4 ms·

JP Morgan Chase currently lost their motion to dismiss a lawsuit against their policy of treating cryptocurrency purchases as cash advances But their terms of

JP Morgan Chase currently lost their motion to dismiss a lawsuit against their policy of treating cryptocurrency purchases as cash advances But their terms of service didn't spell out cryptocurrencies, lets see how it plays out I’m betting cryptocurrency purchases will begin accurately falling under a consumer goods framework sooner rather than later, indistinct from buying a cryptographic accesstoken for any saas product which powers your user session.

kelnos 7y ago
> JP Morgan Chase currently lost their motion to dismiss a lawsuit against their policy of treating cryptocurrency purchases as cash advances Just a note for people reading this who might not understand the nuances of the American tort system: this merely means that JPM's lawyers tried to "short circuit" the process by asking a judge to decide the case has no merit, and throw it out before going through the whole process. The judge disagreed, thinks there might be merit to the case, and wants to see it go to trial (or, more likely, see JPM settle with the plaintiff).
TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
Why wouldn't they be treated as cash equivalents? Do you believe cryptocurrency is not currency?
- rolltiide 7y ago
  They are hashes secured by repeatable cryptography which are stored on a distributed database The monikers are skeumorphs to be more relatable to a nearest prior elementary concept Some of those hashes are used for payment, some of those hashes are used for a record of fractional ownership of an enterprise, some of those hashes are used to access a good or service. A credit card company would therefore be misapplying their policy, when there isnt enough information in their transaction detail and also no rationale for charging higher fees for this type of transaction. If any actual risk was higher they should make a third category. Otherwise treat a crypto transaction like any purchase of consumer goods.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
    Contracts and law generally tend to see through the technical details. It is functionally like cash, therefore it is a cash equivalent.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    This is the sort of "laws work like computer code" thinking that gets you "I don't recognize this court because it has a fringed flag" sovereign citizen types. A judge is not going to see it this way.
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      Several countries and states have laws reflective of what I described, with the same taxonomy already in committee in Congress US payment processors are the ones flying blind and interpreting things arbitrarily, and the courts might too, but the direction the legislatures are going will correct that
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        US payment processors have been giving casino chips this treatment for decades. I see no reason US legislatures would give cryptocurrency better treatment than that - if anything, they're more likely to smack it around.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        Casino chips tend to be fiat-denominated and trivially redeemable at face value, so are true cash equivalents. Cryptocurrencies tend not to be fiat-denominated, and even those that are don't have trivial free frictionless exchange for fiat at face value.
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        The Euro has an exchange rate and forex spread, too, hence neither of those things are disqualifying as a cash equivalent.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  No, currency has a specific definition: (1) a system of money in general use in a particular country. (2) the fact or quality of being generally accepted or in use. Cryptocurrencies satisfy neither definition and are therefore not currencies. They may be cash equivalents for the purpose of this definition, however. More like a gift card whose value fluctuates wildly and is primarily used for narcotics, money laundering and at best, speculation.
- pwinnski 7y ago
  When you are being encouraged to purchase Bitcoin (for example), it's the currency of the future. When you are trying to use a credit card to purchase Bitcoin (for example), it's not a currency. When you are facing a tax bill, I can't remember whether the claim is that it's a currency or a security.

kelnos 7y ago

> JP Morgan Chase currently lost their motion to dismiss a lawsuit against their policy of treating cryptocurrency purchases as cash advances Just a note for people reading this who might not understand the nuances of the American tort system: this merely means that JPM's lawyers tried to "short circuit" the process by asking a judge to decide the case has no merit, and throw it out before going through the whole process. The judge disagreed, thinks there might be merit to the case, and wants to see it go to trial (or, more likely, see JPM settle with the plaintiff).

TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago

Why wouldn't they be treated as cash equivalents? Do you believe cryptocurrency is not currency?

rolltiide 7y ago
They are hashes secured by repeatable cryptography which are stored on a distributed database The monikers are skeumorphs to be more relatable to a nearest prior elementary concept Some of those hashes are used for payment, some of those hashes are used for a record of fractional ownership of an enterprise, some of those hashes are used to access a good or service. A credit card company would therefore be misapplying their policy, when there isnt enough information in their transaction detail and also no rationale for charging higher fees for this type of transaction. If any actual risk was higher they should make a third category. Otherwise treat a crypto transaction like any purchase of consumer goods.
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
  Contracts and law generally tend to see through the technical details. It is functionally like cash, therefore it is a cash equivalent.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  This is the sort of "laws work like computer code" thinking that gets you "I don't recognize this court because it has a fringed flag" sovereign citizen types. A judge is not going to see it this way.
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    Several countries and states have laws reflective of what I described, with the same taxonomy already in committee in Congress US payment processors are the ones flying blind and interpreting things arbitrarily, and the courts might too, but the direction the legislatures are going will correct that
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      US payment processors have been giving casino chips this treatment for decades. I see no reason US legislatures would give cryptocurrency better treatment than that - if anything, they're more likely to smack it around.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        Casino chips tend to be fiat-denominated and trivially redeemable at face value, so are true cash equivalents. Cryptocurrencies tend not to be fiat-denominated, and even those that are don't have trivial free frictionless exchange for fiat at face value.
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        The Euro has an exchange rate and forex spread, too, hence neither of those things are disqualifying as a cash equivalent.
arcticbull 7y ago
No, currency has a specific definition: (1) a system of money in general use in a particular country. (2) the fact or quality of being generally accepted or in use. Cryptocurrencies satisfy neither definition and are therefore not currencies. They may be cash equivalents for the purpose of this definition, however. More like a gift card whose value fluctuates wildly and is primarily used for narcotics, money laundering and at best, speculation.
pwinnski 7y ago
When you are being encouraged to purchase Bitcoin (for example), it's the currency of the future. When you are trying to use a credit card to purchase Bitcoin (for example), it's not a currency. When you are facing a tax bill, I can't remember whether the claim is that it's a currency or a security.