6 ms·

Unfortunately in the UK a bank can (and do) freeze your account with no reason for up to 2 years without any recourse or access to funds. With API access you ri

by yuumei 3y ago

Unfortunately in the UK a bank can (and do) freeze your account with no reason for up to 2 years without any recourse or access to funds. With API access you risk your money being frozen due to automatic fraud detection. The government have given up policing of finance to banks and they take the least risky options

fabianhjr 3y ago
And in the US they got civil forfiture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United... > To get back the seized property, owners must prove it was not involved in criminal activity. Some cases: https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-2/grading-state-federal-civil-forfeiture-laws/irs-cleans-out-bank-accounts/ https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-2/grading-state-fe... https://prosperityeconomics.org/stolen-savings-civil-forfeiture-banks-unsafe/ https://prosperityeconomics.org/stolen-savings-civil-forfeit...
- dataangel 3y ago
  > In 2015, Eric Holder ended the policy of "adoptive forfeiture", which occurred "when a state or local law enforcement agency seizes property pursuant to state law and requests that a federal agency take the seized asset and forfeit it under federal law" due to abuse.[21] Although states proceeded to curtail the powers of police to seize assets, actions by the Justice Department in July 2017 have sought to reinstate police seizure powers that simultaneously raise funding for federal agencies and local law enforcement.[22] basically Obama got rid of it then Trump put it back then Biden didn't anything
- downWidOutaFite 3y ago
  Your first link says the IRS stopped doing forfeiture of bank accounts 9 years ago.
varispeed 3y ago
These "challenger" banks are a gimmick. Friend of mine recently tried to set up an account for his new business and all "challengers" refused a business account, they were slow to respond and disinterested in helping. Eventually he set up with a high street bank, but the whole thing took over a month, which is ridiculous.
- toyg 3y ago
  That's surprising. Starling opened a business account for me in less than 3 days. This was back in 2018 though.
  - varispeed 3y ago
    Starling was particularly bad. Maybe they stopped caring...
- monooso 3y ago
  My experience of banking with both Starling and Monzo (personal and business) has been excellent. Far better than with any of the high street banks.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- blitzar 3y ago
  Exact same experience, I wouldnt say refused just hoop after hoop to jump through. disinterested in helping is an apt description, they got interested 2 years later and I would get a daily phone call about "finishing my application". I was pretty transparent with the person(s) calling - after years of doing their best to push business customers away, someone up high decided to make to get as many business customers as possible and everyone was on a fat commission to open up new accounts (I think lure of government guaranteed covid loans might have had something to do with it). High street bank was open within 3 days, fill out the form and done.
- yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
  That wasn't my experience. I set up an account with HSBC about seven years go, and they were a nightmare. It took over a month to open the account, and everything had to be done in branch. Also, HSBC in the UK is not the same HSBC in other countries. I once had to fly back to London from Athens just to "pop in to my local branch" for some uninteresting bureaucratic process. I closed that account and switched to Tide. It took me like 15 minutes to open the account online.
venantius 3y ago
I wouldn’t say “given up” as much as “actively delegated”. The UK has essentially made a (political) choice that rather than cover the cost of policing finance through taxes, they’ll just make the banks sort it out for them. This is not great for some people for obvious reasons. But for everyone else it’s lower taxes. Where one falls on the political spectrum largely determines how one feels about this.
- CTDOCodebases 3y ago
  It’s part of the privatisation of the surveillance state. Money isn’t the only motivation factor.
hanniabu 3y ago
Yet another example for why Ethereum is needed
- kemotep 3y ago
  Can you specifically describe how Ethereum, where all transactions are public, would prevent this kind of surveillance?
  - hanniabu 3y ago
    I was referring to the inability of the government to freeze your funds. But there are ways to prevent surveillance using zkproofs where you can break the onchain connection for private transactions.
    - kemotep 3y ago
      Putting your eth wallet keys on a “do not transact with” list would be pretty similar. Having to engage in “money laundering” such as those privacy measures you bring up being a reason the government may put an address on the block list would make it quite difficult to get around too. That is assuming Ethereum sees that kind of mass adoption to the point governments start to regulate its usage.
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        Is there actually a "block list" of this kind? It seems like it couldn't possibly work, e.g. there is a huge foreign entity that does zillions of honest transactions but isn't in a jurisdiction that subjects it to a given block list and it gets a transfer from some wallet that is. Either you now block anyone who transacts with them in turn and by Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon therefore the entire world, or transfers from "blocked" wallets go in there and come out non-blocked.
        kemotep 3y ago
        This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. If using non-government sanctioned cryptocurrencies is a crime in the future, than it doesn’t really matter if it is perfectly privacy preserving or not does it if you need to pay taxes in not the privacy preserving crypto.

by yuumei 3y ago

fabianhjr 3y ago

And in the US they got civil forfiture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United... > To get back the seized property, owners must prove it was not involved in criminal activity. Some cases: https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-2/grading-state-federal-civil-forfeiture-laws/irs-cleans-out-bank-accounts/ https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-2/grading-state-fe... https://prosperityeconomics.org/stolen-savings-civil-forfeiture-banks-unsafe/ https://prosperityeconomics.org/stolen-savings-civil-forfeit...

dataangel 3y ago
> In 2015, Eric Holder ended the policy of "adoptive forfeiture", which occurred "when a state or local law enforcement agency seizes property pursuant to state law and requests that a federal agency take the seized asset and forfeit it under federal law" due to abuse.[21] Although states proceeded to curtail the powers of police to seize assets, actions by the Justice Department in July 2017 have sought to reinstate police seizure powers that simultaneously raise funding for federal agencies and local law enforcement.[22] basically Obama got rid of it then Trump put it back then Biden didn't anything
downWidOutaFite 3y ago
Your first link says the IRS stopped doing forfeiture of bank accounts 9 years ago.

varispeed 3y ago

These "challenger" banks are a gimmick. Friend of mine recently tried to set up an account for his new business and all "challengers" refused a business account, they were slow to respond and disinterested in helping. Eventually he set up with a high street bank, but the whole thing took over a month, which is ridiculous.

toyg 3y ago
That's surprising. Starling opened a business account for me in less than 3 days. This was back in 2018 though.
- varispeed 3y ago
  Starling was particularly bad. Maybe they stopped caring...
monooso 3y ago
My experience of banking with both Starling and Monzo (personal and business) has been excellent. Far better than with any of the high street banks.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
blitzar 3y ago
Exact same experience, I wouldnt say refused just hoop after hoop to jump through. disinterested in helping is an apt description, they got interested 2 years later and I would get a daily phone call about "finishing my application". I was pretty transparent with the person(s) calling - after years of doing their best to push business customers away, someone up high decided to make to get as many business customers as possible and everyone was on a fat commission to open up new accounts (I think lure of government guaranteed covid loans might have had something to do with it). High street bank was open within 3 days, fill out the form and done.
yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
That wasn't my experience. I set up an account with HSBC about seven years go, and they were a nightmare. It took over a month to open the account, and everything had to be done in branch. Also, HSBC in the UK is not the same HSBC in other countries. I once had to fly back to London from Athens just to "pop in to my local branch" for some uninteresting bureaucratic process. I closed that account and switched to Tide. It took me like 15 minutes to open the account online.

venantius 3y ago

I wouldn’t say “given up” as much as “actively delegated”. The UK has essentially made a (political) choice that rather than cover the cost of policing finance through taxes, they’ll just make the banks sort it out for them. This is not great for some people for obvious reasons. But for everyone else it’s lower taxes. Where one falls on the political spectrum largely determines how one feels about this.

CTDOCodebases 3y ago
It’s part of the privatisation of the surveillance state. Money isn’t the only motivation factor.

hanniabu 3y ago

Yet another example for why Ethereum is needed

kemotep 3y ago
Can you specifically describe how Ethereum, where all transactions are public, would prevent this kind of surveillance?
- hanniabu 3y ago
  I was referring to the inability of the government to freeze your funds. But there are ways to prevent surveillance using zkproofs where you can break the onchain connection for private transactions.
  - kemotep 3y ago
    Putting your eth wallet keys on a “do not transact with” list would be pretty similar. Having to engage in “money laundering” such as those privacy measures you bring up being a reason the government may put an address on the block list would make it quite difficult to get around too. That is assuming Ethereum sees that kind of mass adoption to the point governments start to regulate its usage.
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      Is there actually a "block list" of this kind? It seems like it couldn't possibly work, e.g. there is a huge foreign entity that does zillions of honest transactions but isn't in a jurisdiction that subjects it to a given block list and it gets a transfer from some wallet that is. Either you now block anyone who transacts with them in turn and by Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon therefore the entire world, or transfers from "blocked" wallets go in there and come out non-blocked.
      - kemotep 3y ago
        This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. If using non-government sanctioned cryptocurrencies is a crime in the future, than it doesn’t really matter if it is perfectly privacy preserving or not does it if you need to pay taxes in not the privacy preserving crypto.