5 ms·

This is not just about tracking funds - there is also the implication that Bitcoins are actively traded. Australia has a capital gains tax - for example, you g

This is not just about tracking funds - there is also the implication that Bitcoins are actively traded. Australia has a capital gains tax - for example, you get taxed if you make a profit on shares (with a bunch of rules around it). Similarly, a loss is deductable. FX gains are exempt if they are of a "private and domestic nature". So if you change some money to travel overseas, then make a profit on it -- that's usually not considered in scope. However, if you're actively trading, then it is taxable. Mr Tee heralded Bitcoin as a “green” tender, compared to “the energy costs of manufacturing, transporting, storing and maintaining the infrastructure behind fiat currencies and banking systems”. Isn't there an energy cost with mining? That is presumably increasing? Maybe it's a lot less, but I'd shy away from calling it "green".

Nursie 13y ago
Indeed. It comes with built-in incentives to add more and more power to the network, and the only thing that added power does is protect against other actors who might come along with significant computational power (the 51% attack). Personally I think it's a design flaw. But I'm not going to pretend I know how to do it better.
- scotty79 13y ago
  I think at some point bitcoin might migrate towards some more useful proof of work so that the calculations might be used to solve some scientific problems.
Sealy 13y ago
To me, this announcement tells us one thing. The Australian government is taking Bitcoin more and more seriously. This is great news for Bitcoin users around the world as it is the first step towards countries officially recognising it as a new type of asset (or currency... or whatever you want to call it).
to3m 13y ago
<50MW globally, apparently (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-12/virtual-bitcoin-mining-is-a-real-world-environmental-disaster.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-12/virtual-bitcoin-min...). $147,000/day. Well, this is certainly more than nothing, but still isn't actually a great deal. For example, something else that cost $147,000 would be 12 seconds'-worth of US petrol consumption (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=23&t=10 http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=23&t=10) at wholesale prices (http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_refmg_dcu_nus_m.htm http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_refmg_dcu_nus_m.htm).
- Tloewald 13y ago
  Ok well how much conventional economic activity does 50MW create? That 12s of US gas consumption might theoretically generate say 29% of US GDP for 12s, which comes to $16,000,000 (29% is transportation as a proportion of US energy consumption, US GDP ~ 1.4E+13). Does that 50MW generate $16M worth of bitcoins per day? In any event, I strongly suspect currency production is one of the overall economies more energy efficient activities given that most currency is created electronically by banks based on a fairly simple set of calculations.

Nursie 13y ago

Indeed. It comes with built-in incentives to add more and more power to the network, and the only thing that added power does is protect against other actors who might come along with significant computational power (the 51% attack). Personally I think it's a design flaw. But I'm not going to pretend I know how to do it better.

scotty79 13y ago
I think at some point bitcoin might migrate towards some more useful proof of work so that the calculations might be used to solve some scientific problems.

Sealy 13y ago

To me, this announcement tells us one thing. The Australian government is taking Bitcoin more and more seriously. This is great news for Bitcoin users around the world as it is the first step towards countries officially recognising it as a new type of asset (or currency... or whatever you want to call it).

to3m 13y ago

<50MW globally, apparently (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-12/virtual-bitcoin-mining-is-a-real-world-environmental-disaster.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-12/virtual-bitcoin-min...). $147,000/day. Well, this is certainly more than nothing, but still isn't actually a great deal. For example, something else that cost $147,000 would be 12 seconds'-worth of US petrol consumption (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=23&t=10 http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=23&t=10) at wholesale prices (http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_refmg_dcu_nus_m.htm http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_refmg_dcu_nus_m.htm).

Tloewald 13y ago
Ok well how much conventional economic activity does 50MW create? That 12s of US gas consumption might theoretically generate say 29% of US GDP for 12s, which comes to $16,000,000 (29% is transportation as a proportion of US energy consumption, US GDP ~ 1.4E+13). Does that 50MW generate $16M worth of bitcoins per day? In any event, I strongly suspect currency production is one of the overall economies more energy efficient activities given that most currency is created electronically by banks based on a fairly simple set of calculations.