hardworking people of the world.

Maybe if our Governments managed our taxes more effectively we would have issues like this

[oceans]

Absolutely unreal that the UK Government is trying everything they can to find a way to tax bitcoin. It's never about the public when it comes to the UK Government it's always about them and how they can cash in. Unreal.

[Steigerz]

Absolutely unreal that the UK Government is trying everything they can to find a way to tax bitcoin. It's never about the public when it comes to the UK Government it's always about them and how they can cash in. Unreal.

Looking at the collective i don't think its just the UK. If the Euro Union gets it way we will most likely see Bitcoin and other digital currencies outlawed.

Bitcoin will evolve and eventually surpass any regulation these thieves impose.

[Ayers]

they want to tax everything be glad that air is not taxable or seriously you would die instead of living in this shitty planet

[pikabit]

government saying cryptos need to be regulated = we need new source of taxes because we are running out of money.

It is the main reason for many regulated markets we have.

well how are we going to pay the universal income if it's not by putting higher taxes on these that have wealth?

[polynesia]

Bitcoin businesses will move to tax havens, just like the regular ones did.

[botany]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

[DavidHume]

Bitcoin companies will just leave the country and move elsewhere if they regulate it too much.

[botany]

News like this could become a thing of the past, if the UK tries taxing/over-regulating bitcoin companies.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-overtakes-new-york-to-be-named-worlds-finance-capital-9394994.html

[s1lverbox]

I still don't get it how someone can regulate someone else work ( read : stoshi nakamoto).

internet is regulated but.none of this government assholes know how it's really work.

They don't have an idea how btc works. what Bitcoins is and.most important how to do it so can be taxed.

They will make wallet registration department?
I don't think so. you all can sleep well with no worries.

No chance they will  prove u had coins. If they will digg around company's. ..compnays will move to more btc friendly place on planet.


my two satoshi. ...

[botany]

I still don't get it how someone can regulate someone else work ( read : stoshi nakamoto).

internet is regulated but.none of this government assholes know how it's really work.

They don't have an idea how btc works. what Bitcoins is and.most important how to do it so can be taxed.

They will make wallet registration department?
I don't think so. you all can sleep well with no worries.

No chance they will  prove u had coins. If they will digg around company's. ..compnays will move to more btc friendly place on planet.


my two satoshi. ...

They will look at places where conversion to fiat occurs....
Exchanges, money changers, etc.
The regulation will start from them.

[practicaldreamer]

Most of the taxes raised currently will still be able to be raised with bitcoin. The taxes that are currently problematic - for eg. corporation tax (companies locating offshore etc) and income from self employment (cash in hand etc) will still be problematic under bitcoin.

   I reckon that what TPTB are trying to work out and balance is the possible benefits of btc (and what are they for government ? Lower transaction fees ? A burgeoning btc sector riding on the back of VC money ?) against the possible costs.

   Lets not forget here that under the current fiat financial system the Royal Bank of Scotland, for example, still has a balance sheet of £1.4 trillion. Thats as big as the whole of the UK economy.

    Whats the market cap of bitcoin again ?

[virtualx]

Most of the taxes raised currently will still be able to be raised with bitcoin. The taxes that are currently problematic - for eg. corporation tax (companies locating offshore etc) and income from self employment (cash in hand etc) will still be problematic under bitcoin.

How would they be able to be raised? It's so easy to move btc, it's not possible to tax it.

[practicaldreamer]

Most of the taxes raised currently will still be able to be raised with bitcoin. The taxes that are currently problematic - for eg. corporation tax (companies locating offshore etc) and income from self employment (cash in hand etc) will still be problematic under bitcoin.

How would they be able to be raised? It's so easy to move btc, it's not possible to tax it.

Well, it seems to me that apart from the 2 types of taxation that I mentioned every other type of tax would be able to be raised at source and through the normal channels. Everything is accounted for.
    Fuel tax + income from employment (as an employee) + capital gains tax + Value added Tax + Inheritance tax etc etc - none of these would be problematic for a government to raise - not where employers, retailers, accountants etc have a legal liability.

[polynesia]

Most of the taxes raised currently will still be able to be raised with bitcoin. The taxes that are currently problematic - for eg. corporation tax (companies locating offshore etc) and income from self employment (cash in hand etc) will still be problematic under bitcoin.

How would they be able to be raised? It's so easy to move btc, it's not possible to tax it.

Well, it seems to me that apart from the 2 types of taxation that I mentioned every other type of tax would be able to be raised at source and through the normal channels. Everything is accounted for.
    Fuel tax + income from employment (as an employee) + capital gains tax + Value added Tax + Inheritance tax etc etc - none of these would be problematic for a government to raise - not where employers, retailers, accountants etc have a legal liability.

We could have under-reporting of the value of certain transactions. For e.g. - to avoid capital gains tax, a portion of the proceeds could be received through bitcoins and the remaining through fiat. This will lead to a growth in the parallel/bitcoin economy.

Of course, these issues are possible through fiat also. But dealing in large amounts of fiat is a problem. With bitcoins, it is easier.

[gts476]

don't see any way they could make this happen, just .gov trying to kill competitors for it's monopoly on toilet paper.

[botany]

don't see any way they could make this happen, just .gov trying to kill competitors for it's monopoly on toilet paper.

It would take a concerted effort by all governments.
Might not happen even then. 

[BitCoinNutJob]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

[polynesia]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

The Government is trying to force-fit bitcoin into parameters they are comfortable with. That is the problem.
They should approach regulation with an open mind.

[Mobius]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

[polynesia]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

We just have to hope that the government stops at 'mild' regulation.

[aminorex]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Governments do not think - people do.  Governments typically  behave as though their own survival and expanding power is first priority - at the expense of the governed from whom substance and power of self-determination must be wrested.  If they did not, natural selection would cull them.  Once the state controls education fascism is the only stable endpoint.

[valvalis]

Taxes everywhere
It would be more expensive to transaction with bitcoin.

[botany]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Governments do not think - people do.  Governments typically  behave as though their own survival and expanding power is first priority - at the expense of the governed from whom substance and power of self-determination must be wrested.  If they did not, natural selection would cull them.  Once the state controls education fascism is the only stable endpoint.

You don't seem to think democracies work efficiently.

[furlong]

never trust the institutions 

[Mobius]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

We just have to hope that the government stops at 'mild' regulation.

Since the government is run by "the people" and for "the people" it is up to the citizens of the country to ensure this happens. If government starts to enact too much regulation then the citizens need to elect new politicians who support less regulation.

[polynesia]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

We just have to hope that the government stops at 'mild' regulation.

Since the government is run by "the people" and for "the people" it is up to the citizens of the country to ensure this happens. If government starts to enact too much regulation then the citizens need to elect new politicians who support less regulation.

The problem is bitcoin regulation is unlikely to be an election issue. Elections will be won by politicians on various other issues and we finally have to accept the bitcoin regulation policies of the winning party.

[lihuajkl]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

Depend what level of regulation is imposed to BTC? If taxed a lot, it would be a burden for the development of btc.

[BitDreams]

I believe if they attempt to tax transactions on the internet they will fail and drive the economy over to dark coins.

Taxing consumption appears to be the logical conclusion to me but with that comes the need for government to regulate transportation at an even higher level. Of course with blockchains, once rules are set regulating everything becomes easier.

To me the eventual conclusion is that bitcoin ultimately optimizes taxation to the point where taxes are almost if not totally voluntary.

[botany]

I believe if they attempt to tax transactions on the internet they will fail and drive the economy over to dark coins.

I believe that integrating dark coin like features into bitcoin is bound to happen, given the way countries are trying to regulate the system.

[Foxxyfox]

I believe if they attempt to tax transactions on the internet they will fail and drive the economy over to dark coins.

I believe that integrating dark coin like features into bitcoin is bound to happen, given the way countries are trying to regulate the system.

all new features of darkcoin can be achieved with 3rd party services with bitcoins

[botany]

I believe if they attempt to tax transactions on the internet they will fail and drive the economy over to dark coins.

I believe that integrating dark coin like features into bitcoin is bound to happen, given the way countries are trying to regulate the system.

all new features of darkcoin can be achieved with 3rd party services with bitcoins

Correct. But if government intervention becomes systemic, it may be integrated with the original bitcoin protocol as well.

[Mobius]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

Depend what level of regulation is imposed to BTC? If taxed a lot, it would be a burden for the development of btc.

I had specified that mild regulation would be necessary. Additionally regulation and taxation are two separate issues. In the US at least it would be very difficult to impose any taxes on bitcoin that do not have the same type of tax for a fiat based transaction. If this would be imposed then the taxing authority would run into equal protection constitutionality issues.

[Febo]

UK planning how to handle BTC integration into their economy...my 2 bobs worth is they just want to figure out how to tax BTC so they can get their cut.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/07/uk_government_to_assess_whether_virtual_currencies_should_be_regulated/

'I want to see whether we can make more use of them for the benefit of the UK economy and British consumers' from the UK article really means 'how can UK tax BTC'

in 10 years time people will laugh at this.

[botany]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

Depend what level of regulation is imposed to BTC? If taxed a lot, it would be a burden for the development of btc.

I had specified that mild regulation would be necessary. Additionally regulation and taxation are two separate issues. In the US at least it would be very difficult to impose any taxes on bitcoin that do not have the same type of tax for a fiat based transaction. If this would be imposed then the taxing authority would run into equal protection constitutionality issues.

Regulation and taxation might be different, but given the government's past track record, taxation seems to be the end result that they pursue.

[DhaniBoy]

I think bitcoin is a symbol of freedom to transact, you use bitcoin only if you use the internet, because bitcoin only be used in transactions on the Internet, bitcoin has no physical form such as another currency, so bitcoin should be free from taxes unlike other currencies that have a physical form, hopefully government policy would be different from the currency that has a physical form ... 

[Swordsoffreedom]

The fact that the UK has enacted a 10 year plan and evaluation of it means that they will take their time getting to a decision ^^.

At least it sounds prudent though
"These alternative payment systems are popular because they are quick, cheap, and convenient – and I want to see whether we can make more use of them for the benefit of the UK economy and British consumers. I also want to be alert to the risks that accompany any new technology."

"We need to plan ahead to make sure the right infrastructure is in place to meet the UK’s objectives and this strategy will set out what the UK needs to do over the next 10 to 15 years to achieve this," the consultation paper said. "It is vital that our digital communications infrastructure meets the needs of users in the UK. The UK must also be competitive on a global scale."

Anyways no real problem with it from my opinion will need to see how the bureaucratic red tape pans out though.

[Kickstart4]

government saying cryptos need to be regulated = we need new source of taxes because we are running out of money.

It is the main reason for many regulated markets we have.

Yes absolutely.Governments are just seeking another way to get their cut out of peoples money.

[51percemt]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

Depend what level of regulation is imposed to BTC? If taxed a lot, it would be a burden for the development of btc.

I had specified that mild regulation would be necessary. Additionally regulation and taxation are two separate issues. In the US at least it would be very difficult to impose any taxes on bitcoin that do not have the same type of tax for a fiat based transaction. If this would be imposed then the taxing authority would run into equal protection constitutionality issues.

Regulation and taxation might be different, but given the government's past track record, taxation seems to be the end result that they pursue.

I don't see any problem with taxing bitcoin as long as the taxes are not unique to bitcoin - meaning that any taxes that are paid on bitcoin transactions are paid on any other barter transaction and any fiat based transaction when applicable.

[wasserman99]

Do all governments think regulation is their primary job?
The bitcoin economy seems to have developed pretty well without (or because of) the government not intervening.

Gov regulation will happen, the mainstream wont use bitcoin without it so as long as its "reasonable" regulation we all get rich and have extra resources to create bitcoin 2.0 to move the goal posts further.

I agree. Mild government regulation will likely cause bitcoin to get an additional amount of legitimacy and will cause increased levels of adoption.

Depend what level of regulation is imposed to BTC? If taxed a lot, it would be a burden for the development of btc.

I had specified that mild regulation would be necessary. Additionally regulation and taxation are two separate issues. In the US at least it would be very difficult to impose any taxes on bitcoin that do not have the same type of tax for a fiat based transaction. If this would be imposed then the taxing authority would run into equal protection constitutionality issues.

Regulation and taxation might be different, but given the government's past track record, taxation seems to be the end result that they pursue.

I don't see any problem with taxing bitcoin as long as the taxes are not unique to bitcoin - meaning that any taxes that are paid on bitcoin transactions are paid on any other barter transaction and any fiat based transaction when applicable.

I agree with this. I think that bitcoin should be treated the same way as any other asset/currency and citizens should pay the same taxes regardless of how they pay.

[zimmah]

Absolutely unreal that the UK Government is trying everything they can to find a way to tax bitcoin. It's never about the public when it comes to the UK Government it's always about them and how they can cash in. Unreal.

this only means they think bitcoin will become big enough to go through the hassle

[yunkie]

As long as they do not put lots of limitations and regulations its cool.