4 ms·
The third example lays out a situation where the loss is not deductable even though it is a real loss. What worries me more is that this is an "instruction", b
by ptaipale 9y ago
The third example lays out a situation where the loss is not deductable even though it is a real loss.
What worries me more is that this is an "instruction", but the tax authorities are not bound by instructions. And they are known to do as they want, even flouting European law (particularly when it is to do with car taxes, although not so much related to bitcoins.).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- matt4077 9y agoSomeone actually did the leg work and disproved you. How about saying “I was wrong” instead of careening off into conspiracy theories and unrelated grievances?
- heavenlyblue 9y agoIt only works that way if both of them are equally familiar with Finish culture.
- ptaipale 8y agoDisproved what? The previous commenter explained cases 1 and 2, I just mentioned the example in case 3 where loss is not deductable (I'm Finnish so I do read that fluently).
- ska 9y agoLots of losses aren't deductible, there is no a-priori reason to assume bitcoin losses would be. You can lobby to have tax treatment of cryptocurrency changed, of course, but you are still bound by the law(s) under which you are tax resident. And they all have weird corners.