7 ms·

Where's the problem? Can someone explain? It's not like this bans owning Bitcoin.

nlperguiy 9y ago
2nd layer solutions would provide fungibility and ultimate privacy. Cryptocurrencies like Zcash, Dash or Monero, especially Monero, could be illegal.
- almostApatriot1 9y ago
  I say good. Those coins don't need to go mainstream so they can be held, pumped, and dumped. Let people use them for buying drugs.
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    I was about to disagree, then realized that I agree with you. Going mainstream would make these currencies less usable (and possibly more targeted), and then what would we use for our weed?
  - tehlike 9y ago
    Monero is fascinating, unlike other pump and dump coins.
JoshTriplett 9y ago
What's the problem with being required to send a plaintext copy of every encrypted email to various government agencies around the world? It's not like that would ban using encrypted email.
- cmurf 9y ago
  What the problem with being required to report your income from various government agencies around the world? It's not like that would ban governments from existing, surely some people will continue to voluntarily pay some taxes on the honor system.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
rothbardrand 9y ago
Your grandpa dies and you inherit his estate. There's a bunch of boxes and you go thru a lot of them until you get to one of his war stuff. It is too much and you put it aside. Years later, you are prosecuted under this law because it turns out he had a hardware wallet in that box. That's the problem, and it doesn't matter if you think it's not something that is likely. Truth of the matter is, you committed no crime. This law would be the crime. ---- I've been slow banned. Apparently HN has detected my opinions are not sufficiently marxist. I know how this goes. I was once shadow banned here for relating how I had met Grace Hopper. Another time for merely linking to a PDF of a scientific paper in response to someone elses scientific claim. (over 10 years that's about how many times I've tried to give this site another chance... this was the third one, and I'm done now. Thinking is not tolerated here, clearly.) It was nice being on HN for awhile... but of course, the anti-intellectual snowflakes who run this site cannot abide actual critical thinking. A shame, this could be a good site if discussions were allowed, instead it is a filter bubble of only one ideological viewpoint. The bay area is quickly losing creditability-- as you advocate for "net neutrality" (which contains government censorship powers) on the argument that without it we will get government censorship, yet twitter and facebook and google are full scale censoring any viewpoint other than hard core militant marxist SJW... not to mention, HN does this as well. You guys reject thinking and the concept of diversity while justifying your sexism, racism and general bigotry with the #diversity hash tag. The thing is, you know you're hypocrites, but instead of learning or thinking you just make your wall 10 feet higher. By the way 850 points of karma proves I'm a good contributor here.... but one moderator disagrees with me and they take arbitrary action, without cause, without warning and without justification. Don't ever pretend like you believe in the rule of law, you're criminals under your own rules! -------- So to respond to the guy below: These "laws" (which are unconstitutional, by the way) make a mockery of the rule of law. They erode our rights until we are purely at the mercy of the whim of tyrants. You assume the rule of law is there to protect you and you would have recourse, but you're wrong. There are many examples similar to your buried gold one-- people having their life savings simply stolen by the government under asset forfeiture, or going to jail for "money laundering" etc when they did nothing actually criminal.
- jonreem 9y ago
  I don't see how this is any different from discovering years later that he had 10 pounds of gold buried in the backyard, a situation I'm sure you have some legal recourse in.
CryptoPunk 9y ago
It is a violation of privacy rights.
- Maarten88 9y ago
  Is there any right to keep your possessions private from the tax agency? Last time I checked, everyone had to specify everything of value owned, and sign for it, to calculate capital taxes due (I live in the EU). This includes BTC holdings. We have to trust the tax agency to keep tax data confidential. It surprises me that the US needs to change laws to require this only now. I'd say the wording of the old laws were probably too specific, and after this change they probably still are. A public ruling by the tax agency should be enough to require this for new forms of value like digital currencies.
  - tehlike 9y ago
    Very true. The difference is people like to be in the gray area, and treat btc wealth as hidden and nontaxable. Now they will have hard reason to declare their coins and the source of them. On the flip side, i am not sure if there is any reason for "any body else" to know my networth, if i am not generating a taxable event.
  - garmaine 9y ago
    > possessions private from the tax agency? Last time I checked, everyone had to specify everything of value owned, and sign for it, to calculate capital taxes due (I live in the EU). This includes BTC holdings. We have to trust the tax agency to keep tax data confidential. The Us does not have that kind of tax. There is no wealth/capital tax here. There is no tax authority with that information here. And to be honest, I find it abhorrent that you’ve been conditioned to accept that kind of invasion of privacy and mandated trust as normal and expected.
  - CryptoPunk 9y ago
    The income tax requires violating privacy rights, which is why many libertarians oppose it.

2nd layer solutions would provide fungibility and ultimate privacy. Cryptocurrencies like Zcash, Dash or Monero, especially Monero, could be illegal.

almostApatriot1 9y ago
I say good. Those coins don't need to go mainstream so they can be held, pumped, and dumped. Let people use them for buying drugs.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  I was about to disagree, then realized that I agree with you. Going mainstream would make these currencies less usable (and possibly more targeted), and then what would we use for our weed?
- tehlike 9y ago
  Monero is fascinating, unlike other pump and dump coins.

JoshTriplett 9y ago

What's the problem with being required to send a plaintext copy of every encrypted email to various government agencies around the world? It's not like that would ban using encrypted email.

cmurf 9y ago
What the problem with being required to report your income from various government agencies around the world? It's not like that would ban governments from existing, surely some people will continue to voluntarily pay some taxes on the honor system.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

rothbardrand 9y ago

Your grandpa dies and you inherit his estate. There's a bunch of boxes and you go thru a lot of them until you get to one of his war stuff. It is too much and you put it aside. Years later, you are prosecuted under this law because it turns out he had a hardware wallet in that box. That's the problem, and it doesn't matter if you think it's not something that is likely. Truth of the matter is, you committed no crime. This law would be the crime. ---- I've been slow banned. Apparently HN has detected my opinions are not sufficiently marxist. I know how this goes. I was once shadow banned here for relating how I had met Grace Hopper. Another time for merely linking to a PDF of a scientific paper in response to someone elses scientific claim. (over 10 years that's about how many times I've tried to give this site another chance... this was the third one, and I'm done now. Thinking is not tolerated here, clearly.) It was nice being on HN for awhile... but of course, the anti-intellectual snowflakes who run this site cannot abide actual critical thinking. A shame, this could be a good site if discussions were allowed, instead it is a filter bubble of only one ideological viewpoint. The bay area is quickly losing creditability-- as you advocate for "net neutrality" (which contains government censorship powers) on the argument that without it we will get government censorship, yet twitter and facebook and google are full scale censoring any viewpoint other than hard core militant marxist SJW... not to mention, HN does this as well. You guys reject thinking and the concept of diversity while justifying your sexism, racism and general bigotry with the #diversity hash tag. The thing is, you know you're hypocrites, but instead of learning or thinking you just make your wall 10 feet higher. By the way 850 points of karma proves I'm a good contributor here.... but one moderator disagrees with me and they take arbitrary action, without cause, without warning and without justification. Don't ever pretend like you believe in the rule of law, you're criminals under your own rules! -------- So to respond to the guy below: These "laws" (which are unconstitutional, by the way) make a mockery of the rule of law. They erode our rights until we are purely at the mercy of the whim of tyrants. You assume the rule of law is there to protect you and you would have recourse, but you're wrong. There are many examples similar to your buried gold one-- people having their life savings simply stolen by the government under asset forfeiture, or going to jail for "money laundering" etc when they did nothing actually criminal.

jonreem 9y ago
I don't see how this is any different from discovering years later that he had 10 pounds of gold buried in the backyard, a situation I'm sure you have some legal recourse in.

CryptoPunk 9y ago

It is a violation of privacy rights.

Maarten88 9y ago
Is there any right to keep your possessions private from the tax agency? Last time I checked, everyone had to specify everything of value owned, and sign for it, to calculate capital taxes due (I live in the EU). This includes BTC holdings. We have to trust the tax agency to keep tax data confidential. It surprises me that the US needs to change laws to require this only now. I'd say the wording of the old laws were probably too specific, and after this change they probably still are. A public ruling by the tax agency should be enough to require this for new forms of value like digital currencies.
- tehlike 9y ago
  Very true. The difference is people like to be in the gray area, and treat btc wealth as hidden and nontaxable. Now they will have hard reason to declare their coins and the source of them. On the flip side, i am not sure if there is any reason for "any body else" to know my networth, if i am not generating a taxable event.
- garmaine 9y ago
  > possessions private from the tax agency? Last time I checked, everyone had to specify everything of value owned, and sign for it, to calculate capital taxes due (I live in the EU). This includes BTC holdings. We have to trust the tax agency to keep tax data confidential. The Us does not have that kind of tax. There is no wealth/capital tax here. There is no tax authority with that information here. And to be honest, I find it abhorrent that you’ve been conditioned to accept that kind of invasion of privacy and mandated trust as normal and expected.
- CryptoPunk 9y ago
  The income tax requires violating privacy rights, which is why many libertarians oppose it.