9 ms·

>mutual cooperation This is some quality spin, so kudos for that. You make it sound like the government and the individual in question came to a friendly agre

>mutual cooperation This is some quality spin, so kudos for that. You make it sound like the government and the individual in question came to a friendly agreement, when what happened was the government discovered the person's identity and used the powers available to them to get a consent to forfeiture out of them. >Very different than any random judge or municipal police freezing anything they want. Not at all. Just as the authorities have to know an identity to freeze an account in a criminal matter, if they know your identity then they can compel you to give up your Bitcoin stash. You can refuse, but then you'll go to jail. It's no different than some drug lord burying their money in the desert somewhere and refusing to give it up to the feds when they come. People keep pretending Bitcoin/cryptocurrency is magic and immune to real world pressures, and keep getting rude awakenings when they learn it's not.

ramenmeal 6y ago
Disclaimer, I know very little about bitcoin. If you owe the IRS tax money, they can take the money from your bank account without asking. They just do it. Can the same be done with bitcoin? As far as I know, they aren't able to. If that's the case, there's a difference.
- nannal 6y ago
  > Can the same be done with bitcoin? No, they don't have the keys, they can't sign a message as you.
- klodolph 6y ago
  They can "ask" you for your Bitcoin, but the question is phrased, "Would you rather give us your Bitcoin now, or would you rather spend some time in jail first and give us the Bitcoin later?" It generally requires a court order to get money out of your bank. If it's a Bitcoin wallet, then they can just send the court order to you directly, and put you in jail until you comply (i.e. as many years as it takes). The differences seem a bit superficial to me.
  - doggosphere 6y ago
    The difference is fundamental in that the "property" still exists outside the control of the government. If a trusted source has access to it, they can still move it. If such thing were to happen, and afterwards you complied, then there would be little grounds to hold you for contempt of court.
    - klodolph 6y ago
      > If such thing were to happen, and afterwards you complied, then there would be little grounds to hold you for contempt of court. The court system is not a computer program you can fool with clever tricks. If you are facing a court order to surrender money or other assets and try to evade it by moving the money around, you are just going to find yourself in deeper trouble. People have tried it before.
      - doggosphere 6y ago
        How do you surrender assets you don't have control over? I'm merely pointing out that the differences are not superficial.
        NationalPark 6y ago
        The point is that the judge won't say, "Aha! You got me!", the judge will say, "Cute trick, now back to jail."
        doggosphere 6y ago
        What grounds does a judge have to send the person to jail if they complied with the order to decrypt a wallet? There can be any number of reasons the coin was moved: - hacked by some 3rd party - corruption by officers (https://news.bitcoin.com/rogue-silk-road-agent-admits-to-stealing-bitcoins-seized-by-u-s-marshals/ https://news.bitcoin.com/rogue-silk-road-agent-admits-to-ste...) - partner in crime moved them, with or without consent from suspect.
- LiquidSky 6y ago
  This is the kind of magical thinking I'm talking about. If you owed the IRS tax money, you have a legal obligation to pay it, the IRS isn't responsible for coming and finding it. Garnishment or seizure are tools they can use to get the money, but the obligation is always there. If you don't pay you incur fines and penalties, potentially criminal penalties. You also have an obligation to report your assets. If you tried to keep your Bitcoin stash secret from the IRS to hide your money, you'd be looking at very serious criminal penalties, not to mention you could never touch your stash again if the IRS is coming after you without them immediately seeing you actually do have extra funds. Stop treating this as some abstract technical problem that ignores real-world consequences.
  - alasdair_ 6y ago
    >You also have an obligation to report your assets. Do you? I own things that are worth money that I've never had to report to anyone. I see needing to report a gain when the asset is sold, but the asset itself is less certain. Do I need to tell them about the $100 bill in my wallet?
    - jacques_chester 6y ago
      If it's at an overseas brokerage, you'll need to report make FinCEN report each year.
- kridsdale1 6y ago
  https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- overkalix 6y ago
  PPPSS. (Previous Poster's Point Still Stands). You could have cash buried in the desert and the IRS wouldn't be able to take it. Bitcoin is a way with both advantages and disadvantages to hide money, but it doesn't teleport you to another plane of reality where you're immune to the violence of the state.
  - at-fates-hands 6y ago
    That's happened in several high profile bank robberies. In one robbery (I think it was a robbery on a airport hanger where they robbed an armored car company) they guys went to jail and they have some $18 million or so split between four dudes. Even after trial, conviction and sentencing, the court reporter said the Feds still weren't able to recover around $5 million of the total money and have no idea what happened to it.
- at-fates-hands 6y ago
  Her's some actual legal information about the seizing of BTC by the FBI: In June 2014, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (‘UNODC’) published a ‘Basic Manual on the Detection and Investigation of the Laundering of Crime Proceeds Using Virtual Currencies’ (hereinafter ‘Manual’) providing a guide as to how the Bitcoin can be located and seized. The advantage of locating and seizing the Bitcoin wallet is that the potential complex jurisdictional issues that the use of virtual currencies creates, (as it operates in the online environment that blurs the national borders) can be avoided. The physical location of the instrument containing the Bitcoin wallet will in most cases be considered as the rightful jurisdiction for the purposes of freezing, seizure and confiscation. Despite the technological difficulty in the early detection of illegitimate use of Bitcoins, it is nevertheless possible although difficult for Bitcoins to be seized as proceeds of crime. The most effective way law enforcement authorities can seize Bitcoins is by obtaining the private keys which are linked to the Bitcoins or physically confiscating the ‘Bitcoin wallet’. Essentially once they have court approval and know where the wallet is - hard drive, USB drive, digital wallet. They will confiscate the wallet (similar to physical property seizures from a drug dealer) then just transfer the BTC to an account or wallet they control. The above article is from Australia, but the manual is used internationally so I'm assuming it would be the same for the US: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=40d618a0-89e0-4920-9826-60e4c72af103 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=40d618a0-89e0...
  - vmception 6y ago
    > The above article is from Australia, but the manual is used internationally so I'm assuming it would be the same for the US: As with all legal topics, not a good assumption. > Essentially once they have court approval and know where the wallet is - hard drive, USB drive, digital wallet. They will confiscate the wallet (similar to physical property seizures from a drug dealer) then just transfer the BTC to an account or wallet they control. You know this requires them having access to the private key. There is no "just transfer the BTC", there isn't even a guarantee that they are the only custodians of it as the wallet itself can be replicated and the "physical location" being in many places at once. There is no way of disproving that, only assuming based on most people's poor operational security.

ramenmeal 6y ago

Disclaimer, I know very little about bitcoin. If you owe the IRS tax money, they can take the money from your bank account without asking. They just do it. Can the same be done with bitcoin? As far as I know, they aren't able to. If that's the case, there's a difference.

nannal 6y ago
> Can the same be done with bitcoin? No, they don't have the keys, they can't sign a message as you.
klodolph 6y ago
They can "ask" you for your Bitcoin, but the question is phrased, "Would you rather give us your Bitcoin now, or would you rather spend some time in jail first and give us the Bitcoin later?" It generally requires a court order to get money out of your bank. If it's a Bitcoin wallet, then they can just send the court order to you directly, and put you in jail until you comply (i.e. as many years as it takes). The differences seem a bit superficial to me.
- doggosphere 6y ago
  The difference is fundamental in that the "property" still exists outside the control of the government. If a trusted source has access to it, they can still move it. If such thing were to happen, and afterwards you complied, then there would be little grounds to hold you for contempt of court.
  - klodolph 6y ago
    > If such thing were to happen, and afterwards you complied, then there would be little grounds to hold you for contempt of court. The court system is not a computer program you can fool with clever tricks. If you are facing a court order to surrender money or other assets and try to evade it by moving the money around, you are just going to find yourself in deeper trouble. People have tried it before.
    - doggosphere 6y ago
      How do you surrender assets you don't have control over? I'm merely pointing out that the differences are not superficial.
      - NationalPark 6y ago
        The point is that the judge won't say, "Aha! You got me!", the judge will say, "Cute trick, now back to jail."
        doggosphere 6y ago
        What grounds does a judge have to send the person to jail if they complied with the order to decrypt a wallet? There can be any number of reasons the coin was moved: - hacked by some 3rd party - corruption by officers (https://news.bitcoin.com/rogue-silk-road-agent-admits-to-stealing-bitcoins-seized-by-u-s-marshals/ https://news.bitcoin.com/rogue-silk-road-agent-admits-to-ste...) - partner in crime moved them, with or without consent from suspect.
LiquidSky 6y ago
This is the kind of magical thinking I'm talking about. If you owed the IRS tax money, you have a legal obligation to pay it, the IRS isn't responsible for coming and finding it. Garnishment or seizure are tools they can use to get the money, but the obligation is always there. If you don't pay you incur fines and penalties, potentially criminal penalties. You also have an obligation to report your assets. If you tried to keep your Bitcoin stash secret from the IRS to hide your money, you'd be looking at very serious criminal penalties, not to mention you could never touch your stash again if the IRS is coming after you without them immediately seeing you actually do have extra funds. Stop treating this as some abstract technical problem that ignores real-world consequences.
- alasdair_ 6y ago
  >You also have an obligation to report your assets. Do you? I own things that are worth money that I've never had to report to anyone. I see needing to report a gain when the asset is sold, but the asset itself is less certain. Do I need to tell them about the $100 bill in my wallet?
  - jacques_chester 6y ago
    If it's at an overseas brokerage, you'll need to report make FinCEN report each year.
kridsdale1 6y ago
https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
overkalix 6y ago
PPPSS. (Previous Poster's Point Still Stands). You could have cash buried in the desert and the IRS wouldn't be able to take it. Bitcoin is a way with both advantages and disadvantages to hide money, but it doesn't teleport you to another plane of reality where you're immune to the violence of the state.
- at-fates-hands 6y ago
  That's happened in several high profile bank robberies. In one robbery (I think it was a robbery on a airport hanger where they robbed an armored car company) they guys went to jail and they have some $18 million or so split between four dudes. Even after trial, conviction and sentencing, the court reporter said the Feds still weren't able to recover around $5 million of the total money and have no idea what happened to it.
at-fates-hands 6y ago
Her's some actual legal information about the seizing of BTC by the FBI: In June 2014, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (‘UNODC’) published a ‘Basic Manual on the Detection and Investigation of the Laundering of Crime Proceeds Using Virtual Currencies’ (hereinafter ‘Manual’) providing a guide as to how the Bitcoin can be located and seized. The advantage of locating and seizing the Bitcoin wallet is that the potential complex jurisdictional issues that the use of virtual currencies creates, (as it operates in the online environment that blurs the national borders) can be avoided. The physical location of the instrument containing the Bitcoin wallet will in most cases be considered as the rightful jurisdiction for the purposes of freezing, seizure and confiscation. Despite the technological difficulty in the early detection of illegitimate use of Bitcoins, it is nevertheless possible although difficult for Bitcoins to be seized as proceeds of crime. The most effective way law enforcement authorities can seize Bitcoins is by obtaining the private keys which are linked to the Bitcoins or physically confiscating the ‘Bitcoin wallet’. Essentially once they have court approval and know where the wallet is - hard drive, USB drive, digital wallet. They will confiscate the wallet (similar to physical property seizures from a drug dealer) then just transfer the BTC to an account or wallet they control. The above article is from Australia, but the manual is used internationally so I'm assuming it would be the same for the US: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=40d618a0-89e0-4920-9826-60e4c72af103 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=40d618a0-89e0...
- vmception 6y ago
  > The above article is from Australia, but the manual is used internationally so I'm assuming it would be the same for the US: As with all legal topics, not a good assumption. > Essentially once they have court approval and know where the wallet is - hard drive, USB drive, digital wallet. They will confiscate the wallet (similar to physical property seizures from a drug dealer) then just transfer the BTC to an account or wallet they control. You know this requires them having access to the private key. There is no "just transfer the BTC", there isn't even a guarantee that they are the only custodians of it as the wallet itself can be replicated and the "physical location" being in many places at once. There is no way of disproving that, only assuming based on most people's poor operational security.