Feds Take A Step Closer To Trying To Regulate Bitcoin
from the control-control-control dept
We're still somewhat skeptical about the longterm prospects for Bitcoin, even if it has shown the ability to rebound after its initial hypecycle crashed. However, we've always known that the government was uncomfortable with the concept of Bitcoin. From Senator Chuck Schumer insisting that it was money laundering to the FBI exploring the technology, you knew that sooner or later the government would try to do something.Recently, they took a step in the direction of trying to gain some tiny bit of control over Bitcoin by having the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issue new guidelines concerning rules for (unnamed) "de-centralized virtual currency." Basically, the rules say that "money services businesses" including "money transmitters" will have to report "potentially suspicious transactions" to the government -- which potentially could involve a decent number of Bitcoin transactions. The question was who qualifies, and the new rules basically suggest if there's a connection to another currency (say... US dollars), then you've got an issue. Users of Bitcoin are clearly exempted, but with sellers... it's not so clear. As Tim Lee explains:
On the other hand, "a person that creates units of convertible virtual currency and sells those units to another person for real currency or its equivalent is engaged in transmission to another location and is a money transmitter," and is therefore subject to federal regulations.Of course, with an unclear rule, you can bet that some people are going to test the boundaries -- and that could eventually lead to a very interesting case, challenging specific aspects of Bitcoin.
However, this may only apply to those who perform money transmitting services "as a business." FinCEN says that "a user of virtual currency is not an MSB under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." But with a peer-to-peer currency, the line between a "user" and an "administrator or exchanger" is not at all clear. The regulations define an exchanger as someone who "engaged as a business in the exchange of virtual currency for real currency."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bitcoin, decentralized currency, money laundering, regulation
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The part after the second comma was sarcasm, by the way. The US government's tendency to seize control via fear, sadly, is not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Gold farmers, THEY have a problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
For a good example of this, look at Diablo 3, Think of how many people use the auction house to transfer those in-game items back to cash and how Blizzard is taking a cut of it. I imagine if the Feds were aware of this happening instead of being blissfully unaware of most things until they're at least four years old, they would be throwing a shitfit over that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They need to get big fast
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They need to get big fast
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Tell it to the judge. You have violated the CFAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legitimacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legitimacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seems dicey if peope are paying real money for them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As inflation is imposed the value of cash diminishes (while commodities go up) what was once large sums 10k or a million bucks 100 years ago is nothing today in comparison. Other creeping laws of restrictive legislation chips away at the value and stability of personal property. Its like we don't even own our land, house or bank accounts anymore let alone spend (it) or move privately.
Its so bad that if your deposit $500 cash in a bank account and try to forget about it... (the best way to save!) it gets confiscated (various states with varying time lengths some as short as one year) by the state and a fee is charged to get it back. (if you remember it) It used to be a legend that a bank would call you up with a long lost deposit gaining compound interest but that is now impossible.
Have to be honest... don't care what the FED or US whines about and actually (yeah right anytime soon now. Hahaha) expect the courts to toss out about 49 million filler pages congress likes to pass so much. (figurative foot in congressional rear.) Have been tired of trying to sort out the doublespeak and statistical whatever long ago.
Since personal privacy has become an issue does it matter what money laundering charges have been levied by congress, white house, JDept or anyone? In reality it does very much but many times public sanity simply catches up. Since I don't believe in the validity or rational of the drug laws/war (another huge drain on economy/society) its an irrelevant subject. IMHO
Bitcoin is a fascinating development completely undefined by current law. Internationally based decentralized virtual spending accounts that does not use any currency at all? Some interesting questions as to how it is valued between each countries currency values without some base standard?
Since the stability of the rapidly inflationary adjusted dollar has long been in question it would be nice to find some island of value/transaction stability. Questions on how Bitcoin handles inflationary crisis need to be answered as these obvious economic traps need to be maneuvered around. What happens to forgotten accounts and family inheritance matters?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lets assume for the point of discussion that a Canadian transfers 10 Bitcoins to a Cuban for services in Cuba who then uses the Bitcoins to purchase Swiss franks which are deposited in his offshore account.
How does any of this concern the US government? That is what I do not get.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You must be new here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Anything outside the control of the US government, scares the US government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All in all this is a slow motion pass the popcorn moment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It helps...
It helps their citizens get access to DMT and learn the truth. It must be stopped.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"real"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "real"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "real"
The paper-notes in my pocket are only valuable by agreement with my fellow citizens i.e. the paper itself has limited intrinsic value.
This difference is even more pronounced with the 1s and 0s that represent my bank balance. Arguably a bit coin (which represents actual computation effort) has more intrinsic value than those 1s and 0s.
The powers-that-be must find this distressing! ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]