4 ms·
The only way to solve this that I can see is if the bank could confirm: 1) that the account being payed into belongs to the friend (so they can ask the name fr
by pbhjpbhj 2y ago
The only way to solve this that I can see is if the bank could confirm:
1) that the account being payed into belongs to the friend (so they can ask the name from the customer, and say 'that is [not] the name on the account')
2) confirm the tax liability (eg the Austrian gov provided a limited time hash-based URL where the bank could check a limited amount of the friends records; somewhat like sharing driving license details with car rental companies)
To me, this would not be intrusive, assuming that there was a ledger (blockchain) in which the accesses were recorded and the bank was under a massive penalty (compensation to customer and penalty charge paid to the state) for any unnecessary accesses.
- JadeNB 2y ago> 2) confirm the tax liability (eg the Austrian gov provided a limited time hash-based URL where the bank could check a limited amount of the friends records; somewhat like sharing driving license details with car rental companies) Why should this be required? If I want to send money to my friend because I like them and want to give them money, then the bank should have no role beyond verifying that I am sending it to the person I intended. I shouldn't only be able to send money to address an immediately provable tax liability.
- pbhjpbhj 2y agoYes, fair enough if you're sure it's your friend and that they're not being ripped off.