4 ms·

So I read the 2016 ruling [1], and it basically stipulates that: Assim, as cripto-moeda podem gerar diferentes tipos de rendimentos tributáveis: 1) Por gan

So I read the 2016 ruling [1], and it basically stipulates that: Assim, as cripto-moeda podem gerar diferentes tipos de rendimentos tributáveis: 1) Por ganhos obtidos com compra e venda de unidades monetárias virtuais / troca ao câmbio do momento de cripto-moeda por moeda real (qualquer que ela seja) 2) Por obtenção de comissões pela prestação de serviços relacionados com a obtenção ou curso normal da cripto-moeda. 3) Por ganhos derivados de vendas de produtos ou serviços em cripto-moeda. which would basically translate to: Thus, the cryptocurrencies would generate 3 different type of taxable revenues: - the gains from selling/buying Cryptos when changing them into real fiat currency (whatever the currency) - for any commission one might earn for services related to the cryptos - for any gain that one might get from selling products or services in cryptos Basically this ruling is just about platforms not being entitled to charge VAT to their customers. [1] https://info.portaldasfinancas.gov.pt/pt/informacao_fiscal/informacoes_vinculativas/rendimento/cirs/Documents/PIV_09541.pdf https://info.portaldasfinancas.gov.pt/pt/informacao_fiscal/i...

icebraining 7y ago
I think that paragraph is just saying what they're going to analyse, not the conclusion. They proceed to analyse each hypothesis, and conclude crypto-coins don't fit in any, therefore not being taxable under personal IRS. That's at least how I (and Jornal de Negócios, the newspaper) read it.
- inlined 7y ago
  It seems this is following the collectibles argument. Bitcoin “isn’t” a currency but buying or selling the collectible of Bitcoin is a taxable transaction.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    That's not my reading, nor of the tax lawyer that read it: https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/opiniao/detalhe/as-mais-valias-das-criptomoedas https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/opiniao/detalhe/as-mais-vali... (in Portuguese). He writes: "Thus, in the understanding advocated by the [IRS], the profits obtained from the sale of cryptocurrencies are not taxable in the IRS under the Portuguese tax system, unless it is a taxpayer's professional or business activity, in which case it will be taxed as income falling within IRS category B."
    - jorge-d 7y ago
      Well, you're right in the case of non-recurring crypto trading. Now, in the paragraph B, it is said: Now the exercise of the activity is determined by its recurrence and the goal of the activity to generate profit. If there is a business or professional activity then the person would have to pay the IRS and would be required to comply with the reporting obligations, whenever you perform a sell or provide a service. To me, doing some crypto-trading would easily fall in this definition and the IRS might come later saying "hey, you did multiple transactions over the course of X months, this looks like a professional activity"

icebraining 7y ago

I think that paragraph is just saying what they're going to analyse, not the conclusion. They proceed to analyse each hypothesis, and conclude crypto-coins don't fit in any, therefore not being taxable under personal IRS. That's at least how I (and Jornal de Negócios, the newspaper) read it.

inlined 7y ago
It seems this is following the collectibles argument. Bitcoin “isn’t” a currency but buying or selling the collectible of Bitcoin is a taxable transaction.
- icebraining 7y ago
  That's not my reading, nor of the tax lawyer that read it: https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/opiniao/detalhe/as-mais-valias-das-criptomoedas https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/opiniao/detalhe/as-mais-vali... (in Portuguese). He writes: "Thus, in the understanding advocated by the [IRS], the profits obtained from the sale of cryptocurrencies are not taxable in the IRS under the Portuguese tax system, unless it is a taxpayer's professional or business activity, in which case it will be taxed as income falling within IRS category B."
  - jorge-d 7y ago
    Well, you're right in the case of non-recurring crypto trading. Now, in the paragraph B, it is said: Now the exercise of the activity is determined by its recurrence and the goal of the activity to generate profit. If there is a business or professional activity then the person would have to pay the IRS and would be required to comply with the reporting obligations, whenever you perform a sell or provide a service. To me, doing some crypto-trading would easily fall in this definition and the IRS might come later saying "hey, you did multiple transactions over the course of X months, this looks like a professional activity"