10 ms·

Reported Bitcoin 'founder' Craig Wright's home raided by Australian police

290 points by laex 11y ago

jv0010 11y ago
Let's say there is a tax related issue or governmental issue with wright? Still very coincidental now also what is interesting is that the government has released In the last few days an innovation agenda where there are a few benefits in the startup / tech sector. So much coincidence :/
ketralnis 11y ago
Whether he is Satoshi or not, the only rational thing to do at this point is say he is not
- cba9 11y ago
  At this point, if he is Satoshi, he would probably be better off coming out of the closet. If you read through the McGrath-Nichols documents about the Hotwire bankruptcy and how the R&D tax credits dispute killed Hotwire, it's clear the ATO has it out for Wright. I bet that whatever this raid is about, it's about something like R&D tax credits again (http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-have-invented-bitcoin-claimed-to-have-landed-54m-in-taxpayer-funded-rebates-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-hav... says $54 million in 2015 alone!) or some sort of VAT rebate, and it may kill another of Wright's companies. There's not much you can do against the ATO if they are determined to reach an adverse decision against you... But if he's Satoshi, he can take the moral high ground and wage a media campaign to shame the ATO into dropping the case and maybe finally correctly treating Bitcoin as money.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 11y ago
    > But if he's Satoshi, he can take the moral high ground and wage a media campaign to shame the ATO into dropping the case and maybe finally correctly treating Bitcoin as money. How does this help? If they treat it that way, wouldn't Wright have a huge income tax debt?
    - cba9 11y ago
      > wouldn't Wright have a huge income tax debt? Yes, but presumably he can pay it out of his Bitcoin fortune. He has to deal with that at some point anyway, and by going public now, he gains additional leverage on his VAT or tax credit or whatever the ATO has decided to get him for this time.
      - imron 11y ago
        > Yes, but presumably he can pay it out of his Bitcoin fortune Thereby tanking the price of Bitcoin, and his fortune. Though on the bright side, a smaller fortune will mean smaller taxes.
      - randyrand 11y ago
        Bitcoin is still volatile. Typically tax on volatile income is paid when you "cash out" to a more stable currency.
        girvo 11y ago
        I wonder if capital-gains tax applies to Bitcoin? I'd think it would. And it's quite large, too.
        mikeyouse 11y ago
        Yep, the Australian Tax Office recognizes it as a commodity that's subject to capital gains taxes.
amix 11y ago
The bitcoins that Satoshi Nakamoto own are worth about ~400 million USD. There are also a ton of coins missing from Mt. Gox and Silkroad. Maybe it’s all related somehow? Anyhow, it's clear why the authorities would be interested: potentially there are hundreds of millions of USD on the line. This said, this is horrible for Craig Wright if he is innocent...
- obilgic 11y ago
  well he is (innocent), until proven guilty...
  - credit_guy 11y ago
    I guess you mean to say he is presumed innocent, at this point.
  - prawn 11y ago
    Which is irrelevant because the biggest threat is likely to be from those who won't wait to find out.
- CyberDildonics 11y ago
  How would mt. gox's missing coins be connected? The reason people know how much satoshi has is because those coins haven't moved from their original address.
mxxx 11y ago
So if the popular theory that he's faked a lot of the evidence to make himself look like Satoshi is true, it would appear he didn't entirely think his plan through...
- o_nate 11y ago
  I think most likely Satoshi was a pseudonym jointly created by Kleiman & Wright for their collaboration, but after Kleiman died, Wright went back and faked emails to make it look like he alone was Satoshi.
gizi 11y ago
What would be the problem if he were Satoshi Nakamoto? He'd rather deserve the Nobel prize.
- bmelton 11y ago
  I think the possible reason for raiding him is to catch up on tax obligations from having accrued so much undeclared wealth. I don't know if there are other crimes for which they intend to charge him, but that's the first one that pops to mind. Also, they've obviously had meetings in advance of "what do we do if we determine the identity of Satoshi", because this raid was FAST.
  - amix 11y ago
    The person(s) who leaked the documents to the media, could also have leaked them to the Australian authorities.
  - aianus 11y ago
    You don't have to pay taxes on capital gains until you sell the asset. Satoshi hasn't sold his hundreds of millions of dollars in Bitcoin, they're just sitting there on the blockchain where they were mined.
    - Angostura 11y ago
      Unless Australian tax law considers Bitcoin a currency.
      - NeutronBoy 11y ago
        It doesn't
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  >What would be the problem if he were Satoshi Nakamoto? From the article: "Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation."
tlrobinson 11y ago
> Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation. Seems like a hell of a coincidence for these two things to happen on the same day...
- bro-stick 11y ago
  There is a strong incentive for SN to stay anonymous now: extortion, GBH threats, kidnapping, tax evasion, etc. This could be some guy feigning humblebragging to fool prospective customers, or the vaguest individual Wired decided to hoist the label onto because it garners eyeballs in a Daily Mail way that's hard to repute. The raid is explained because many governments want evidence for tax evasion and evading the conventional banking system... control SN = control BTC.
  - snewk 11y ago
    Many governments are interested in finding Satoshi. They need a scapegoat to pin this bitcoin thing on. They still believe finding him/her might be effective method of getting rid of bitcoin. It's like trump wanting to go ask bill gates about locking up the internet.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - oh_sigh 11y ago
      Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
      - snewk 11y ago
        i admit i don't have conclusive proof. however, is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become.
Mtinie 11y ago
From the article: > Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation. So the story is that the Australian Tax Office just happened to be running an investigation looking into some facet of Craig Wright's finances. An investigation that apparently revealed some sort of abnormality, resulting in a raid on a property connected to Mr. Wright... ...18 hours after a major technology publication "outed" him as the possible person behind "Satoshi Nakamoto". Welp, that looks completely coincidental to me. /s
- nthitz 11y ago
  gwern is responding on this /r/bitcoin thread https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_creator_satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably/cxsi37b?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_cr...
  - Mtinie 11y ago
    Thanks for the link. The timing is suspicious, but it's certainly plausible that while the ATO's actions aren't related to an investigation into Wright's bitcoin holdings, that the Wired article acted as a trigger to move up the timeline of the raid. If that's what happened perhaps they were moving quickly to preserve evidence of whatever else they were investigating in advance of the hordes of people on their way to break into the house and steal whatever computer hardware they could find hoping to gain access to the "Satoshi's Stash" bitcoins. --- EDIT: Too funny... I posted this and then saw another comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10702038 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10702038) by imron (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=imron https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=imron) posted before mine that described almost the exact same conclusion (nearly word for word). Props to them for beating me to the punch!
    - imron 11y ago
      > nearly word for word) Great minds think alike! ;-)
  - 11y ago
shiado 11y ago
Wasn't it the case that Satoshi Nakamoto published PGP keys early in the days of Bitcoin? Shouldn't the issue of an individual claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto be trivial to solve?
- daurnimator 11y ago
  It sounds like in this case he doesn't want to be Satoshi, but the ATO investigators think he might be.
kanzure 11y ago
I fear gwern has gone off the deep end on this one, situation is getting ridiculous: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_creator_satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably/cxsa9hs https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_cr...
- sillysaurus3 11y ago
  (EDIT: There are some good points in the ensuing discussion below. I don't know what to think yet, but my comment here was unfair. Sorry, kanzure. And thank you to everyone who responded.) As far as I can tell, you're bullying gwern. Please stop. If you have a point, then make it clearly. Leave out speculation about "what would happen if it was a US no-knock raid." What, precisely, did gwern do? Their replies address your points, from where I'm sitting. What am I missing here?
  - eudox 11y ago
    Not the parent, but, >What, precisely, did gwern do? Publicly accused someone of being Satoshi Nakamoto, which is quote serious, and predictably would have negative consequences. It's especially bad if you do it with unreliable evidence, because then it's just some poor unrelated person.
    - comboy 11y ago
      Whether he is or not, he clearly seems to want to be associated with Satoshi. So this is not exactly the Dorian case. This guy practically asked for it at the conference.
      - eudox 11y ago
        So the guy, out of narcissism or whatever, made some imprudent edits to old blogposts. Taking advantage of that to publish an unsubstantiated article that potentially puts someone's life at risk is, for lack of a stronger word, wrong.
catweasel 11y ago
In case anyone is interested in the ATO's treatment of crypto currencies - https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-currencies-in-Australia---specifically-bitcoin/ https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-c...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cba9 11y ago
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-have-invented-bitcoin-claimed-to-have-landed-54m-in-taxpayer-funded-rebates-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-hav... "Under the scheme, a company which turns over less than $20 million is eligible to apply for a cash rebate of 45 cents for every dollar spent on research and development activity. According to a press release in May, 2015, DeMorgan Ltd succeeded in its application for the rebate. That means DeMorgan were able to prove to AusIndustry that it had spent $120 million on R&D activities in the 2014/2015 financial year, all while turning over less than $20 million. A 45 cent rebate on $120 million works out to $54 million."
- mikeyouse 11y ago
  I've been through the ATO R&D tax rebate process with a business that had Australian operations, you need audited financials and it takes months of due diligence. As an example, we applied to the ATO with preliminary totals for our 2014 R&D spending in January of 2015, updated our application in March with our audited numbers, answered questions from the ATO for 3 months, had our application approved in June, and the check wasn't cut until September or October. The credit from the ATO comes in the form of a check, but it's a prepayment against future tax obligations (you lost the tax-loss carry-forward you'd otherwise be able to claim to offset future profits). It's very useful for a startup since it's non-dilutive funding which can be used to get a lot of work done.
  - cba9 11y ago
    So it's difficult to successfully get it, and there's a lot that could go wrong and, say, prompt a lawsuit or criminal case?
    - mikeyouse 11y ago
      Yep, there are all sorts of forms about material representations and liabilities for false statements. It seems like a well-run program, our contacts with the ATO were very sharp and knew which questions to ask. You could tell they've ferreted out fraudulent applications before.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
tim333 11y ago
The guy introducing himself - seems quite plausible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE&feature=youtu.be&t=57s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE&feature=youtu.be...
- knocte 11y ago
  I don't imagine Satoshi bragging like this douche does.
- hcon 11y ago
  Top quality cringe. How can anyone watch this video and not see that it's a braggart looking for some fame?
- AlexMuir 11y ago
  This guy is sending my bullshit detector off the charts. I'll bet that the story here will turn out to be that he's built a backstory around being Satoshi in either an attempt to get famous, or some fraudulent scheme to profit from it. On reading the tax stuff, I'm wondering if he's told the Australian Tax authorities that he is Satoshi.
  - tim333 11y ago
    Yeah thinking about it the guys answers seem calculated to imply he's Satoshi which seems something unlikely for the real Satoshi to do. There is also evidence of faked PGP keys https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10706511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10706511
- andreasvc 11y ago
  Absolutely not. Somebody who claims to have "a couple of doctorates" is definitely a phony. Obtaining a doctorate takes 3-4 years, and it is highly unusual to get more than one. Moreover, you would not forget about which ones you obtained.
sgt 11y ago
I don't understand - why would they raid his house? Is he suspected of dodging taxes? But as far as I understand, most tax evaders don't get their houses raided at first. It makes sense to first contact the person and/or send a letter.
- hhandoko 11y ago
  From what I read on other sources, he is under investigation for tax issues by the ATO for a number of years now. Perhaps the ATO felt they need to move quickly when news broke out (suggesting he is the BitCoin creator), to secure his assets before they are transferred / moved.
  - AKifer 11y ago
    I doubt that this [very] clever person would put his bitcoins at risk of a seizure at his/her home
    - imron 11y ago
      True, however I don't doubt that there are [very] stupid people who think it would be a good idea to break in to his house to steal hard-drives/computers in case they have bitcoins on them. And it looks like the ATO doesn't doubt that either and wants to protect evidence from its ongoing investigation.
      - nickonline 11y ago
        The guy that put together silk road was found with all his stuff at the same coffee shop every day.
    - Retra 11y ago
      There's only so much planning that a person can afford, regardless of how clever they are.
epaga 11y ago
Here is an Amazon comment left by Wright. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVvsxDOVAAANOD-.png:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVvsxDOVAAANOD-.png:large "Silicone" Valley? "Assumed to the centre of everything"? Color me skeptical that this guy is Satoshi. (source: https://twitter.com/kashhill/status/674393417019883520 https://twitter.com/kashhill/status/674393417019883520 )
- kylebebak 11y ago
  Agreed... Exhibit A (https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf) This paper, and the technology it proposes, are as eloquent and ingenious as they come. Exhibit B (from one of Wright's blog posts in the Wired exposé) "Well.. e-gold is down the toilet." The telltale 2 dot ellipsis... Imagining this semi-literate blowhard writing that paper is a real stretch.
  - akhilcacharya 11y ago
    I think it's most likely that he was just involved in the early stages. If not him then one of his associates wrote the white paper.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
sr_banksy 11y ago
So... this was a tax raid? Quite a harsh response, considering the rules were drafted 12months ago... What are the money laundering measures that caused Aussie banks to disown Bitcoin? Maybe that could shed light on the motivations behind the raid?
- robzyb 11y ago
  > So... this was a tax raid? Quite a harsh response, considering the rules were drafted 12months ago... You're making very ambitious assumptions that the tax raid is related to the rules that were drafted 12 months ago. I'd bet significant sums of money that he isn't in trouble for creating bitcoin. Its more likely to be some other action he has done, possibly with bitcoin.
- lukedev 11y ago
  Might be more of a risk management move than anything regarding Australian legislation. AUSTRAC (in charge of supervising compliance of the The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act) put out a release in September regarding the closure of bank accounts: http://www.austrac.gov.au/media/media-releases/statement-bitcoin-and-bank-closures http://www.austrac.gov.au/media/media-releases/statement-bit...
dang 11y ago
Earlier, extensive discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10699846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10699846. Since this story contains significant new information, it doesn't count as a duplicate.
transfire 11y ago
Repeat after me "I will not disrupt the NWO."
hartator 11y ago
Innovate they say.
snowse 11y ago
Wrong guy, Satoshi Nakamoto is Swiss.
mankash666 11y ago
I see no mention of a crime in this article. If he did create bitcoin, he should be celebrated.
- peteretep 11y ago
  Tax-related investigation
theGimp 11y ago
Once again, you have a journalist ruining a person's life by claiming they created BitCoin. Wired better be able to back it up.
- l33tbro 11y ago
  It seems pretty well backed-up. Several leaked emails and deleted blog posts with Wright voluntarily identifying as Nakamoto. Certainly not as cavalier as Newsweek were last year when trying to out that other fellow. That doesn't mean it's not carefully crafted bullshit on his behalf
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    Not backed up. An unreliable source creates emails and blog posts that say it's him. End of story, right? No, not by far. This dump is worthless as evidence so far.
    - theGimp 11y ago
      But at least he was asking for it this time, unlike Dorian Nakamato.
      - nickpsecurity 11y ago
        I'll give you that. Whether Dorian was inventor or not, he didn't deserve all the stress and publicity he got. Whereas Wright is a self-absorbed prick playing media games even if not the leaker. Don't care what happens to him from now.
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  It's just as shitty whether it's true or false. Either way, they're deliberately exposing someone to unwanted public attention to sell magazines and ad impressions.
  - baby 11y ago
peterburkimsher 11y ago
"I do not want to be your posterboy. I am not found and I do not want to be." Why oh why can't journalists just respect his wishes! "People love my secret identity and hate me." It certainly seems that the Australian police aren't on particularly good terms with him at the moment. If the Australian government takes control of the Tulip Trust bitcoin stash, the world has to deal with a cryptocurrency being managed by politicians. Whoever gets them, I hope that the bitcoins remain off the market until at least 2020 as Kleiman wanted. Which makes me think - could the bitcoins from Kleiman be considered "inherited", and thus subject to inheritance regulations? Another hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined the first bitcoins, they were worthless. They only gain value if someone else projects value onto them. They're not being used. Imagine they're a form of trading derivative (e.g. stock options): the right to trade in future. Are those taxed? Anyhow, it seems very complicated, and confiscating personal computers with a whole host of other files seems extreme.
- rlpb 11y ago
  > Another hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined thAnother hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined the first bitcoins, they were worthless. They only gain value if someone else projects value onto them. They're not being used. Imagine they're a form of trading derivative (e.g. stock options): the right to trade in future. Are those taxed? Generally yes, although I don't know about Australia. In the UK it's called capital gains tax.
  - gordjw 11y ago
    AFAIK, the tax is only applied when the value is realised (i.e. sold/liquidated). I wouldn't have thought just holding bitcoins would be grounds for taxation.
    - dogma1138 11y ago
      Capital gains taxes are way more complicated than this and they aren't only calculated when the asset is disposed off. Capital gains also are not calculated for individual assets but globally which also means you get tax relief for capital loss if any had occurred. If you have any capital assets each year their value will be recalculated and compared to last's year calculations (some assets maybe calculated on a quarterly basis) the taxable value is then adjusted for any capital gains or loss that was carried from previous years and the final amount is calculated so you get a tax invoice "your GC tax for year 2015-2016 is X). You can pay that tax immediately or you can choose to carry it on depending on the tax law and assets you might have to pay a certain amount immediately you might also be allowed to carry the tax to the next year which also might incur a certain payment/tax on it's own. If the tax law allows you to carry on loss or gains to following years there's usually a limit to this (e.g. you have to pay the tax every 5 or 7 years to be able to do that) different types of assets will also have different regulation regarding deferring tax payments e.g. directly tradable/liquid assets like bonds might now grant you deferral on yearly GC tax while non-liquid assets like property which requires registration and tax duty to transfer will. Considering that Australia most likely has laws which will be quite similar to those of the UK (As it only achieved final independence in 1942 or well technically 1986 ;)) there is a good chance that the capital gains tax on BC should've been paid every year, and even if it wasn't and you could deffer payments you had to declare it and submit it for valuation each year for tax purposes because otherwise GC tax cannot be calculated. So no matter what was the value of BC when he made it if he didn't declare it properly especially after it was defined as taxable assets in Australia he violated the law, given his at least presumed intelligence (regardless if he's Satoshi or not) and the actions he so far has taken this was done quite knowingly and intentionally.
Uptrenda 11y ago
http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692 http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie... It seems like when you put everything together that Craig Steven Wright + Dave Kleiman + unknown associates = Satoshi. This honestly seems like a much simpler conclusion to me than the alternative which is that someone (whether a group or a person) went to the trouble of concocting extremely elaborate and convincing evidence for the purpose of framing Wright as Satoshi. Hopefully the media didn't out the wrong guy this time (although in retrospect: I'm not even sure why Gwern thought it wise to send the leaks to the press. I would have thought that he would sympathize with Satoshi wanting to stay anonymous given that he writes under a pseudonym himself...)
facepalm 11y ago
What a weird ass article, I mean from the guardian - writing paragraph over paragraph of gossip from somebody who barely knows the man (their landlord), because somebody has not paid their taxes on time?
bammmmm 11y ago
statistics on the timing of satoshis original forum posts: http://i.imgur.com/58l7W05.png http://i.imgur.com/58l7W05.png could be australia, no? probably the deadzone is a bigger tell than where he posted. Ostralia is about UTC +10h? no posts between 4 and 8am is believable.
headgasket 11y ago
cmon. Not a chance. Dorian had at least the name. I suspect this guy could not write C++ that even compiles to save his life. He's an IT expert with a long list of acronyms that sell threats models to the government. As to why the fakery... no idea. My best guess for SN stays an alternate schyzo personality of John Nash. He had prolly forgotten himself hence the lost bitcoins.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

290 points by laex 11y ago

Let's say there is a tax related issue or governmental issue with wright? Still very coincidental now also what is interesting is that the government has released In the last few days an innovation agenda where there are a few benefits in the startup / tech sector. So much coincidence :/

ketralnis 11y ago

Whether he is Satoshi or not, the only rational thing to do at this point is say he is not

cba9 11y ago
At this point, if he is Satoshi, he would probably be better off coming out of the closet. If you read through the McGrath-Nichols documents about the Hotwire bankruptcy and how the R&D tax credits dispute killed Hotwire, it's clear the ATO has it out for Wright. I bet that whatever this raid is about, it's about something like R&D tax credits again (http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-have-invented-bitcoin-claimed-to-have-landed-54m-in-taxpayer-funded-rebates-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-hav... says $54 million in 2015 alone!) or some sort of VAT rebate, and it may kill another of Wright's companies. There's not much you can do against the ATO if they are determined to reach an adverse decision against you... But if he's Satoshi, he can take the moral high ground and wage a media campaign to shame the ATO into dropping the case and maybe finally correctly treating Bitcoin as money.
- 2muchcoffeeman 11y ago
  > But if he's Satoshi, he can take the moral high ground and wage a media campaign to shame the ATO into dropping the case and maybe finally correctly treating Bitcoin as money. How does this help? If they treat it that way, wouldn't Wright have a huge income tax debt?
  - cba9 11y ago
    > wouldn't Wright have a huge income tax debt? Yes, but presumably he can pay it out of his Bitcoin fortune. He has to deal with that at some point anyway, and by going public now, he gains additional leverage on his VAT or tax credit or whatever the ATO has decided to get him for this time.
    - imron 11y ago
      > Yes, but presumably he can pay it out of his Bitcoin fortune Thereby tanking the price of Bitcoin, and his fortune. Though on the bright side, a smaller fortune will mean smaller taxes.
    - randyrand 11y ago
      Bitcoin is still volatile. Typically tax on volatile income is paid when you "cash out" to a more stable currency.
      - girvo 11y ago
        I wonder if capital-gains tax applies to Bitcoin? I'd think it would. And it's quite large, too.
        mikeyouse 11y ago
        Yep, the Australian Tax Office recognizes it as a commodity that's subject to capital gains taxes.

amix 11y ago

The bitcoins that Satoshi Nakamoto own are worth about ~400 million USD. There are also a ton of coins missing from Mt. Gox and Silkroad. Maybe it’s all related somehow? Anyhow, it's clear why the authorities would be interested: potentially there are hundreds of millions of USD on the line. This said, this is horrible for Craig Wright if he is innocent...

obilgic 11y ago
well he is (innocent), until proven guilty...
- credit_guy 11y ago
  I guess you mean to say he is presumed innocent, at this point.
- prawn 11y ago
  Which is irrelevant because the biggest threat is likely to be from those who won't wait to find out.
CyberDildonics 11y ago
How would mt. gox's missing coins be connected? The reason people know how much satoshi has is because those coins haven't moved from their original address.

mxxx 11y ago

So if the popular theory that he's faked a lot of the evidence to make himself look like Satoshi is true, it would appear he didn't entirely think his plan through...

o_nate 11y ago
I think most likely Satoshi was a pseudonym jointly created by Kleiman & Wright for their collaboration, but after Kleiman died, Wright went back and faked emails to make it look like he alone was Satoshi.

gizi 11y ago

What would be the problem if he were Satoshi Nakamoto? He'd rather deserve the Nobel prize.

bmelton 11y ago
I think the possible reason for raiding him is to catch up on tax obligations from having accrued so much undeclared wealth. I don't know if there are other crimes for which they intend to charge him, but that's the first one that pops to mind. Also, they've obviously had meetings in advance of "what do we do if we determine the identity of Satoshi", because this raid was FAST.
- amix 11y ago
  The person(s) who leaked the documents to the media, could also have leaked them to the Australian authorities.
- aianus 11y ago
  You don't have to pay taxes on capital gains until you sell the asset. Satoshi hasn't sold his hundreds of millions of dollars in Bitcoin, they're just sitting there on the blockchain where they were mined.
  - Angostura 11y ago
    Unless Australian tax law considers Bitcoin a currency.
    - NeutronBoy 11y ago
      It doesn't
cpncrunch 11y ago
>What would be the problem if he were Satoshi Nakamoto? From the article: "Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation."

tlrobinson 11y ago

> Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation. Seems like a hell of a coincidence for these two things to happen on the same day...

bro-stick 11y ago
There is a strong incentive for SN to stay anonymous now: extortion, GBH threats, kidnapping, tax evasion, etc. This could be some guy feigning humblebragging to fool prospective customers, or the vaguest individual Wired decided to hoist the label onto because it garners eyeballs in a Daily Mail way that's hard to repute. The raid is explained because many governments want evidence for tax evasion and evading the conventional banking system... control SN = control BTC.
- snewk 11y ago
  Many governments are interested in finding Satoshi. They need a scapegoat to pin this bitcoin thing on. They still believe finding him/her might be effective method of getting rid of bitcoin. It's like trump wanting to go ask bill gates about locking up the internet.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - oh_sigh 11y ago
    Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
    - snewk 11y ago
      i admit i don't have conclusive proof. however, is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become.

Mtinie 11y ago

From the article: > Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation. So the story is that the Australian Tax Office just happened to be running an investigation looking into some facet of Craig Wright's finances. An investigation that apparently revealed some sort of abnormality, resulting in a raid on a property connected to Mr. Wright... ...18 hours after a major technology publication "outed" him as the possible person behind "Satoshi Nakamoto". Welp, that looks completely coincidental to me. /s

nthitz 11y ago
gwern is responding on this /r/bitcoin thread https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_creator_satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably/cxsi37b?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_cr...
- Mtinie 11y ago
  Thanks for the link. The timing is suspicious, but it's certainly plausible that while the ATO's actions aren't related to an investigation into Wright's bitcoin holdings, that the Wired article acted as a trigger to move up the timeline of the raid. If that's what happened perhaps they were moving quickly to preserve evidence of whatever else they were investigating in advance of the hordes of people on their way to break into the house and steal whatever computer hardware they could find hoping to gain access to the "Satoshi's Stash" bitcoins. --- EDIT: Too funny... I posted this and then saw another comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10702038 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10702038) by imron (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=imron https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=imron) posted before mine that described almost the exact same conclusion (nearly word for word). Props to them for beating me to the punch!
  - imron 11y ago
    > nearly word for word) Great minds think alike! ;-)
- 11y ago

shiado 11y ago

Wasn't it the case that Satoshi Nakamoto published PGP keys early in the days of Bitcoin? Shouldn't the issue of an individual claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto be trivial to solve?

daurnimator 11y ago
It sounds like in this case he doesn't want to be Satoshi, but the ATO investigators think he might be.

kanzure 11y ago

I fear gwern has gone off the deep end on this one, situation is getting ridiculous: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_creator_satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably/cxsa9hs https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vzgnd/bitcoins_cr...

sillysaurus3 11y ago
(EDIT: There are some good points in the ensuing discussion below. I don't know what to think yet, but my comment here was unfair. Sorry, kanzure. And thank you to everyone who responded.) As far as I can tell, you're bullying gwern. Please stop. If you have a point, then make it clearly. Leave out speculation about "what would happen if it was a US no-knock raid." What, precisely, did gwern do? Their replies address your points, from where I'm sitting. What am I missing here?
- eudox 11y ago
  Not the parent, but, >What, precisely, did gwern do? Publicly accused someone of being Satoshi Nakamoto, which is quote serious, and predictably would have negative consequences. It's especially bad if you do it with unreliable evidence, because then it's just some poor unrelated person.
  - comboy 11y ago
    Whether he is or not, he clearly seems to want to be associated with Satoshi. So this is not exactly the Dorian case. This guy practically asked for it at the conference.
    - eudox 11y ago
      So the guy, out of narcissism or whatever, made some imprudent edits to old blogposts. Taking advantage of that to publish an unsubstantiated article that potentially puts someone's life at risk is, for lack of a stronger word, wrong.

catweasel 11y ago

In case anyone is interested in the ATO's treatment of crypto currencies - https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-currencies-in-Australia---specifically-bitcoin/ https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-c...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

cba9 11y ago

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-have-invented-bitcoin-claimed-to-have-landed-54m-in-taxpayer-funded-rebates-2015-12 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-australian-who-may-hav... "Under the scheme, a company which turns over less than $20 million is eligible to apply for a cash rebate of 45 cents for every dollar spent on research and development activity. According to a press release in May, 2015, DeMorgan Ltd succeeded in its application for the rebate. That means DeMorgan were able to prove to AusIndustry that it had spent $120 million on R&D activities in the 2014/2015 financial year, all while turning over less than $20 million. A 45 cent rebate on $120 million works out to $54 million."

mikeyouse 11y ago
I've been through the ATO R&D tax rebate process with a business that had Australian operations, you need audited financials and it takes months of due diligence. As an example, we applied to the ATO with preliminary totals for our 2014 R&D spending in January of 2015, updated our application in March with our audited numbers, answered questions from the ATO for 3 months, had our application approved in June, and the check wasn't cut until September or October. The credit from the ATO comes in the form of a check, but it's a prepayment against future tax obligations (you lost the tax-loss carry-forward you'd otherwise be able to claim to offset future profits). It's very useful for a startup since it's non-dilutive funding which can be used to get a lot of work done.
- cba9 11y ago
  So it's difficult to successfully get it, and there's a lot that could go wrong and, say, prompt a lawsuit or criminal case?
  - mikeyouse 11y ago
    Yep, there are all sorts of forms about material representations and liabilities for false statements. It seems like a well-run program, our contacts with the ATO were very sharp and knew which questions to ask. You could tell they've ferreted out fraudulent applications before.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

tim333 11y ago

The guy introducing himself - seems quite plausible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE&feature=youtu.be&t=57s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE&feature=youtu.be...

knocte 11y ago
I don't imagine Satoshi bragging like this douche does.
hcon 11y ago
Top quality cringe. How can anyone watch this video and not see that it's a braggart looking for some fame?
AlexMuir 11y ago
This guy is sending my bullshit detector off the charts. I'll bet that the story here will turn out to be that he's built a backstory around being Satoshi in either an attempt to get famous, or some fraudulent scheme to profit from it. On reading the tax stuff, I'm wondering if he's told the Australian Tax authorities that he is Satoshi.
- tim333 11y ago
  Yeah thinking about it the guys answers seem calculated to imply he's Satoshi which seems something unlikely for the real Satoshi to do. There is also evidence of faked PGP keys https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10706511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10706511
andreasvc 11y ago
Absolutely not. Somebody who claims to have "a couple of doctorates" is definitely a phony. Obtaining a doctorate takes 3-4 years, and it is highly unusual to get more than one. Moreover, you would not forget about which ones you obtained.

sgt 11y ago

I don't understand - why would they raid his house? Is he suspected of dodging taxes? But as far as I understand, most tax evaders don't get their houses raided at first. It makes sense to first contact the person and/or send a letter.

hhandoko 11y ago
From what I read on other sources, he is under investigation for tax issues by the ATO for a number of years now. Perhaps the ATO felt they need to move quickly when news broke out (suggesting he is the BitCoin creator), to secure his assets before they are transferred / moved.
- AKifer 11y ago
  I doubt that this [very] clever person would put his bitcoins at risk of a seizure at his/her home
  - imron 11y ago
    True, however I don't doubt that there are [very] stupid people who think it would be a good idea to break in to his house to steal hard-drives/computers in case they have bitcoins on them. And it looks like the ATO doesn't doubt that either and wants to protect evidence from its ongoing investigation.
    - nickonline 11y ago
      The guy that put together silk road was found with all his stuff at the same coffee shop every day.
  - Retra 11y ago
    There's only so much planning that a person can afford, regardless of how clever they are.

epaga 11y ago

Here is an Amazon comment left by Wright. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVvsxDOVAAANOD-.png:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVvsxDOVAAANOD-.png:large "Silicone" Valley? "Assumed to the centre of everything"? Color me skeptical that this guy is Satoshi. (source: https://twitter.com/kashhill/status/674393417019883520 https://twitter.com/kashhill/status/674393417019883520 )

kylebebak 11y ago
Agreed... Exhibit A (https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf) This paper, and the technology it proposes, are as eloquent and ingenious as they come. Exhibit B (from one of Wright's blog posts in the Wired exposé) "Well.. e-gold is down the toilet." The telltale 2 dot ellipsis... Imagining this semi-literate blowhard writing that paper is a real stretch.
- akhilcacharya 11y ago
  I think it's most likely that he was just involved in the early stages. If not him then one of his associates wrote the white paper.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

sr_banksy 11y ago

So... this was a tax raid? Quite a harsh response, considering the rules were drafted 12months ago... What are the money laundering measures that caused Aussie banks to disown Bitcoin? Maybe that could shed light on the motivations behind the raid?

robzyb 11y ago
> So... this was a tax raid? Quite a harsh response, considering the rules were drafted 12months ago... You're making very ambitious assumptions that the tax raid is related to the rules that were drafted 12 months ago. I'd bet significant sums of money that he isn't in trouble for creating bitcoin. Its more likely to be some other action he has done, possibly with bitcoin.
lukedev 11y ago
Might be more of a risk management move than anything regarding Australian legislation. AUSTRAC (in charge of supervising compliance of the The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act) put out a release in September regarding the closure of bank accounts: http://www.austrac.gov.au/media/media-releases/statement-bitcoin-and-bank-closures http://www.austrac.gov.au/media/media-releases/statement-bit...

dang 11y ago

Earlier, extensive discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10699846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10699846. Since this story contains significant new information, it doesn't count as a duplicate.

transfire 11y ago

Repeat after me "I will not disrupt the NWO."

hartator 11y ago

Innovate they say.

snowse 11y ago

Wrong guy, Satoshi Nakamoto is Swiss.

mankash666 11y ago

I see no mention of a crime in this article. If he did create bitcoin, he should be celebrated.

peteretep 11y ago
Tax-related investigation

theGimp 11y ago

Once again, you have a journalist ruining a person's life by claiming they created BitCoin. Wired better be able to back it up.

l33tbro 11y ago
It seems pretty well backed-up. Several leaked emails and deleted blog posts with Wright voluntarily identifying as Nakamoto. Certainly not as cavalier as Newsweek were last year when trying to out that other fellow. That doesn't mean it's not carefully crafted bullshit on his behalf
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Not backed up. An unreliable source creates emails and blog posts that say it's him. End of story, right? No, not by far. This dump is worthless as evidence so far.
  - theGimp 11y ago
    But at least he was asking for it this time, unlike Dorian Nakamato.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      I'll give you that. Whether Dorian was inventor or not, he didn't deserve all the stress and publicity he got. Whereas Wright is a self-absorbed prick playing media games even if not the leaker. Don't care what happens to him from now.
PhasmaFelis 11y ago
It's just as shitty whether it's true or false. Either way, they're deliberately exposing someone to unwanted public attention to sell magazines and ad impressions.
- baby 11y ago

peterburkimsher 11y ago

"I do not want to be your posterboy. I am not found and I do not want to be." Why oh why can't journalists just respect his wishes! "People love my secret identity and hate me." It certainly seems that the Australian police aren't on particularly good terms with him at the moment. If the Australian government takes control of the Tulip Trust bitcoin stash, the world has to deal with a cryptocurrency being managed by politicians. Whoever gets them, I hope that the bitcoins remain off the market until at least 2020 as Kleiman wanted. Which makes me think - could the bitcoins from Kleiman be considered "inherited", and thus subject to inheritance regulations? Another hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined the first bitcoins, they were worthless. They only gain value if someone else projects value onto them. They're not being used. Imagine they're a form of trading derivative (e.g. stock options): the right to trade in future. Are those taxed? Anyhow, it seems very complicated, and confiscating personal computers with a whole host of other files seems extreme.

rlpb 11y ago
> Another hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined thAnother hypothetical thought: when the original bitcoin creator mined the first bitcoins, they were worthless. They only gain value if someone else projects value onto them. They're not being used. Imagine they're a form of trading derivative (e.g. stock options): the right to trade in future. Are those taxed? Generally yes, although I don't know about Australia. In the UK it's called capital gains tax.
- gordjw 11y ago
  AFAIK, the tax is only applied when the value is realised (i.e. sold/liquidated). I wouldn't have thought just holding bitcoins would be grounds for taxation.
  - dogma1138 11y ago
    Capital gains taxes are way more complicated than this and they aren't only calculated when the asset is disposed off. Capital gains also are not calculated for individual assets but globally which also means you get tax relief for capital loss if any had occurred. If you have any capital assets each year their value will be recalculated and compared to last's year calculations (some assets maybe calculated on a quarterly basis) the taxable value is then adjusted for any capital gains or loss that was carried from previous years and the final amount is calculated so you get a tax invoice "your GC tax for year 2015-2016 is X). You can pay that tax immediately or you can choose to carry it on depending on the tax law and assets you might have to pay a certain amount immediately you might also be allowed to carry the tax to the next year which also might incur a certain payment/tax on it's own. If the tax law allows you to carry on loss or gains to following years there's usually a limit to this (e.g. you have to pay the tax every 5 or 7 years to be able to do that) different types of assets will also have different regulation regarding deferring tax payments e.g. directly tradable/liquid assets like bonds might now grant you deferral on yearly GC tax while non-liquid assets like property which requires registration and tax duty to transfer will. Considering that Australia most likely has laws which will be quite similar to those of the UK (As it only achieved final independence in 1942 or well technically 1986 ;)) there is a good chance that the capital gains tax on BC should've been paid every year, and even if it wasn't and you could deffer payments you had to declare it and submit it for valuation each year for tax purposes because otherwise GC tax cannot be calculated. So no matter what was the value of BC when he made it if he didn't declare it properly especially after it was defined as taxable assets in Australia he violated the law, given his at least presumed intelligence (regardless if he's Satoshi or not) and the actions he so far has taken this was done quite knowingly and intentionally.

Uptrenda 11y ago

http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692 http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie... It seems like when you put everything together that Craig Steven Wright + Dave Kleiman + unknown associates = Satoshi. This honestly seems like a much simpler conclusion to me than the alternative which is that someone (whether a group or a person) went to the trouble of concocting extremely elaborate and convincing evidence for the purpose of framing Wright as Satoshi. Hopefully the media didn't out the wrong guy this time (although in retrospect: I'm not even sure why Gwern thought it wise to send the leaks to the press. I would have thought that he would sympathize with Satoshi wanting to stay anonymous given that he writes under a pseudonym himself...)

facepalm 11y ago

What a weird ass article, I mean from the guardian - writing paragraph over paragraph of gossip from somebody who barely knows the man (their landlord), because somebody has not paid their taxes on time?

bammmmm 11y ago

statistics on the timing of satoshis original forum posts: http://i.imgur.com/58l7W05.png http://i.imgur.com/58l7W05.png could be australia, no? probably the deadzone is a bigger tell than where he posted. Ostralia is about UTC +10h? no posts between 4 and 8am is believable.

headgasket 11y ago

cmon. Not a chance. Dorian had at least the name. I suspect this guy could not write C++ that even compiles to save his life. He's an IT expert with a long list of acronyms that sell threats models to the government. As to why the fakery... no idea. My best guess for SN stays an alternate schyzo personality of John Nash. He had prolly forgotten himself hence the lost bitcoins.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]