11 ms·

A cool use of the Lightning network is the podcast 2.0 initative. Currently, as I listen to podcasts, I stream back satoshis (sats), value for value (I use Cast

A cool use of the Lightning network is the podcast 2.0 initative. Currently, as I listen to podcasts, I stream back satoshis (sats), value for value (I use Castamatic on iOS, fountain.fm is also an option on Android). You can also send messages with sats attached, called “boosts”. Creators can transparantly split the sats they receive over various goals (i.e. FOSS projects [opensats], or guests on shows). There are no transaction fees afaik, that is just when your lightning node syncs with the main blockchain, and then you can bundle a lot of transactions. I find this a very healthy counter movement to the current centralization that is going on in Podcasting where indie creators are being sucked into Spotify and YouTube (and sometimes are being censored there). The podcast 2.0 movement is not all about value for value, there are also cool features like artwork per chapter, sharing of snippets, a way to specify different formats (like opus) for the same podcast/episode, and many more modern things. It’s a cool community and if you ask me, the first really useful thing to come out of “blockchain”. Edit: Yeah I want to add some references but my company uses Cisco Umbrella and some things are blocked. Moreover, I can see it also MITMs my own websites (like my NextCloud instance), because those are not my certs!... But I digress.

TekMol 4y ago
How do you handle the tax implications of streaming sats? As far as I know, every payment with Bitcoin triggers a taxable event? Do you record a gazillion log entrys "Paid $0.0000145 for listening podcasts, Paid $0.000142 for listening podcasts ...", crunch all the numbers and then at the end of the year put that gigantic list into your tax declaration?
- londons_explore 4y ago
  Software can do it all for you. Not my problem that the IRS can't handle my 10 million page tax return...
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    It’s anoying for me. I remember living in place where doing my taxes was taking 15min total. Here, without third party software it’s a challenge
- teekert 4y ago
  I'm not on the receiving end, but to me this seems like the law is behind reality. Micropayments are coming, perhaps using blockchain, perhaps not, probably in a number of different ways. I guess this is a good question for the hosts of the podcasts that use these features (Like Linux Unplugged, and other shows from Jupiter Broadcasting or the No Agenda show by Adam Curry and John Dvorak.) Perhaps this is not answered yet. In the Netherlands this only becomes relevant over a certain amount, and I think you can then just bundle all amounts. But I'm also not sure.
  - TekMol 4y ago
    In the US and other countries I have heard about, it applies to the sender also. If you buy Bitcoin for $X and then buy something with those Bitcoin, then you have to record the "fair value" $Y of that something and pay taxes on $Y-$X. On the amount that your "Bitcoin speculation" has earned you. Looks like in the Netherland, it is different indeed. Making it much easier to use Bitcoin.
  - FabHK 4y ago
    > Micropayments are coming, perhaps using blockchain Blockchain is remarkably ill-suited for micropayments.
    - gikrauss 4y ago
      L2 solutions are proving that this is not quite true.
    - dopidopHN 4y ago
      Oh god yes. I manage block chain nodes those days. We build some type of wallet. Those things works. But the pain is fresh
    - samatman 4y ago
      Untrue both in general and in particular. Most blockchains are worthless and have nothing in the way of transaction fees or indeed transactions. Doge is perfect for micropayments! This was a fad on reddit back in the day. In particular, well, the title of the article says it all. If you have BTC, and you want to send a few sats and pay basically nothing, Lighting has existed for years and works just fine. Edit: I don't think micropayments are such a great idea to begin with, but the arguments for that have nothing to do with the medium of payment: assuming a perfect micropayment system, people still won't want to use it for off-topic reasons.
- wanderingbort 4y ago
  Not a lawyer or accountant here but I think it would be reasonable to only treat the eventual on-chain withdraw as a taxable event. Until then, you have deposited some value in a number of lightening network nodes and have been negotiating a set of pairwise IOUs with them for later. DeFi/staking has a similar problem and I believe waiting until gains and losses are realized will be the way it goes down. For now, make a good faith effort to pay taxes or expect some friction later.
  - 4kimov 4y ago
    That's right, moving sats via LN is done off-chain. Once the channel closes, that's when it settles to L1, at which point tools like Rotki can help you figure it out.
  - lairv 4y ago
    > it would be reasonable to only treat the eventual on-chain withdraw as a taxable event wouldn't that be an easy way to bypass taxes ? make all your transactions off-chain and just withdraw once a year ?
    - dboreham 4y ago
      How does that bypass taxes?
    - meowkit 4y ago
      No. Its a settlement layer. I do 1000 streaming transactions on a channel. When the channel is closed (withdrawn back to the L1 chain, or settled - offchain is the wrong term here Lightning is an L2 "channel"), the transactions are summarized and you can tax that summary event. It's a linear sum of taxes. Of course there are scenarios that complicates things like variable sales tax rates based on transaction type/location/good, but that's an extended conversation. If you really want tax enforcement, governments should be looking to develop CBDC integration on the merchant side with bridge support for major crypto currencies. Given Intuit's iron grip on tax lobbying I don't have much hope for innovate tax schemes though.
- protonbob 4y ago
  I think this is one of those circumstances where you just don't tell the IRS. Just like running a garage sale or a lemonade stand.
  - cowtools 4y ago
    lemonade stands do not keep an easily accessible eternal log of their payments
    - RedNifre 4y ago
      Lightning channels don't either, only the settled transaction in the end gets written back to the block chain.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- samatman 4y ago
  I'm of the opinion that the rules are behind the law when it comes to BTC. I am deeply uninterested in being anywhere near the legal case that challenges this! But currency exchange for 'ordinary purposes' is not taxed, if my company bought some Euros to pay for foreign goods and the Euro rallied against the dollar before the purchase, no tax is owed. Well, BTC is legal tender in El Salvador, and there's no rule that the (in the above) Euros in question have to be paid to a country where the Euro is legal tender: perhaps they're a Singaporean business which mostly exports to Europe, so their prices are in Euros and it shouldn't matter. The US might not like that El Salvator made BTC official, but that shouldn't matter either. Better keep your books very carefully though, because buying currency with the intention of selling it later (aka exchanging it for another currency) is investment purposes.
  - ska 4y ago
    I don't think the OP was bringing up the FX tax implications, but rather tax on the sale of a service.
    - samatman 4y ago
      That seems unlikely to me, since income tax has to be paid by recipients whether payment is in coin or in kind. BTC is a kind. If I pay you in silver rounds, you are responsible for paying income tax for the convertible value of the silver at the time of payment, but not capital gains at any point.
      - ska 4y ago
        sales tax, not income tax. someone has to calculate, report, and remit it for all these micro transactions somehow. I thought that is what GP was referring to , may be mistaken. In that context cap gains vs other sorts of income is irrelevant.
        samatman 4y ago
        In this case it's definitely income, see https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/207477063-US-Creator-Frequently-Asked-Tax-Questions https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/207477063-US-C..., the scenario is directly analogous to Patreon or tipping a Twitch streamer. They may also owe sales tax! https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043054911-Patreon-s-Sales-Tax-Requirements https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043054911-P... Which, yikes, no wonder running your own business is such a drag, that feels like double-dipping to me. I didn't owe sales tax when I was freelancing, but it is what it is. Either way though, it's not any sort of headache, because the dollar is still used as unit of account, and what's owed is the value at the time of transaction: what you owe on $500 delivered in BTC is what you owe on $500, presuming you turn it into cash within a year (IANAL, I recall that goods paid in kind become investments after a year, such that gains are owed if sold at a profit). The problematic tax situation is when someone buys some Bitcoin, and then wants to spend it, since you have to figure out gains on each transaction and report it correctly, that's a huge hassle. I suspect most people who sincerely try to pay capital gains on Bitcoin purchases get it wrong: if you buy 0.1 BTC at 7K and 0.1 BTC at 45K, then spend $1000 worth at 20K, what capital gains do you owe? Does it depend on which wallet you reached into? I have no idea and, really, feel like I shouldn't have to have any idea. It's the main thing that keeps me from paying in BTC when a vendor likes that form of payment. I could maybe pay a month's rent with the coin in my cushions, I have it because it tickles my fancy to pay for things with magic internet money, but it's just not worth the paperwork to actually do it.
- tzs 4y ago
  Tax does indeed tend to be a hard problem in these kinds of systems, but I think you (and most responses so far to your comment) are looking at it from the wrong end. It's the seller, not the buyer, that has to deal with taxes in most jurisdictions. For podcasts I'd expect the podcaster to be the seller and the listener to be the buyer. Simplest example is the EU. When you sell a digital good to someone in the EU VAT is owed on that in the country in which the buyer resides, but the seller is responsible for collecting that VAT and then reporting and remitting it to the buyer's country. The EU makes this simple. You can register with any EU country, and then report and remit you VAT for all EU countries to that one country's tax agency. That country's tax agency will then settle with the others. Ireland is a good EU country for this if you are a seller in a non-EU English speaking place. It takes about 10 minutes to register with Ireland online for this, and the quarterly tax filings with them are a simple CSV upload that you can also do in a few minutes. Note that this means the seller has to know how much they sold to buyers in each EU country each quarter. That necessitates some form of tracking. The situation is similar, but more work to deal with, in the US with sales tax and use tax. For sake of this discussion I'm just going to call both of those sales taxes [1]. It's more work in the US because (1) thresholds for taxability are often of the form "N transaction or $X in sales" usually with N = 200 so you can get above the threshold on a very tiny sales amount as opposed to EU where thresholds are based just on amount of sales, (2) sales tax is often the sum of statewide, countywide, citywide, and special taxing district sales taxes, so to actually figure out the tax on any given sale you need to know the full physical address of the buyer, and (3) while there is some cooperation among about half the states to do a system conceptually like the EU's, for the other half of the states if you meet their thresholds you need to register with, file with, and remit to each of them separately. There is a way around this (besides just ignoring taxes). You can go through an intermediary that takes on legally the role of the seller. It is that intermediary that then needs to track how much is sold in each state and country and how much tax is owed. That's how it works for app developers selling through the Apple app store for example. Until tax laws are changed to be more friendly to micropayments directly to content creators, going through some kind of store that aggregates content from multiple creators is probably the best we can legally do. [1] A sales tax is a tax on the sale of something. A use tax is a tax on having something. The big difference is that a state makes the seller collect sales tax, but use tax is suppose to be dealt with be the person who owns the thing. It used to be that states could not force sellers to collect sales tax unless the seller had a presence in the state. So states would impose both a sales tax and a use tax, and the use tax was the exact same rate as the sales tax and had a deduction for the amount of sales tax paid. The net result was that if you bought something from an in-state seller they collected sales tax and you owed no use tax. If you bought something from an out-of-state seller, no sales tax was collected and you owed use tax on the full purchase price. If you travelled to another state, bought an item and paid sales tax to that state then brought the item home, and that other state's sales tax rate was lower than your state's use tax rate, you owed the difference in use tax. The use tax exactly equalling the sales tax and being discounted by any sales tax already paid is because the Constitution restricts the states from regulating interstate commerce. Applying a higher tax to goods from out out of state than you do to domestic goods would run afoul of that. By making it so that the total sales + use tax was the same for imported and domestic item the state was not interfering with interstate commerce. But a few years ago the Supreme Court overturned the cases that had said that states could not force sellers with no in-state presence to collect taxes. Now states can make out-of-state sellers collect the sales/use tax so for most purposes there is not much point in distinguishing between sales and use taxes.
- worik 4y ago
  > As far as I know, every payment with Bitcoin triggers a taxable event? tl:dr Unlikely Unsure what the regime in your area does, but... Here (Aotearoa) the tax authorities are not interested in rats and mice. I play in a rock band as a hobby. Occasionally we get paid ($300 is the most ever). We had a promoter not pay us because we had "not given him the tax forms". I contacted our tax authorities and was told, in no uncertain terms, if it is a hobby, if you are not making serious money, do not tell us about it. Please do not tell us. We have a transaction tax here that merchants have to charge and pay, but only when their revenues top $50,000 So there are two data points that indicate that not every transaction incurs tax
Grumbledour 4y ago
I really dislike this whole initiative and much prefer the patreon model. One reason of course might be that i am listening to Jupiter Broadcast and Chris pushes this stuff hard, really annoying me with the constant talk about lightning and especially the boosts, which seem to take over half the show, because somehow he seems not to realize that the problem he has in getting regular supporters is the insane price he asks (last i looked about $2,50 per episode), but likes to give everyone several minutes of the show who sent him 20 cents. But I think my misgivings go further than that and i am especially concerned about this taking over podcasts or even open source, because while I do understand that people need to eat, I think these two ecosystems especially thrive because so many people contribute to them without profit being their first motive. I would not ask people to do work for free, but I often find that that when profit comes into it, quality starts to suffer and ideals get lost. Sure, lightning is in some ways similar to patreon etc. because it might still be user financed, but I feel the unpredictability of getting funds, the more attention focused model, will have similar effects on creators than other platforms with similar models do and I am mostly not fond of this.
- teekert 4y ago
  Chris indeed pushes it hard, I think indeed too hard, I agree. But it's reducing and moving to other shows (like OfficeHours.hair). To him this is the response to centralization of podcasting and I see that. As a member (I do 8$ a month, supporting 1 show but listen to all) I also see the imbalance in the attention that 2ct boosts get. It will go 1 of 2 ways I guess: 1) Boosts become the main income and keep getting attention (but at some cutoff like with NoAgenda donations. 2) Boosts remain a minor part and the attention decreases. If I were you I'd sit it out and let Chris try. I do like putting 100$ every (half?) year or so in my podcast app and letting the app distribute it over everything I listen to. But that's also because I'm at an age where I have disposable income. I pay for the membership to get the ads out of my fav podcast.
  - Grumbledour 4y ago
    You are right and i should not even have mentioned him, because i don't support him (though i wanted to once) and so really have no grounds to complain. I let my annoyance get the better of me and it seems just mean now when i reread it. It also just undermines my skepticism and dislike of the podcasts 2.0 thing, which should have been my main point.
soulofmischief 4y ago
It makes my eyes water sometimes when i see all of the cool things so many people on the planet are working on, and that they also have users.
kylebenzle 4y ago
yieldcrv 4y ago
podcast boosts? is bitcoin interesting again? are there cool applications using Taproot and Schnorr? are lightning network openings and closings looking identical as any other transaction or script, improving confidentiality? where are the current communities that talk about whats going on there? I don't visit bitcoin reddits anymore and the cryptocurrency communities are about pretty much everything else
shmatt 4y ago
Like 99% of crypto projects, this would work just as well under a centralized db / FIAT
- simonmales 4y ago
  Not exactly. Lightning means they receiver gets 100% what I send. This is particularly interesting for micropayments. I can tip someone 1 cent, or less with no middle man.
  - shmatt 4y ago
    the fact you are using the lightning network means there is some thing writing down a transaction from wallet a to wallet b smart contracts are a middle man, and not a great one from all the recent exploits executed on them
    - simonmales 4y ago
      If I were to send you satoshis via lightning. It wouldn't be recorded in the Bitcoin blockchain.
    - noch 4y ago
      > the fact you are using the lightning network means there is some thing writing down a transaction from wallet a to wallet b Correction: Lightning is a peer-to-peer payment network https://docs.lightning.engineering/the-lightning-network/payment-channels https://docs.lightning.engineering/the-lightning-network/pay...
  - lxgr 4y ago
    What's the incentive for anybody to open a lightning channel, providing connetivity etc. without compensation? And even if all of this was indeed done for free (sustainably, not as a loss leader): Dispute resolution and fraud costs money. Free leaves zero margin for either, and I wouldn't use a payment service not providing both.
    - 4y ago
joshstrange 4y ago
I pay for 5 podcasts, I do it via Patreon, Memberful, and a custom (stripe-based) solution. I'm not really sure what problem needs to be solved in this space. I pay for 2 podcasts that I haven't listened to in months, I do it because I pay to support these creators. I don't need/want my listen history to directly correlate to sending money to hosts I like (nor do they, they'd much rather have the constant stream instead of peaks and valleys). Also, I actually hate the idea of "boosts", it just encourages bad behavior (just like IAP's that aren't one-time/DLC/remove-ads).
- bubersson 4y ago
  Patreon bans podcasters sometimes, you also have to be in one of the lucky countries to be able to use it - other people are excluded. There are annoying fees that Patreon (and credit card providers) take on each transaction (afaik around 10%), so the actual podcasters get quite smaller amount compared to what you send...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mrorbitman 4y ago
  all those websites take their cut. and visa takes their cut. and still the podcaster can't "cash out" immediately, depending on settlement times and policies of the corporations. Essentially, the middlemen have the creators by the balls, lightning solves that.
bethecloud 4y ago
This would be even more awesome if the underlying object storage was distributed on web3 via storj (would generate better bandwidth margins too)
the_gastropod 4y ago
Let's ignore the Lightning Network for a moment, and dig into the meat of what you're suggesting: that people—in some meaningnful number—would prefer to spend money to get a thing they currently get for free (with the caveat that they occasionally they have to listen to / watch advertisements). Maybe you're right! But: 1. I doubt it. And 2. Lightning Network isn't the only technological solution to such an idea. This concept isn't particularly common, probably, because most people will put up with a lot to avoid spending actual money.

TekMol 4y ago

How do you handle the tax implications of streaming sats? As far as I know, every payment with Bitcoin triggers a taxable event? Do you record a gazillion log entrys "Paid $0.0000145 for listening podcasts, Paid $0.000142 for listening podcasts ...", crunch all the numbers and then at the end of the year put that gigantic list into your tax declaration?

londons_explore 4y ago
Software can do it all for you. Not my problem that the IRS can't handle my 10 million page tax return...
- dopidopHN 4y ago
  It’s anoying for me. I remember living in place where doing my taxes was taking 15min total. Here, without third party software it’s a challenge
teekert 4y ago
I'm not on the receiving end, but to me this seems like the law is behind reality. Micropayments are coming, perhaps using blockchain, perhaps not, probably in a number of different ways. I guess this is a good question for the hosts of the podcasts that use these features (Like Linux Unplugged, and other shows from Jupiter Broadcasting or the No Agenda show by Adam Curry and John Dvorak.) Perhaps this is not answered yet. In the Netherlands this only becomes relevant over a certain amount, and I think you can then just bundle all amounts. But I'm also not sure.
- TekMol 4y ago
  In the US and other countries I have heard about, it applies to the sender also. If you buy Bitcoin for $X and then buy something with those Bitcoin, then you have to record the "fair value" $Y of that something and pay taxes on $Y-$X. On the amount that your "Bitcoin speculation" has earned you. Looks like in the Netherland, it is different indeed. Making it much easier to use Bitcoin.
- FabHK 4y ago
  > Micropayments are coming, perhaps using blockchain Blockchain is remarkably ill-suited for micropayments.
  - gikrauss 4y ago
    L2 solutions are proving that this is not quite true.
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    Oh god yes. I manage block chain nodes those days. We build some type of wallet. Those things works. But the pain is fresh
  - samatman 4y ago
    Untrue both in general and in particular. Most blockchains are worthless and have nothing in the way of transaction fees or indeed transactions. Doge is perfect for micropayments! This was a fad on reddit back in the day. In particular, well, the title of the article says it all. If you have BTC, and you want to send a few sats and pay basically nothing, Lighting has existed for years and works just fine. Edit: I don't think micropayments are such a great idea to begin with, but the arguments for that have nothing to do with the medium of payment: assuming a perfect micropayment system, people still won't want to use it for off-topic reasons.
wanderingbort 4y ago
Not a lawyer or accountant here but I think it would be reasonable to only treat the eventual on-chain withdraw as a taxable event. Until then, you have deposited some value in a number of lightening network nodes and have been negotiating a set of pairwise IOUs with them for later. DeFi/staking has a similar problem and I believe waiting until gains and losses are realized will be the way it goes down. For now, make a good faith effort to pay taxes or expect some friction later.
- 4kimov 4y ago
  That's right, moving sats via LN is done off-chain. Once the channel closes, that's when it settles to L1, at which point tools like Rotki can help you figure it out.
- lairv 4y ago
  > it would be reasonable to only treat the eventual on-chain withdraw as a taxable event wouldn't that be an easy way to bypass taxes ? make all your transactions off-chain and just withdraw once a year ?
  - dboreham 4y ago
    How does that bypass taxes?
  - meowkit 4y ago
    No. Its a settlement layer. I do 1000 streaming transactions on a channel. When the channel is closed (withdrawn back to the L1 chain, or settled - offchain is the wrong term here Lightning is an L2 "channel"), the transactions are summarized and you can tax that summary event. It's a linear sum of taxes. Of course there are scenarios that complicates things like variable sales tax rates based on transaction type/location/good, but that's an extended conversation. If you really want tax enforcement, governments should be looking to develop CBDC integration on the merchant side with bridge support for major crypto currencies. Given Intuit's iron grip on tax lobbying I don't have much hope for innovate tax schemes though.
protonbob 4y ago
I think this is one of those circumstances where you just don't tell the IRS. Just like running a garage sale or a lemonade stand.
- cowtools 4y ago
  lemonade stands do not keep an easily accessible eternal log of their payments
  - RedNifre 4y ago
    Lightning channels don't either, only the settled transaction in the end gets written back to the block chain.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
samatman 4y ago
I'm of the opinion that the rules are behind the law when it comes to BTC. I am deeply uninterested in being anywhere near the legal case that challenges this! But currency exchange for 'ordinary purposes' is not taxed, if my company bought some Euros to pay for foreign goods and the Euro rallied against the dollar before the purchase, no tax is owed. Well, BTC is legal tender in El Salvador, and there's no rule that the (in the above) Euros in question have to be paid to a country where the Euro is legal tender: perhaps they're a Singaporean business which mostly exports to Europe, so their prices are in Euros and it shouldn't matter. The US might not like that El Salvator made BTC official, but that shouldn't matter either. Better keep your books very carefully though, because buying currency with the intention of selling it later (aka exchanging it for another currency) is investment purposes.
- ska 4y ago
  I don't think the OP was bringing up the FX tax implications, but rather tax on the sale of a service.
  - samatman 4y ago
    That seems unlikely to me, since income tax has to be paid by recipients whether payment is in coin or in kind. BTC is a kind. If I pay you in silver rounds, you are responsible for paying income tax for the convertible value of the silver at the time of payment, but not capital gains at any point.
    - ska 4y ago
      sales tax, not income tax. someone has to calculate, report, and remit it for all these micro transactions somehow. I thought that is what GP was referring to , may be mistaken. In that context cap gains vs other sorts of income is irrelevant.
      - samatman 4y ago
        In this case it's definitely income, see https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/207477063-US-Creator-Frequently-Asked-Tax-Questions https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/207477063-US-C..., the scenario is directly analogous to Patreon or tipping a Twitch streamer. They may also owe sales tax! https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043054911-Patreon-s-Sales-Tax-Requirements https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043054911-P... Which, yikes, no wonder running your own business is such a drag, that feels like double-dipping to me. I didn't owe sales tax when I was freelancing, but it is what it is. Either way though, it's not any sort of headache, because the dollar is still used as unit of account, and what's owed is the value at the time of transaction: what you owe on $500 delivered in BTC is what you owe on $500, presuming you turn it into cash within a year (IANAL, I recall that goods paid in kind become investments after a year, such that gains are owed if sold at a profit). The problematic tax situation is when someone buys some Bitcoin, and then wants to spend it, since you have to figure out gains on each transaction and report it correctly, that's a huge hassle. I suspect most people who sincerely try to pay capital gains on Bitcoin purchases get it wrong: if you buy 0.1 BTC at 7K and 0.1 BTC at 45K, then spend $1000 worth at 20K, what capital gains do you owe? Does it depend on which wallet you reached into? I have no idea and, really, feel like I shouldn't have to have any idea. It's the main thing that keeps me from paying in BTC when a vendor likes that form of payment. I could maybe pay a month's rent with the coin in my cushions, I have it because it tickles my fancy to pay for things with magic internet money, but it's just not worth the paperwork to actually do it.
tzs 4y ago
Tax does indeed tend to be a hard problem in these kinds of systems, but I think you (and most responses so far to your comment) are looking at it from the wrong end. It's the seller, not the buyer, that has to deal with taxes in most jurisdictions. For podcasts I'd expect the podcaster to be the seller and the listener to be the buyer. Simplest example is the EU. When you sell a digital good to someone in the EU VAT is owed on that in the country in which the buyer resides, but the seller is responsible for collecting that VAT and then reporting and remitting it to the buyer's country. The EU makes this simple. You can register with any EU country, and then report and remit you VAT for all EU countries to that one country's tax agency. That country's tax agency will then settle with the others. Ireland is a good EU country for this if you are a seller in a non-EU English speaking place. It takes about 10 minutes to register with Ireland online for this, and the quarterly tax filings with them are a simple CSV upload that you can also do in a few minutes. Note that this means the seller has to know how much they sold to buyers in each EU country each quarter. That necessitates some form of tracking. The situation is similar, but more work to deal with, in the US with sales tax and use tax. For sake of this discussion I'm just going to call both of those sales taxes [1]. It's more work in the US because (1) thresholds for taxability are often of the form "N transaction or $X in sales" usually with N = 200 so you can get above the threshold on a very tiny sales amount as opposed to EU where thresholds are based just on amount of sales, (2) sales tax is often the sum of statewide, countywide, citywide, and special taxing district sales taxes, so to actually figure out the tax on any given sale you need to know the full physical address of the buyer, and (3) while there is some cooperation among about half the states to do a system conceptually like the EU's, for the other half of the states if you meet their thresholds you need to register with, file with, and remit to each of them separately. There is a way around this (besides just ignoring taxes). You can go through an intermediary that takes on legally the role of the seller. It is that intermediary that then needs to track how much is sold in each state and country and how much tax is owed. That's how it works for app developers selling through the Apple app store for example. Until tax laws are changed to be more friendly to micropayments directly to content creators, going through some kind of store that aggregates content from multiple creators is probably the best we can legally do. [1] A sales tax is a tax on the sale of something. A use tax is a tax on having something. The big difference is that a state makes the seller collect sales tax, but use tax is suppose to be dealt with be the person who owns the thing. It used to be that states could not force sellers to collect sales tax unless the seller had a presence in the state. So states would impose both a sales tax and a use tax, and the use tax was the exact same rate as the sales tax and had a deduction for the amount of sales tax paid. The net result was that if you bought something from an in-state seller they collected sales tax and you owed no use tax. If you bought something from an out-of-state seller, no sales tax was collected and you owed use tax on the full purchase price. If you travelled to another state, bought an item and paid sales tax to that state then brought the item home, and that other state's sales tax rate was lower than your state's use tax rate, you owed the difference in use tax. The use tax exactly equalling the sales tax and being discounted by any sales tax already paid is because the Constitution restricts the states from regulating interstate commerce. Applying a higher tax to goods from out out of state than you do to domestic goods would run afoul of that. By making it so that the total sales + use tax was the same for imported and domestic item the state was not interfering with interstate commerce. But a few years ago the Supreme Court overturned the cases that had said that states could not force sellers with no in-state presence to collect taxes. Now states can make out-of-state sellers collect the sales/use tax so for most purposes there is not much point in distinguishing between sales and use taxes.
worik 4y ago
> As far as I know, every payment with Bitcoin triggers a taxable event? tl:dr Unlikely Unsure what the regime in your area does, but... Here (Aotearoa) the tax authorities are not interested in rats and mice. I play in a rock band as a hobby. Occasionally we get paid ($300 is the most ever). We had a promoter not pay us because we had "not given him the tax forms". I contacted our tax authorities and was told, in no uncertain terms, if it is a hobby, if you are not making serious money, do not tell us about it. Please do not tell us. We have a transaction tax here that merchants have to charge and pay, but only when their revenues top $50,000 So there are two data points that indicate that not every transaction incurs tax

Grumbledour 4y ago

I really dislike this whole initiative and much prefer the patreon model. One reason of course might be that i am listening to Jupiter Broadcast and Chris pushes this stuff hard, really annoying me with the constant talk about lightning and especially the boosts, which seem to take over half the show, because somehow he seems not to realize that the problem he has in getting regular supporters is the insane price he asks (last i looked about $2,50 per episode), but likes to give everyone several minutes of the show who sent him 20 cents. But I think my misgivings go further than that and i am especially concerned about this taking over podcasts or even open source, because while I do understand that people need to eat, I think these two ecosystems especially thrive because so many people contribute to them without profit being their first motive. I would not ask people to do work for free, but I often find that that when profit comes into it, quality starts to suffer and ideals get lost. Sure, lightning is in some ways similar to patreon etc. because it might still be user financed, but I feel the unpredictability of getting funds, the more attention focused model, will have similar effects on creators than other platforms with similar models do and I am mostly not fond of this.

teekert 4y ago
Chris indeed pushes it hard, I think indeed too hard, I agree. But it's reducing and moving to other shows (like OfficeHours.hair). To him this is the response to centralization of podcasting and I see that. As a member (I do 8$ a month, supporting 1 show but listen to all) I also see the imbalance in the attention that 2ct boosts get. It will go 1 of 2 ways I guess: 1) Boosts become the main income and keep getting attention (but at some cutoff like with NoAgenda donations. 2) Boosts remain a minor part and the attention decreases. If I were you I'd sit it out and let Chris try. I do like putting 100$ every (half?) year or so in my podcast app and letting the app distribute it over everything I listen to. But that's also because I'm at an age where I have disposable income. I pay for the membership to get the ads out of my fav podcast.
- Grumbledour 4y ago
  You are right and i should not even have mentioned him, because i don't support him (though i wanted to once) and so really have no grounds to complain. I let my annoyance get the better of me and it seems just mean now when i reread it. It also just undermines my skepticism and dislike of the podcasts 2.0 thing, which should have been my main point.

soulofmischief 4y ago

It makes my eyes water sometimes when i see all of the cool things so many people on the planet are working on, and that they also have users.

kylebenzle 4y ago

yieldcrv 4y ago

podcast boosts? is bitcoin interesting again? are there cool applications using Taproot and Schnorr? are lightning network openings and closings looking identical as any other transaction or script, improving confidentiality? where are the current communities that talk about whats going on there? I don't visit bitcoin reddits anymore and the cryptocurrency communities are about pretty much everything else

shmatt 4y ago

Like 99% of crypto projects, this would work just as well under a centralized db / FIAT

simonmales 4y ago
Not exactly. Lightning means they receiver gets 100% what I send. This is particularly interesting for micropayments. I can tip someone 1 cent, or less with no middle man.
- shmatt 4y ago
  the fact you are using the lightning network means there is some thing writing down a transaction from wallet a to wallet b smart contracts are a middle man, and not a great one from all the recent exploits executed on them
  - simonmales 4y ago
    If I were to send you satoshis via lightning. It wouldn't be recorded in the Bitcoin blockchain.
  - noch 4y ago
    > the fact you are using the lightning network means there is some thing writing down a transaction from wallet a to wallet b Correction: Lightning is a peer-to-peer payment network https://docs.lightning.engineering/the-lightning-network/payment-channels https://docs.lightning.engineering/the-lightning-network/pay...
- lxgr 4y ago
  What's the incentive for anybody to open a lightning channel, providing connetivity etc. without compensation? And even if all of this was indeed done for free (sustainably, not as a loss leader): Dispute resolution and fraud costs money. Free leaves zero margin for either, and I wouldn't use a payment service not providing both.
  - 4y ago

joshstrange 4y ago

I pay for 5 podcasts, I do it via Patreon, Memberful, and a custom (stripe-based) solution. I'm not really sure what problem needs to be solved in this space. I pay for 2 podcasts that I haven't listened to in months, I do it because I pay to support these creators. I don't need/want my listen history to directly correlate to sending money to hosts I like (nor do they, they'd much rather have the constant stream instead of peaks and valleys). Also, I actually hate the idea of "boosts", it just encourages bad behavior (just like IAP's that aren't one-time/DLC/remove-ads).

bubersson 4y ago
Patreon bans podcasters sometimes, you also have to be in one of the lucky countries to be able to use it - other people are excluded. There are annoying fees that Patreon (and credit card providers) take on each transaction (afaik around 10%), so the actual podcasters get quite smaller amount compared to what you send...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mrorbitman 4y ago
all those websites take their cut. and visa takes their cut. and still the podcaster can't "cash out" immediately, depending on settlement times and policies of the corporations. Essentially, the middlemen have the creators by the balls, lightning solves that.

bethecloud 4y ago

This would be even more awesome if the underlying object storage was distributed on web3 via storj (would generate better bandwidth margins too)

the_gastropod 4y ago

Let's ignore the Lightning Network for a moment, and dig into the meat of what you're suggesting: that people—in some meaningnful number—would prefer to spend money to get a thing they currently get for free (with the caveat that they occasionally they have to listen to / watch advertisements). Maybe you're right! But: 1. I doubt it. And 2. Lightning Network isn't the only technological solution to such an idea. This concept isn't particularly common, probably, because most people will put up with a lot to avoid spending actual money.