Bitcoin To Be Regulated Under US Money Laundering Laws

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin To Be Regulated Under US Money Laundering Laws

Posted by Soulskill on Friday March 22, 2013 @04:23AM from the government-smells-funding dept.

Newsubmitter davek writes with news that the U.S. will be applying money-laundering laws to Bitcoin and other 'virtual currencies.' "The move means that firms that issue or exchange the increasingly popular online cash will now be regulated in a similar manner as traditional money-order providers such as Western Union Co. WU +0.17% They would have new bookkeeping requirements and mandatory reporting for transactions of more than $10,000. Moreover, firms that receive legal tender in exchange for online currencies or anyone conducting a transaction on someone else's behalf would be subject to new scrutiny, said proponents of Internet currencies. 'I think it's inevitable that just like you have U.S. dollars used by thieves and criminals, it's sadly inevitable you will have criminals use a virtual currency. We want to work with authorities,' said Jeff Garzik, a Bitcoin developer. Still, law enforcement, regulators and financial institution have expressed worries about the hard-to-trace attributes of virtual currencies, helping trigger this week's move from the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCen."

439 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

They don't get it by lalena · 2013-03-22 04:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

Bit Coin works even if there are no "firms" to issue or exchange. Therefore, there is no one to regulate.
1. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:34 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  They regulate entities that exchange bitcoins for dollars.
  If the average user can't exchange bitcoins for dollars, what good is it?
2. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:37 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Bitcoin works? Here I thought it was just good for giving you heatstroke, buying child porn or drugs, and breaking when there are more than about 70,000 transactions across the network per day (compared to Visa's 300 million). The currency of the future, ladies and gentlemen!
  Nota bene: I would have mentioned buying slim jims and ramen, but the self-made captains of industry running Bitmunchies weren't able to turn enough of a profit and shut down. Speaking of Bitcoin businesses, how's Roger Ver's Bitcoin store doing? Still about $600,000 shy of the $850,000 it'll need to make in Q1? Up, up, up!
3. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:40 · Score: 0, Interesting
  
  I've never exchange it out, and I've bought 1000's of USD worth of stuff off Amazon.
4. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:40 · Score: 0
  
  Exchanging for services?
5. Re:They don't get it by jandrese · 2013-03-22 04:42 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The regulation is clearly going to happen at MtGox or any other place that exchanges bitcoins for USD. Once you are sending $10,000 USD to someone, the money laundering provisions apply. This should work for as long as businesses don't accept bitcoins directly, which is still mostly the case. There are a small number of businesses that will deal directly in bitcoins, but not enough that you could spend $10,000 on them reasonably yet.
  
  --
  
  I read the internet for the articles.
6. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  You still have to buy goods or services from someone. That someone gets regulated if they are in the US.
7. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:46 · Score: 0
  
  You don't seem to be happy. Did something bad happen to you?
8. Re:They don't get it by countach · 2013-03-22 04:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  What good are dollars? They are just pieces of paper. Oh wait, you can exchange them for stuff, like you can with bitcoins.
9. Re:They don't get it by DerekLyons · 2013-03-22 04:49 · Score: 2
  
  Bit Coin works even if there are no "firms" to issue or exchange. Therefore, there is no one to regulate.
  On the contrary. Just because there is no one 'issuing' or 'exchanging' Bitcoins doesn't mean that businesses and individuals using Bitcoins can't be regulated. Like MtGox and the other Bitcoin exchanges, or companies that accept Bitcoins in lieu of US dollars for goods and services.
  In some ways, this may also pave the way for wider acceptance of Bitcoins because more traditional companies are wary of accepting alternate currencies because they don't know how they'll be treated under the law.
10. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:51 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  No. You don't get it.
  The gold standard also works if there are no "firms" to issue or exchange it. People can do transactions person-to-person with no intermediary. Or, heck, cash transactions - me buying a truckload of goods in exchange for cash payment cannot be directly regulated.
  What CAN be regulated are transactions through banks and financial firms. You can sell a truckload of goods for cash no problem, but depositing $1,000,000 in cash will raise some eyebrows. Similarly, you can buy all the bitcoins you want. And you can exchange them directly with whoever you want. But if you want to exchange a large number of US dollars for them (or vice versa) via a financial firm, they're going to ask questions. The financial firm will have to track and report it.
  You can do whatever you like out in the shadows. It's when you hook things up to the "mainstream" financial markets that these regualtions apply.
  Which is why it's effective for money laundering. If you have a wadge of dirty cash, you can't really go out there and buy bitcoins "one at a time" through individual transactions until you've converted it all. You need to go through a large, organized market. Which requires an exchange. If you're doing very high value transactions, they want some reporting on where the "other side" of the transaction into/out of bitcoins came from and where it's going.
11. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 0
  
  MtGox is in Japan. Good luck.
12. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Two years after VISA Inc. started in 1958, I suspect they had less than 70,000 global transactions also. Everything starts small, Mr. Smartypants
13. Re:They don't get it by cayenne8 · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  But why SHOULD it be regulated?
  For that matter, WTF should the US govt be notified if I do any transaction over $10K in cash, bitcoins or barter??
  How did we let it become the govts business what we do with our money?
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
14. Re:They don't get it by Nerdfest · 2013-03-22 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Can't businesses accept any amount of cash without declaring it, or are they required to declare that as well? I assumed most of these rules only applied when you tried to put the money in a bank, etc.
15. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:56 · Score: 1
  
  There's a much broader array of stuff that you can exchange dollars for than there is that you can exchange buttcoins for.
16. Re:They don't get it by interkin3tic · 2013-03-22 04:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I suspect you are the one who doesn't get it. Government makes demands. If those demands aren't met, aren't countered through an internal process (like voting the pols who made those demands out), or if those demands aren't bluffs, there's an escalation. Eventually, force will be used.
  
  There are people to regulate. The government will identify them if the politicians, lobbyists, and special interests are determined enough. I'm not sure if they are. How many transactions over $10,000 in value are being done with bitcoins (the minimum for these rules applying)? I didn't read TFA too closely, but I couldn't see any estimates.
  
  Many slashdotters may disagree that the government isn't serious about stopping bitcoin use, but hear me out. Banks and law enforcement may have made statements "worrying" about it, but that doesn't mean they see it as a real threat due to how few people use bitcoins. Bitcoin proponents love to think that what they're doing will be a revolution, but bitcoins seem to be losing ground (if they had any to begin with.) I can't imagine banks or law enforcement spending much capital on a problem that is solving itself. The "I want taxes" bureaucrats aren't likely to pursue it either for the same reasons. They don't, after all, usually audit teenage babysitters for tax evasion. And I'd wager babysitting is a more lucrative economy than anything happening on bitcoin.
  
  Anyway, the target here probably isn't bitcoins, it's probably the other alternative currency mentioned in the article: corporations with virtual currency. Amazon coins. There's obviously someone to regulate there.
  
  Forget about bitcoins. They're not the story here despite the headline. Amazon or various other entities attempting to avoid sales taxes IS.
17. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:57 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  If the average user can't exchange bitcoins for dollars, what good is it?
  Finally someone gets it, and explains why the EU is failing. All those people earning and spending euros, never converting them to dollars, wasting their time, getting nothing out of it. Don't they understand? If they don't convert to dollars, they're useless. Fortunately for the euro, they can convert to dollars, but so few europeans take advantage of this to validate to the euro. Thus, it never gains legitimacy.
18. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 04:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I call bullshit on that.
  Amazon does not take bitcoin. Someone is converting that to pay amazon USD. They will regulate the one doing the conversion.
19. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:57 · Score: 0
  
  Does Amazon accept Bitcoins now?.. I somehow doubt that (but if they'd do, then gov't'd just regulate Amazon in this regard)
  Which means that someone, somewhere, has to exchange Bitcoins into currency accepted by Amazon - therefore can be regulated.
  The fuck's with "Ha-ha, silly government! You'll never catch me, I'm behind 7 proxies!"? If your pure digital currency ever gets in contact with real world - government can put their finger on it.
20. Re:They don't get it by SerpentMage · 2013-03-22 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  ehhh you are supposed to declare it. Many don't. But if you get caught you have serious issues!
  
  --
  
  "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
  "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
21. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · 2013-03-22 04:58 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Not really, USD are taken by anybody in the US that lends money as well as for taxes. BTC are basically just useful by a small number of people that aren't very good at math. The rest of us stick to currency and barter of things that actually exist.
  Now, if BTC was a mandatory option for payment and was likely to continue that way into the future, then it would be a closer analogy. But, even there with the fixed maximum supply and the curve at which they're being introduced, being what they are, even then it would be a stretch.
22. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 04:58 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  You need them to pay taxes, can't do that with bitcoins.
23. Re:They don't get it by SerpentMage · 2013-03-22 05:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They will comply because if they don't it means that they can never have a US account, ask for US dollars, trade US equities, etc, etc, etc... If you are willing to 100% forgo every and any tie to the US, go for it! The US is even for us foreigners a part of our daily lives, directly or indirectly.
  
  --
  
  "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
  "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
24. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:00 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The Euro is another currency that millions of people accept and pay taxes with. Bitcoins are not.
25. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:00 · Score: 0
  
  Call me when the IRS accepts your taxes paid in Bitcoins.
  I`ll be waiting.
26. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · 2013-03-22 05:01 · Score: 2
  
  Visa works in real currencies that you're guaranteed to be able to use, their main problem was a lack of outlets. Which does build over time, what's more they weren't limited to just one currency, they could expand into all currencies if need be.
  In this case, you've got something starting small in a currency that's ultimately doomed from the start. Yeah, that's exactly the same thing as Visa's near unlimited flexibility. What's more, Visa was following the Diner's Club into the market, they already knew what the market was, they just needed to get enough POS locations and customers to make it worthwhile.
27. Re:They don't get it by Attila+Dimedici · 2013-03-22 05:01 · Score: 2
  
  Even if businesses accept bitcoins directly, if they accept $10,000 worth of bitcoins in a single transaction this ruling is that they are required to report it just as they would be required to report it if they accepted USD cash.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
28. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:02 · Score: 0
  
  Is the sky also purple in your world? I heard the landscape is suspended upside down in some realms over there.
29. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:02 · Score: 0
  
  Because odds are most of those transactions are parts of crime, or the people doing them will not mind filling out the forms.
  Why should banks be allowed to profit from crimes?
30. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:03 · Score: 0
  
  There was no global marketplace to speak of in 1958. If Visa only got 70,000 membersw TODAY it would be doomed to be a 2nd-rate card, like Discover.
31. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · 2013-03-22 05:04 · Score: 2
  
  You still have to bring the money into the US if you're in the US. Unless you're suggesting breaking US law by sending packages of cash and not declaring them as such, the government will find out about it one way or another. And even if you do opt to go the boxes of cash route, you're stuck making small deposits into your account in order to avoid having your bank report it.
  Bottom line is that the US government has plenty of tools to solve this particular problem. And I'd be very surprised if other governments didn't get their own provisions to deal with BTC.
  OTOH, they could just wait until the whole thing blows up in people's faces and not waste time dealing with the problem. Anybody buying enough BTC to make this worthwhile as a money laundering avenue is going to see some major fluctuation in the rates they're dealing with.
32. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  Or if they accept that amount in several transactions too close together. In fact that flags the transactions as even more suspicious and you have to fill out even more paperwork.
33. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  We let it because otherwise crooks inevitably ended up abusing the lack of oversigt to engage in racketeering, extortion and embezzlement. Drop the econ 101 outrage at tampering with the invisible hand of the free market and join the real world some day.
34. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:06 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  To fight crime, but if you want to live in a country that corruption has overrun you can just go to mexico.
  The funny thing is that I'm sure you are against corrupt politicians, but it's much easier to just ignore consequences of what you want.
35. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Person to person transactions are still regulated. You might not report them like you are supposed to, but when you get caught it will be a big deal.
36. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  Look it up: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100527259
37. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · 2013-03-22 05:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  They don't have to, but if you go into a dealership and try to buy a new car with cash, they're probably going to see that as suspicious. Very, very few people pay cash in the literal sense for a vehicle, those who do have the money will usually pay by cash, because carrying around $24k in unrefundable currency is pretty risky. Not to mention a real PITA to count and carry.
  I used to get paid monthly in cash at a job I worked, and the 6500 would be a stack of hundreds about 2" high IIRC.
38. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:08 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Yes, BitPay are converting buttcoin to USD and will be the ones regulated. Shouldn't be too big a deal; presumably they already have customers' addresses so they can ship stuff to them.
39. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  That says bitpay is the one taking the coins not amazon.
40. Re:They don't get it by Afty0r · 2013-03-22 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  If the average user can't exchange bitcoins for dollars, what good is it?
  Then the average user exchanges their bitcoin for a currency other than US Dollars?
41. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  I'm in eastern europe, I buy a giftcard from amazon and exchange it for bitcoins because it is a more stable currency than the one I get paid in(which isn't saying much).
  My government can't even keep the lights on and they are more worried about mountain warlords and fallout(literally) from the middle east. US government can't do shit.
  Dang.
42. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 0
  
  Finally someone gets it, and explains why the USA is failing. All those people earning and spending dollars, never converting them to euros, wasting their time, getting nothing out of it. Don't they understand? If they don't convert to euros, they're useless. Fortunately for the dollar, they can convert to euros, but so few americans take advantage of this to validate to the dollar. Thus, it never gains legitimacy.
43. Re:They don't get it by serviscope_minor · 2013-03-22 05:12 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The Euro is another currency that millions of people accept and pay taxes with
  Except the Greeks!
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
44. Re:They don't get it by Hentes · 2013-03-22 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with using bitcoins directly is that in that case you have to keep a large amount of your wealth in a very volatile currency.
45. Re:They don't get it by Trepidity · 2013-03-22 05:14 · Score: 2
  
  Anyway, the target here probably isn't bitcoins, it's probably the other alternative currency mentioned in the article: corporations with virtual currency. Amazon coins. There's obviously someone to regulate there.
  I agree bitcoins aren't the real target. In addition to the corporation-tied virtual currencies you mention, online game currencies are of interest to law enforcement recently because they've been used to launder money. It's quite straightforward: you buy a bunch of virtual gold with USD, then you transfer it through the game world in a way that is invisible unless you're looking at server logs, and someone else ends up with this pile of virtual gold. That someone else sells it and gets USD. The net effect is that USD has moved from one person to another, who is possibly in another part of the world, without either: 1) moving it through the regular, traceable banking system; or 2) physically having to carry around suitcases of cash. Instead the money moved via, say, Blizzard's servers. What the government wants is for Blizzard to do some tracing and reporting of these movements once they reach a certain size.
  
  --
  10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
46. Re:They don't get it by BBTaeKwonDo · 2013-03-22 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Discover is a second-rate card? I use my Discover about 20 times more than my MasterCard.
47. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:20 · Score: 0
  
  You can still use Bitcoins to buy from an Amazon seller, as per OP's converting of 1000's of USD and buying off Amazon.
48. Re:They don't get it by misanthropic.mofo · 2013-03-22 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  But why SHOULD it be regulated?
  They want to regulate it as a step towards taxing it, I'll pretty much guarantee that. Bitcoin transactions, represent a pool of money they don't have their greedy self-serving paws on. I guaranttee, that if BitCoin garners enough attention and traction, that there will be something like a 1099-V. (Doing best IRS authoritative voice) "Introducing form 1099-V, this form is to be used to declare all of your virtual currency holdings in order that we may tax the ever living fuck out of you. No lube."
  
  --
  --There are two kinds of people in this world. I don't like either of them.
49. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:22 · Score: 0
  
  OTOH, they could just wait until the whole thing blows up in people's faces and not waste time dealing with the problem. Anybody buying enough BTC to make this worthwhile as a money laundering avenue is going to see some major fluctuation in the rates they're dealing with.
  The US, other states and large financial companies can destroy BTC any moment at will. Switch as couple of data centers / super computers to bitcoin for a couple of hours to reach 51% of the total hash rate and manipulate the bitcoin chain. Repeating that in random intervalls will quickly destroy any confidence in BTC.
  Captcha: investor
50. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:22 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  WTF are you trying to say here?
  You cannot buy from amazon with bitcoin directly. Instead bitpay handles that. If you want to buy from amazon, someone has to turn that into USD at some point. They will be the regulated party. If amazon takes bitcoins, all that would change is amazon would be regulated as a money changer.
51. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  That's just a matter of time and adoption. If you were to join a bitcoin mining group and earn a bitcoin, and then exchange it for something you wanted that will accept it, why would you need to get a USD involved? The only value of any currency is someone else's willingness to exchange something for it.
52. Re:They don't get it by misanthropic.mofo · 2013-03-22 05:24 · Score: 1
  
  crooks inevitably ended up abusing the lack of oversigt to engage in racketeering, extortion and embezzlement.
  Isn't that the modern definition for the US Congress?
  
  --
  --There are two kinds of people in this world. I don't like either of them.
53. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:25 · Score: 0
  
  Hardly. $6500 in hundreds is slightly less than 2/3 of a strap, and only about half an inch high.
54. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:27 · Score: 0
  
  So what your saying is, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?
55. Re:They don't get it by misanthropic.mofo · 2013-03-22 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  if you want to live in a country that corruption has overrun you can just go to mexico.
  I live in the US. Why would I need to move in order to be in a country overrun by corruption?
  
  --
  --There are two kinds of people in this world. I don't like either of them.
56. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:28 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I'm in eastern europe,
  There's your problem right there. You should move to a more civilized and stable area, like Somalia.
57. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:28 · Score: 0
  
  Exchanging bit coins for dollars == selling bit coins. As long as someone, somewhere is willing to buy your bitcoins, then you can exchange them and at least one of the two parties to that transaction would apparently be regulated by this law. How to enforce it is the real issue.
58. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  What happened to things like the 4th amendment or innocent until proven guilty? If the govt. has a reason to belive someone is involved in crime, then they can get warrant to then have the bank notify them if that person is making large transactions. It should not just be a big fishing expedition where people have to prove their innocence every time they make a transaction over an arbitrary amount.
  Why not just randomly raid the houses of people in rich neighborhoods to make sure they aren't doing something illegal? Or pull over every other car and search it to see if they have drugs or weapons? If your not doing anything illegal what are you worried about right?
59. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:30 · Score: 0
  
  Why should banks be allowed to profit from crimes?
  As a banker, let me count the ways:
  1) to pay for my many summer homes, winter homes, and vacation homes
  2) to pay for fuel to power my private jet
  3) to pay for my 8th yacht
  4) to pay for every brand name/signature label that fills my wardrobe
  5) to pay for my annual new Mercedes ...)
  Last) to pay for my backroom/lobby/crony payments aka buy shares in the Federal Government for immunity on steps 1) through Last)
  What the fuck are you, some sort of serf? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. DURRRRRRRRRR
60. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 05:32 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Today.
61. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:32 · Score: 0
  
  Fascist.
62. Re:They don't get it by DerekLyons · 2013-03-22 05:33 · Score: 0
  
  But why SHOULD it be regulated?
  Anyone can playact a childish form of appearing intelligent by asking stupid questions. Real intelligence appears in the form of making a case for one's positions.
63. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:34 · Score: 0
  
  The Euro is another currency that millions of people accept and pay taxes with
  Except the Greeks!
  and except the Cypriots!
64. Re:They don't get it by DragonWriter · 2013-03-22 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  I used to get paid monthly in cash at a job I worked, and the 6500 would be a stack of hundreds about 2" high IIRC.
  US bills are 0.0043" thick, so 65 of them are less than a third of an inch thick (2" of $100 bills is $46,500.) Bills which are neither new nor banded won't stack as efficiently, so its not hard to imagine a loose stack of 65 worn, somewhat crumpled $100 bills being 2" high.
65. Re:They don't get it by NFN_NLN · 2013-03-22 05:36 · Score: 2
  
  Is paypal regulated in a similar manner?!
  Not that I agree with this, but I do hate paypal.
66. Re:They don't get it by gman003 · 2013-03-22 05:37 · Score: 1
  
  That depends on whether the average user can exchange bitcoins for the good or service they desire.
67. Re:They don't get it by circletimessquare · 2013-03-22 05:38 · Score: 0
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist
  and after you get ripped off, by... get this... criminals... learn your lesson the hard way
  criminality exists in this world. i'm sorry this bothers you, and i'm sorry in your naive rage you blame those who pursue criminality rather than criminality itself
  of course, many types of actions should not be classified as crime, and many tactics used to fight criminality should be changed, discarded, or improved
  but this doesn't change the fact that criminality is real, if unopposed it grows, and the vast majority of society has no problem with tactics like this to fight criminal organizations
  welcome to reality
  deal with it
  or throw your useless tantrums shouting "fascist!" like an ignorant spoiled teenager whose dad didn't let him have the car keys
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
68. Re:They don't get it by Time_Ngler · 2013-03-22 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  Considering the parabolic rise in price, and the ever increasing announcements of new businesses based around it, and existing businesses accepting it, how are bitcoins "losing ground"?
69. Re:They don't get it by NFN_NLN · 2013-03-22 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  Is paypal regulated in a similar manner?!
  Not that I agree with this, but I do hate paypal.
  As HSBC and the drug cartels have proven, regulation only encourages organization. Sure it pushes mom&pop dealers out, but do you really want powerful cartels running everything?
  http://www.nbcnews.com/business/report-hsbc-allowed-money-laundering-likely-funded-terror-drugs-889170
70. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:41 · Score: 0
  
  Anti-smurfing rules would also apply.
71. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:42 · Score: 0
  
  If you held $10K in cash, a.k.a. physical objects stored in your mattress, no one would know.
  The most important difference between bitcoins and pieces of paper is that you tell the entire network every time you give a bitcoin to someone else. Imagine having machines record the serial number of every bill you spend at every transaction, and query the network as to the status of that serial number before accepting it, and let the entire network know that that bill was at that location at that time.
  In a bitcoin-based economy, _everyone_ will know _exactly_ how many bitcoins you have, because they will count the bitcoins you have been paid, and the bitcoins you have spent.
  If you were to give some bitcoins that were paid to you by your employer to a drug dealer, and the drug dealer got busted, the police would come knocking on your door asking why a bitcoin that was last seen entering your account ended up on the drug dealer's computer. Thus, no one will want to spend money that can be traced to them on drugs.
  If you were to spend some bitcoins at Shady's porn store that doesn't record transactions, and Shady spends them on drugs, the police come to you first. As a result, everyone will demand that every transaction be recorded.
  Bitcoins are horrible from an anonymity standpoint. But they were really being sold as non-inflatable, because there are only a certain number of numbers with the property of being bitcoins.
  Funny thing about that.
  (1) The government gives you an invalid "extended" bitcoin as part of your tax return.
  (2) You sue the government. Lol.
  (3) Invalid, a.k.a. extended, bitcoins are now in circulation, people prefer the real ones, but are willing to trust the extended ones as far as they trust the government to be able to force people to accept invalid ones as if they were real.
72. Re:They don't get it by Ghostworks · 2013-03-22 05:44 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  First, a small point: the laws apply to ALL transactions. The laws for MANDATORY reporting are at $10,000. If a financial institution suspects something weird -- which can mean a $9,999 transaction, 100 transactions of $100 each, a $5000 transaction where a teller noticed the customer also has another $5,000 in cash that he's not doing anything with yet, or a transaction where a customer said, "oh, wait, let me take that cash back and deposit a little less so I am below the $10,000 mandatory reporting limit" -- then they can, should, and probably will still file a report. This applies at banks, airports*, and numerous other places.
  * Side note: ever wonder why you can't travel with more than $10,000 cash? Well, you can. Ever wonder why some people act like you can't? Because it means paperwork. It's perfectly legal to walk through an airport with $10,000 and say, "I'm going to Las Vegas to bet the farm." It just means at some point customs, your bank, and the casino cashier will have forms to sign saying they saw $10,000. Unless you actually are driving to the Nevada desert for a drug deal, it's really no skin off your back.
  Second, I'm going to make this an, "I told you so," to posters on previous threads who seemed to believe that U.S. money laundering laws only applied to U.S. currency. It's most easily enforced at large, brick and mortar companies actually doling out greenbacks, but it's applicable always and everywhere something is a currency. If enough people were in a mood to transfer all of their cash in to WoW gold pieces, it would apply. It applies equally to Americans and in American jurisdictions to: U.S. dollars, mostly-defunct financial instruments like Bank promissory notes, to proxies like casino chips (and WoW gp), and non-federal currencies like Ithaca Hours, Chinese Yuan, and BitCoins.
  Third, on a larger scale, let this be a reminder that there is no "cyberspace". The internet is not something apart from the rest of the world. The internet is just something the whole world is "doing" right now. There is no cybercrime, just crime. There is no cyberlaw, only law. The internet is not regulated differently than any other aspect of our lives, except that special provisions are necessary to disambiguate jurisdiction and to enable law enforcement to cope with the realities of the situation, much in the way "wire fraud" was created as a federal crime to allow enforcement agencies to cope with the jurisdictional questions of a crime committed in one state by a perpetrator in another. The internet is not special. All laws still apply.
73. Re:They don't get it by dcollins · 2013-03-22 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  So to make a very long story short -- Demanding that some drugs be illegal makes it necessary that we inspect every action in your fantasy games. Along with a host other surveillance.
  
  --
  We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
74. Re:They don't get it by alexander_686 · 2013-03-22 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  Reading the tax code, in my opinion (talked to a qualified tax expert on your particular issues, etc.) BitCoins transactions are already taxable. I would think that the current rules on foreign currency, script, and batter would cover all possible situations.
  Note that “Taxable” transactions are different then “Reportable” transactions.
  And I believe these rules are coming from the DOJ Fraud divisions then the IRS.
75. Re:They don't get it by gl4ss · 2013-03-22 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Look it up: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100527259
  you did exchange it out by their integrated service, you doofus.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
76. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:55 · Score: 0
  
  >>You cannot buy from amazon with Bitcoin directly.
  No shit, nobody has made the claim that Amazon accepts Bitcoin. That seem to be your imagined argument, but the claim is actually that Bitcoins are being used to buy off products off of Amazon, despite Amazon not having any direct way to use Bitcoin. That's where Bitpay comes in, as you described.
77. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:58 · Score: 0
  
  It's been a while, they weren't new bills and I didn't bother to actually hold up a ruler to them, but it was a rather considerable height to them.
78. Re:They don't get it by sandertje · 2013-03-22 05:59 · Score: 2
  
  which won't get you anywhere if you ever decide to venture out of the US.
79. Re:They don't get it by gl4ss · 2013-03-22 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  they're supposed to declare it.
  how do you think taxes work?
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
80. Re:They don't get it by serviscope_minor · 2013-03-22 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  If amazon takes bitcoins, all that would change is amazon would be regulated as a money changer.
  Presumably only if they handle the transactions themselves. Remember that Amazon accept plenty of forms of non-"money" payment, in the form of credit card transactions. Again, they do this by outsourcing to Visa, Mastercard and Amex (possibly via some other operator).
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
81. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:02 · Score: 0
  
  shut up, fascist
82. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:07 · Score: 0
  
  and because of US tax law, you then have to report it as foreign income, else the feds will tear you up.
  the US is only one of two nations that do this, the other being north korea. Everywhere else treats transactions not performed in their country by their citizens as none of their concern. If you are a US citizen, no place is safe from the IRS. They want their pound of flesh, and don't care that you have not been back to the US in 12 years, and don't even have a US bank account. Unless you give up your citizenship, you are theirs, and they will attempt some stupid "Exit Tax" in the process of you are anything other then dirt poor.
83. Re:They don't get it by Rakarra · 2013-03-22 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  shut up, fascist
  So.... you got nothing.
84. Re:They don't get it by cayenne8 · 2013-03-22 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist
  and after you get ripped off, by... get this... criminals... learn your lesson the hard way
  criminality exists in this world. i'm sorry this bothers you, and i'm sorry in your naive rage you blame those who pursue criminality rather than criminality itself
  Like another poster said, what about "innocent until proven guilty"?
  I mean, if you're in the US, that's the way it is supposed to be.
  If you suspect wrongdoing, then get a warrant, investigate....what's wrong with that?
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
85. Re:They don't get it by Attila+Dimedici · 2013-03-22 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I was simplifying when I wrote that.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
86. Re:They don't get it by interkin3tic · 2013-03-22 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  The rise in price doesn't mean that more people are using it. The list of buisinesses accepting it is, at a quick skim, a list of places I wouldn't want to do any buisines with. EFF was a big name that accepted bitcoins, and they've since stopped, that's specifically what I was thinking when I said "seem to be losing ground."
  
  It was an offhand comment.
87. Re:They don't get it by noh8rz10 · 2013-03-22 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  its not hard to imagine a loose stack of 65 worn, somewhat crumpled $100 bills being 2" high.
  he/she works at a high-end strip club?
88. Re:They don't get it by cayenne8 · 2013-03-22 06:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Anyone can playact a childish form of appearing intelligent by asking stupid questions. Real intelligence appears in the form of making a case for one's positions.
  Well, not so much in the US. The Constitution and the govt and the courts do NOT grant us our rights, we are born with them inherently. Therefore, it is the proper thing to do to question any time the govt starts to assert new authority or set limits on your free to do activity.
  Also, there is nothing wrong with questioning laws already on the books...as that they might not should be there to regulate you.
  We're not here to serve the US govt, they are here to serve us...although, they often seem to be forgetting this.
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
89. Re:They don't get it by Teancum · 2013-03-22 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  The US, other states and large financial companies can destroy BTC any moment at will. Switch as couple of data centers / super computers to bitcoin for a couple of hours to reach 51% of the total hash rate and manipulate the bitcoin chain. Repeating that in random intervalls will quickly destroy any confidence in BTC.
  Captcha: investor
  I'd like to see them try. Seriously. At best all they would accomplish is to throw all of that processing power at preventing new transactions from taking place temporarily and getting accepted into the block chain at tremendous cost of trying to do something silly like having petaflops of processing power being dumped into a useless task. The 51% attack is far overrated, and assumes that you have massive coordination to accomplish that task with spare computing power available that isn't needed to perform some other task at the time it is being used.
  A major bank especially wouldn't be doing something like that unless they are explicitly trying to get into the business of processing bitcoin transactions.... in which case they would be providing processing power to prevent such an attack by any other major institution. Banks are in the business of earning money, not throwing it away on a useless endeavor. Major governments might try to do a brute force attack against Bitcoin in this manner, but it would be unlikely to succeed.
  The best kind of attack that a sovereign entity like a government might do is to arrest any Bitcoin developers and to deploy packet sniffers that try to block any transaction packets being used to transmit Bitcoin information. It would be easier for them to simply shut down the internet going into and out of their country... assuming they don't mind that kind of harsh treatment of their citizens and cutting themselves off from global trade of any kind.
90. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  Because odds are most of those transactions are parts of crime
  Most of those transactions are transactions that SHOULD be legal, though.
91. Re:They don't get it by SirGarlon · 2013-03-22 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  How did we let it become the govts business what we do with our money?
  We didn't. That was done by our ancestors (assuming you are also in the US) when they ratified the US Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 8:
  
  The Congress shall have Power ... [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
  That ship sailed more than 200 years ago and there is no point crying about it now. Perhaps you would be happier in some other country that has a weaker central government.
  Technically, Federal authority wouldn't apply to cash or Bitcoin transactions by sneaker-net between two individuals who live in the same state, and where no goods or services from out-of-state are involved.
  
  --
  [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
92. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  Bit Coin works even if there are no "firms" to issue or exchange.
  
  So does cash, but that won't mean the government won't file a suit against "$10,000 in Cash" or "a wallet.dat file with a hash of 0x1A...."
93. Re:They don't get it by jandrese · 2013-03-22 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  I was assuming he got paid in $20s, which would be a stack about 2" high. I'm a bit curious as to what employer pays cash in that amount though. Maybe construction? It's hard to find a construction job that pays that well though.
  
  --
  
  I read the internet for the articles.
94. Re:They don't get it by Teancum · 2013-03-22 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  Of course this is why institutions like grocery stores and video game parlors are popular with "organized crime" and money laundering ventures. It certainly wouldn't be unusual for a grocery store to make a $100,000 daily deposit of cash in a bank, and some larger ones may even make a routine daily deposit of over a million dollars. Gambling casinos may deposit several million dollars each day as cash deposits.
  Yes, those organizations may be able to document thousands of individual transactions that got them to the point where they can show where the money came from, but there are reasons to be moving that kind of money around where it may not necessarily even raise an eyebrow.
  There are always ways around these rules for those who want to flaunt these kind of regulations. Sometimes they get caught, often they don't.
95. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  To be hyper correct, for a quite a long time, Visa itself worked only in USD, up until about the mid 1980s. The USD was the defacto corporate benchmark, everything was converted to and from USD. Even still, currency conversion happens at the local level by the processor / bank or exchange, and that provider charges up to an additional 5% for that privilege. Unlike Visa's other charges, that one shows up on the customer's end of the bill instead of the merchant's.
  Visa's growth model is exactly what bitcoin needs, more POS locations. And that's exactly what it's getting, except in the virtual realm. More and more reputable vendors are exchanging bitcoins for real world services and products. Will it ever make it into brick and motor stores? Who knows.
96. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  But... you can have no connection to the U.S, but If you start selling your oil in bitcoin your country will get invaded.
97. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:42 · Score: 0
  
  boot-licking idiot
98. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:42 · Score: 0
  
  Do you know why EFF stopped accepting?
99. Re:They don't get it by UnanimousCoward · 2013-03-22 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  So the fact that the "U.S. is applying money-laundering rules to "virtual currencies" legitimizes BTC, right? I see that as a good thing...
  
  --
  Twelve-and-three-quarter inches. Unyielding. This wand belonged to Bellatrix Lestrange.
100. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:51 · Score: 0
  
  nop i dont think his question is stupid, on the contrary this also interests me, why should it be regulated, you did not give any valid reason, and i cant think of any good one myself either ...
101. Re:They don't get it by rahvin112 · 2013-03-22 06:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Are you a fool or just trying to make a point?
  The drug war ship sailed a long time ago and 80% of Americans were out there cheering their loss of freedom. Cash reporting, private property seizure by suing the property, drug dogs, highway checkpoints, etc are all casualties of the war on drugs and almost no one in America was ever concerned about it.
  You want to stop the insanity? Become an activist for total legalization and a rollback of all drug war inspired legislation.
102. Re:They don't get it by roman_mir · 2013-03-22 06:53 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist
  - people did, it was called USA.
  
  and after you get ripped off, by... get this... criminals... learn your lesson the hard way
  - yes, we know, we know who the criminals are. They are in the government or they have closest ties to the government, they are known as 'too big to fail'.
  
  criminality exists in this world. i'm sorry this bothers you, and i'm sorry in your naive rage you blame those who pursue criminality rather than criminality itself
  - 'criminality' is a word. What exists is a legal system that turns normal people's behaviour into 'criminal behaviour', because the real criminals don't want to have to sit on different roads, waiting for wagons to rob. They want to define what roads are, and every road must lead through a toll booth that this type of criminals have set up. It would be a pity if you didn't pay the toll and something would happen to your beautiful business. Oh, didn't you know, it was for the 'common good' and 'general welfare', apparently those things can be used to justify any type of criminality, from theft to murder, no problem. From income taxes and money printing to NDAA and drone strikes, no problem.
  
  but this doesn't change the fact that criminality is real, if unopposed it grows, and the vast majority of society has no problem with tactics like this to fight criminal organizations
  - clearly a true statement. The criminality is real, it is unopposed and it's growing and the vast majority of society has no problem with this criminality, they cheer for it because they share in the proceeds.
  
  welcome to reality
  - this reality is about to bite the people who support it in the ass.
  
  deal with it
  - we are dealing with it.
  
  --
  You can't handle the truth.
103. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:57 · Score: 0
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist
  They have, with Bitcoin.
  captcha: unseen
104. Re:They don't get it by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  EFF stopped accepting it in donations years ago, and the stated reason was that if one day they are going to defend it or its users in a court of law it looks better if they don't appear to be biased. That's a very specific and unique position, you can't really extrapolate anything from it.
105. Re:They don't get it by Ambiguous+Coward · 2013-03-22 07:08 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  We don't need fiat USD. We can purchase the ever growing number of products&services with BTC without the use of USD
  Haha, yes, I've seen the videos. "Watch me buy gas with bitcoins!" *transfers bitcoins to friend, waits 20 minutes, friend buys gas with USD*
  
  --
  Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
106. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:15 · Score: 0
  
  Greeceans!
107. Re:They don't get it by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 07:15 · Score: 2
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist. and after you get ripped off, by... get this... criminals... learn your lesson the hard way
  Ah, well, couple of problems with that.
  The first is that anti-money laundering isn't something that every country arrived at independently through a careful process of democratic consideration and cost/benefit analysis, as you imply. In fact it was invented by Congress in the 70s, institutionalized through a body called the FATF-GATI and then forced on the rest of the world through a combination of diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions. Obviously, AML only works if everyone does it simultaneously. In fact, quite a few countries expressed concerns about this complex and untested set of regulations but that did not matter. Any country failing to implement them was branded a rogue state that was "undermining the integrity of the financial system" and consequently blacklisted. Eventually they all fell into line, one way or another.
  So it'd actually be quite hard to create a society where such controls don't exist, because the US at least would insist on crippling trade sanctions.
  The second problem with your statement is it's unclear you'd be ripped off by criminals. One of the primary motivations for AML is/was to fight drug dealing - it's a very cash intensive business, hence the emphasis on reporting cash transactions. A large chunk of AML can be summed up as "make bankers investigate where people get their money, under threat of jail time". It sounds good, in theory, except it doesn't seem to work - the street price of drugs has steadily fallen since the passing of the Banking Secrecy Act, not risen as you might expect. Indeed, countries that had very strong commitments to banking secrecy until recently (like Switzerland) are famous for their low levels of crime and generally civilised behaviour.
108. Re:They don't get it by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-03-22 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  If I was going to launder money, do you think the government would notice if I declined to state I was carrying more than $10,000?
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
109. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:19 · Score: 0
  
  Here in the old continent forty 500 euro bills fits my wallet just fine.
110. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 07:19 · Score: 0
  
  Because you know the future, right?
111. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:22 · Score: 0
  
  How did we let it become the govts business what we do with our money?
  Because they own you and get to choose what percentage of the product of your labor you're allowed to keep. If you don't like it, you can pay them 50% of your assets and beg another tax farm to own you.
  They're the farmers, you're the cow. Normally they'll just milk you (taxes) but if they want beef (war) they'll do that too.
112. Re:They don't get it by fatphil · 2013-03-22 07:23 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Or the mega-rich.
  
  --
  Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
113. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  Although US can control currency conversion it can't really control bitcoin flow. It will only work as long as direct bitcoin transactions aren't ubiquitous enough, otherwise the regulating laws will be unenforceable.
114. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  Chances are the governments will be as efficient at controlling bitcoins as they are at controlling file sharing.
115. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  No dealership is going to care.
116. Re:They don't get it by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. Because the regulations weren't enforced we should clearly have no regulations ever!
  Also all those laws about murder? Useless! Look at the people who get murdered each year. Anti-murder laws only encourage people to more carefully plan their murders!
117. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:33 · Score: 0
  
  Like another poster said, what about "innocent until proven guilty"?
  I mean, if you're in the US, that's the way it is supposed to be.
  And in which country is this not supposed to be true?
118. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 0
  
  Large amounts of cash are inconvenient.
  Using cash on the order of $10,000 is itself a suspicious act, because who in their right mind would keep that kind of wealth lying around in an easily stolen, time consuming to count, easily lost form?
  If you make a cash transaction on that scale you are acting suspiciously and under the same interpretation that lets cops search the guy who walks into the bank with a ski-mask on and an empty bag with a dollar sign on it without a warrant lets them ask you to document cash transactions that large without a warrant.
119. Re:They don't get it by witherstaff · 2013-03-22 07:37 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I would like to see anyone try to take on such a huge network. A bank couldn't afford to do it. Perhaps with the NSA's budget they may have some crypto chip that could outhash anything out there. Otherwise I simply don't see how to take over 51%.
  Right now the bitcoin network is using 58.710 T/hashes. Everything is gauged in Mhashes so that is 58 billion 710 million M hashes. Top GPU does 1200 Mhash so you'd need about 49 million in GPUs of them running. At $777 each that's 38 billion to duplicate the network, doubling it. Not including anything else on a computer.. no boards, no CPUs, no electric to run them. I think my math is right.
  Total value of all bitcoins if bought outright is 10,936,000 BTC * $72 = 787 million. Sure an entity could try to buy every coin out there. That'd be interesting to see if that would shoot the price even higher. I'm not sure how that would play out. But BTC can go 8 decimal places so even if they get very expensive people can use small portions of them.
  Shutting down the peer to peer network is about the best that would be doable. Outlaw bitcoin, shut off anyone using it, and perhaps. But there is an estimated $2 million USD done on the silk road every month so people are fine doing illegal things.
  This is all about control. Bitcoin was created to avoid the banks. There is no way to "print" more USD to buy treasury bonds like we're doing now. The banks with direct ties with the government is probably fearful this idea of being able to avoid banks entirely actually catches on. That would not be good for business.
120. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:40 · Score: 0
  
  Apparently you haven't been keeping up with the trend in the US called Civil Asset Forfeiture. In the US, your money can be declared guilty of being the proceeds from criminal activity and be confiscated until you can prove otherwise. Law enforcement tends to be quite agressive in some areas, and in other, couldn't care less but walking about 10,000 in cash is just asking for a LEO from some agency take it and claim it in the name of what ever agency he works for.
  While the original comment was about the use of financial instruments being regulated, you're comment of walking around with 10,000 dollars in cash isn't illegal is true. But Local/State/Federal governments have shown that if you do, you're likely to have it taken from you under the auspicies it was probably obtained illegally.
121. Re:They don't get it by lgw · 2013-03-22 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  Of course they are. From what I hear, the majority of PayPal's code base is the regulatory compliance stuff.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
122. Re:They don't get it by witherstaff · 2013-03-22 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  I like how the values haven't changed with the times. I don't know when the 10K rule went in but I wonder what it'd be today with inflation.
123. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:41 · Score: 0
  
  Your definition has just decided that Euros and any other currency that is foreign to the U.S. is not "real" currency. Kudos to you for solving the EU's Cyprus problem.
124. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:41 · Score: 0
  
  Your an idiot
  Hey fuckwit, he was actually making a joke. Go die.
125. Re:They don't get it by witherstaff · 2013-03-22 07:47 · Score: 1
  
  How many people got fined, or did jailtime for the economic collapse and the era of too big to fail? If you're a small time crook it's called a crime. If you have the government bail you out and the DOJ gives up even investigating what happened it's called business as usual.
126. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 07:47 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You can take a handful of dollars and spend them just about anywhere in the US, plus many parts of the world. Retail stores, gas stations, even to give to the kid who mows your lawn. A flash drive with some bitcoins on it is essentially useless almost everywhere, and only slightly less useless on the internet (it's country of origin). If you have a handful of Euros, or Yen, or whatever, at least in the US you can go to any bank and have them exchanged. I don't know of any bank that will exchange bitcoins. I can take my visa or mastercard (eurocard) and use it most places in the world and pay in the local currency but get billed at home in USD (with an extra fee). I can not use a visa/mastercard to buy anything that takes only bitcoins.
  Bitcoins are pointless everywhere except for a very tiny number of places on the internet.
  Now the idea of a digital currency is not a bad idea by itself. However the currency should be tied to something tangible at the start, and not generated from nothing by "mining". The people pushing bitcoins the most are the speculators who have a significant chunk of mined bitcoins that they got for free, and they are hoping that the value goes up so that they can cash out. The people wanting a true digital currency are not necessarily bitcoin fans.
127. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-22 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  If murder is outlawed, only outlaws will murder! Prohibition doesn't work!
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
128. Re:They don't get it by lgw · 2013-03-22 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  MtGox is in Japan. Good luck.
  If you're a US citizen, live in Japan, get paid entirely in Yen, and never exchange for dollars, you better believe you still owe US taxes on your earnings (though the amount owed may happen to be 0 because of the Japanese taxes that you pay, you still file).
  If you're a US citizen, get paid entirely in BitCoins though a Japanese exchange, and never exchange them for dollars - guess what? Of course Japanese financial companies comply with US requests for information, at least in this regard. Even the Swiss banks do, these days.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
129. Re:They don't get it by interkin3tic · 2013-03-22 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Good to know, but my point is that it doesn't seem to be catching on enough to be worth going after for taxes.
130. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:56 · Score: 0
  
  There are a number of places to exchange them for dollars that are based overseas. Now if you attempt to get that money back /into/ the states, there's some trouble. It's been a while since I did anything with the few coins I have, but I know I did my trading at a site overseas(and my bank charged me for 'foreign currency exchange' or somesuch thing when I transferred the $ into my account)
131. Re:They don't get it by interkin3tic · 2013-03-22 07:57 · Score: 1
  
  I realize I did say the "problem" was solving itself, which is a bit of a leap from one group deciding not to use them anymore, even if it weren't unique circumstances, you're right that extrapolating from that was illogical. But I don't think bitcoins are much of a concern to anyone besides law enforcement in regards to silkroad or money laundering, and again, TFA makes no mention of how many $10K+ transactions are going on.
132. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-22 07:58 · Score: 2
  
  Has it occurred to you that government might restrict what you can pay with? Try making up your own paper currency to avoid taxes, see how far that gets you. Bitcoin's cryptographic tricks provide no protection against this.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
133. Re:They don't get it by lgw · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Sure: the US can't control bitcoins paid in private exchanges between individuals. It certainly can control any sort of exchange, bank, or any other sort of bitcoin infrastructure needed to make bitcoin useful, as well as any company that might choose to do business in bitcoins, unless that company wants to relegate itself to the black market.
  Next up: sales tax on bitcoin transactions. Bet on it.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
134. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:05 · Score: 0
  
  Not really, USD are taken by anybody in the US that lends money as well as for taxes. BTC are basically just useful by a small number of people who don't have Stockholm Syndrome.
  FTFY
135. Re:They don't get it by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-03-22 08:07 · Score: 1
  
  There's your problem right there. You should move to a more civilized and stable area, like Somalia.
  Somalia moved to a more civilized and stable area? Good, I really hope it works out well for them.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
136. Re:They don't get it by lgw · 2013-03-22 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  The most important difference between bitcoins and pieces of paper is that you tell the entire network every time you give a bitcoin to someone else. Imagine having machines record the serial number of every bill you spend at every transaction, and query the network as to the status of that serial number before accepting it, and let the entire network know that that bill was at that location at that time.
  Folks may not realize that cash actually does work this way in large amounts. Above some threshold (likely $10k), a bank is required to record all bill serial numbers of cash transactions and report them. You're absolutely right that the government will love bitcoins once it understands them.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
137. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Watch me pay for gas with my collectible beanie babies!
138. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:13 · Score: 0
  
  "oh, wait, let me take that cash back and deposit a little less so I am below the $10,000 mandatory reporting limit" -- then they can, should, and probably will still file a report.
  Such an exchange would be committing suicide - bitcoiners hate VISA and Paypal's arbitrary "seems fishy - kaBLOCKED!" behavior so much they're converting just to avoid it, so they won't tolerate such practices on an exchange. Exchanges should do the legal minimum but nothing more.
139. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  Exchanging is not income and does not need to be reported. Exchange currencies all you like, however if the amount of currency you have increases due to exchange rates changing during the transaction (ie, you bought low and sold high) then that is income to be reported.
140. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  Oh ya, also if you have paid foreign taxes already on your foreign income, this can offset or eliminate the tax you pay to the US. You don't get double taxed on the same income (though you will pay the higher tax rate of the two countries).
141. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-22 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  You still have to bring the money into the US if you're in the US. Unless you're suggesting breaking US law by sending packages of cash and not declaring them as such, the government will find out about it one way or another. And even if you do opt to go the boxes of cash route, you're stuck making small deposits into your account in order to avoid having your bank report it.
  In short, you'll have launder it. You'll have to go through all the pain criminals have to go through to launder their profits, and like criminals you're going to pay a hefty commission in order to get cash you can safely use.
  At this point, the only advantage bitcoin has over, say, counterfeit Egyptian currency, will be that it can be stored on a computer. Woot.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
142. Re:They don't get it by Ambiguous+Coward · 2013-03-22 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  See now, that's actually MORE plausible.
  
  --
  Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
143. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  What we need is a legitimate digital currency, one that is not created out of thin air just by using a computer. Bitcoins is flimsy, it is driven by speculators hoping that the money they printed at home will be rise in value.
144. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  There's nothing about innocence or guilt here, it is just a reporting requirement by the banks.
145. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:25 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, and congress does not like the competition.
146. Re:They don't get it by Hatta · 2013-03-22 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  So? Regulate Bitpay. Bitpay doesn't know how I got my bitcoins, so regulating bitpay can't possibly stop money laundering with bitcoins. They can either prohibit selling bitcoins or allow it, but I don't see how they can "regulate" it.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
147. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  They can already tax it! If you gain income through bitcoins and you are a US citizen, then you must legally report that income. This is also true if your income is in euros or yuan or eucalyptus leaves. Using a currency that the feds don't know about does not exempt someone from the law.
148. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:27 · Score: 0
  
  >>You cannot buy from amazon with Bitcoin directly. No shit, nobody has made the claim that Amazon accepts Bitcoin. That seem to be your imagined argument, but the claim is actually that Bitcoins are being used to buy off products off of Amazon, despite Amazon not having any direct way to use Bitcoin. That's where Bitpay comes in, as you described.
  
  I've never exchange it out, and I've bought 1000's of USD worth of stuff off Amazon.
  If that isn't a claim that they are taking it then what the fuck is? either he is saying Amazon takes it or he is just full of shit and doesn't understand that it is converted.
149. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  This is not a new authority or a new limit. This regulation already exists with all firms that exchange or issue currency (ie, banks or currency exchangers). The only change is that it's being clarified to also include digital currencies.
150. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:31 · Score: 0
  
  Its bitcoin, anyone can datamine the blockchain and exchanges to find out how many $10K transactions are occurring. DO it.
151. Re:They don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  The reason is to prevent and detect criminal money laundering. Did you miss that part? Large transactions are not illegal, they just have to be reported.
152. Re:They don't get it by stenvar · 2013-03-22 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  If the average user can't exchange bitcoins for dollars, what good is it?
  If the average user can't exchange dollars for galactic credits, what good is the dollar?
153. Re:They don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  If you attempt to spend more than $10k worth you will have to fill out a form saying how you got them. No several $1k transactions will not work that is two forms you then have to fill out.
  They will also have to keep records of your transactions.
154. Re:They don't get it by cayenne8 · 2013-03-22 08:35 · Score: 2
  
  So, I would broadly say that in general, this intrusion into how US citizens use and spend their money should be revisited in general....
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
155. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Because you know the future right?
156. Re:They don't get it by bluefoxlucid · 2013-03-22 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  Categorically false. When the United States decided to levy an income tax, it was and is still considered possibly unconstitutional (but accepted). One of the biggest factors was that the government doesn't have a right to know how much money you make--the government does not have a constitutional grant of power to know how much an individual is being paid, and indeed an individual is supposed to have immunity from such warrantless demands of information on their personal lives. Businesses have to disclose what business they do (and thus tariffs are levied), but not how much they bring in or what they pay workers, and so this is very well protected.
  Not protected anymore: we accepted income tax. Income and property tax used to not be a thing. We still don't have an asset tax because, for the moment, we still believe the government doesn't have the constitutional authority to stick its nose in your purse and see how much money you have. Apparently we let them watch when you move it around, though.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
157. Re:They don't get it by stenvar · 2013-03-22 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  And, of course, like all laws, we know this will be followed scrupulously. Give me a break. Criminals have no problem laundering money, and the main effect of such laws is to hassle law abiding citizens even more. (I'd be curious to know whether there is any evidence that these reporting requirements actually have made a difference in reducing crime.)
  And while you're right that the Internet isn't legally special, in practice it is quite different from physical transactions and enables quite different capabilities. These capabilities mean that many laws that work in the physical world simply end up not being practically enforceable.
158. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 08:45 · Score: 2
  
  That's an amusing thing to post under a story that is about the government doing exactly the opposite. Contrary to the oddball spin this was posted with this is the regulatory branch of the government that oversees the largest economic and military power in the world saying it intends to treat and regulate USD interaction with Bitcoin in the same manner it does Euros. The implication being there is no intention to attack or block bitcoin in any way. In fact they explicitly spell out that decentralized currency exchange and transactions for goods are not regulated.
  
  There is a reason the market went up in response to this announcement.
  
  "Bitcoin's cryptographic tricks provide no protection against this."
  
  This smells of a fundamental misunderstanding of what Bitcoin is.
159. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  Bitcoin has grown progressively in usage since release. Has your shit been progressively turning into gold?
160. Re:They don't get it by MyFirstNameIsPaul · 2013-03-22 08:47 · Score: 2
  
  Bitcoin is not easy to trace when it is not linked to something like a bank account transaction. It has to be linked to delivery of goods, but the problem here is that receiving a delivery is not evidence of a crime. There has to be evidence that the person receiving the goods also paid for them.
  
  --
  I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
161. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  All currency exchange points are regulated in a similar manner. The spin here makes it seem like an attack. It's actually an annoucement that the government is going to treat entities that exchange USD/Bitcoin the same as they treat those working with any other foreign currency. It's a good thing all in all. The US government has just declared it is NOT planning to attack Bitcoin. Which is a smart move since they lack any technical means to do so.
162. Re:They don't get it by newcastlejon · 2013-03-22 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  No shit, nobody has made the claim that Amazon accepts Bitcoin.
  Oh?
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
163. Re:They don't get it by stenvar · 2013-03-22 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  criminality exists in this world. i'm sorry this bothers you, and i'm sorry in your naive rage you blame those who pursue criminality rather than criminality itself
  Criminality exists, it has always existed, and it will always exist. It exists in a balance between what we live with, policing, and private mechanisms for curbing it.
  
  but this doesn't change the fact that criminality is real, if unopposed it grows
  Many functions that are now handled by public law enforcement used to be handled by private solutions. One can argue about which one is better, but your idea that without ever increasing governmental law enforcement, criminal behavior keeps growing is utter and complete nonsense.
  
  and the vast majority of society has no problem with tactics like this to fight criminal organizations
  The vast majority of people in many countries have had no problem supporting monarchs, dictators, and fascists to run their lives; they made bad choices.
  
  so go make your own society, where such controls don't exist
  We did. It's called the United States. It was founded by people who tried to escape the stifling and horrific social controls of Europe and the institutionalized and widespread corruption in its governments. You see, if you give too much power to government, the criminals simply move to where the power is, namely government itself. The question is why people like you are here.
  
  welcome to reality deal with it
  The reality is that you're a proto-fascist, and that your views on law enforcement and government are extremely naive.
164. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 08:57 · Score: 2
  
  "Also all those laws about murder?"
  
  Which aspect of unregulated currency exchange is akin to murder again? For every useful law you can point to I can point to another one that is a bad idea.
  
  This is a good thing all in all. The government has given a nod to Bitcoin. Stated it intends to treat it like any other foreign currency. And will work from the assumption that controlling and tracking USD is a good way to maintain control.
  
  This is good for Bitcoin.
165. Re:They don't get it by Lashat · 2013-03-22 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, because the Euro is really working out perfectly.
  
  --
  For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
166. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  The infrastructure is spread and can avoid control and regulation in the same way file sharing can.
167. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  No you didn't. Bitpay did and on behalf of themselves (in order to purchase inventory from their supplier, amazon, to supply their customer, him) not him. The net result if that if I offer to pay you to mow my lawn you know you can spend that coin buying things from Amazon. It doesn't really matter to the Bitcoin economy if the thing you buy with Bitcoin is USD, or Euros (not covered under this law btw), gold, or shoes.
  
  This ruling only applies to those who do the actual exchange between USD and Bitcoin in amounts over $1000/day not to those using their services. If everyone accepts Bitpay (or critical mass), eventually the merchants using Bitpay will able to buy everything they need in Bitcoin and won't need to convert. When they all reach that conclusion everyone will just be paying and accepting Bitcoin.
  
  Some bring up taxes, but if you are paid entirely in bitcoin and you buy everything with Bitcoin, you don't currently owe any taxes. Taxes only become a factor if you cash out at a profit.
168. Re:They don't get it by DanielRavenNest · 2013-03-22 09:09 · Score: 2
  
  >. I don't know of any bank that will exchange bitcoins.
  Silicon Valley Bank: http://marblesecurity.com/bitcoin-gains-more-legitimacy-with-silicon-vslley-bank-support/
169. Re:They don't get it by Nerdfest · 2013-03-22 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  Taxes are a separate matter ... cash, cheque, bitcoin, credit card, etc, it matters not. I'm wondering if in the US (or Canada) a business must report payments of 10K or greater in cash. I know that in Canada, banks must, but I'd made the assumption that it was only banks.
170. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  No I don't, and that is why I don't make claims about it.
171. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  "I somehow doubt that (but if they'd do, then gov't'd just regulate Amazon in this regard)"
  
  Well no they wouldn't. They just released a statement saying they intend to apply no more regulation to Bitcoin than any other foreign currency which Slashdot has somehow turned into a bad thing.
  
  The ruling clearly states that you do not fall under regulation if exchanging Bitcoin or Bitcoin for goods. It only comes into play if you personally (not using an exchange) trade coins for dollars. Despite the spin this is a statement the government has no plans to attack bitcoin, not that it is attacking.
172. Re:They don't get it by sootman · 2013-03-22 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks. Posts like this (and people like you) are why I still come to Slashdot.
  
  --
  Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
173. Re:They don't get it by thebigmacd · 2013-03-22 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  Uhhh, the trust structure used to validate BitCoins requires listing previous transactions. You bet they know where you got it from (to a certain extent), or they won't accept them as legit. That's the whole point of BitCoin.
174. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 09:40 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Exactly. People are always looking for what they need Bitcoin for right now. Bitcoin fortunately has managed to find enough answers for that so far but the benefits if Bitcoin gains critical mass are astounding.
  
  Bitcoin has the potential to be a universal currency that no government and can seize or freeze. No company can trick you into a subscription with fine print and make you pay. No vendor can force you to put a debt before buying food for your family because the bank or government supports them over you.
  
  This is all good for the people. No more charge backs, and no more ability for merchants to pull funds from your account without getting authorization every single time. No more US creating money through hidden inflation. No more China artificially reducing the value of it's currency.
  
  The current schemes burn honest consumers, merchants, banks, traders, and even governments. For every advantage gained by manipulating the system in some way there is somewhere else they get burned. A value exchange medium that isn't controlled by anyone, is global, can't be seized, can't be manipulated, and can be exchanged instantly and easily is ultimately a good thing for everyone.
175. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 09:42 · Score: 1
  
  My bad. Slashdot hid the AC and made it look like you were replying to me.
176. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:45 · Score: 0
  
  How long does it take to count 6 Britannias, or 24 Sovereigns, or any one of a number of gold coins with a value of ~$10,000?
  But in general, most people don't hold large amounts of cash unless a) they are very rich (so it is a tiny portion of their wealth), or b) it comes from crime.
177. Re:They don't get it by thebigmacd · 2013-03-22 09:52 · Score: 1
  
  The US is the only country in the world that taxes out-of-country income of its citizens. For example, Canadians living in the US that have no Canadian income never have to file in Canada.
  We ran into an issue a year or two back where Americans that had never worked in the US and had become Canadian citizens were fined $25,000 for not informing the IRS of all Canadian accounts they held worth more than $10,000 US. The only way to get out of the fine is to revoke your US citizenship, but you have to be current with the IRS to revoke citizenship.
  Sure, you could ignore the fine as long as you never wanted to visit the US again in your life, or wanted to risk extradition if they went that far.
  What a racket.
178. Re:They don't get it by lgw · 2013-03-22 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  Ask Kim Dotcom about that file sharing thing. But what do you mean by "infrastructure"? If you mean just direct, person-to-person transaction, then sure, but most people aren't comfortable paying cash (with no fraud protection) for mail order goods. If you mean places like MtGox, the government can completely regulate bitcoin-based financial companies whenever it cares to.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
179. Re:They don't get it by greg_barton · 2013-03-22 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  Because the government defined what money is...
180. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:15 · Score: 0
  
  call bullshit all you want, I personally have never exchanged it out for USD. I have traded it for amazon gift cards. This was in response to the OP's statement that if it's not exchanged for USD then what good is it. For me, it's been quite helpful at accumulating material possessions. . . kinda like money.
181. Re:They don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  Ironically Dotcom never did any file sharing and he is doing very well, thank you, despite any efforts the US government made to fuck him up which further proves my point. US can regulate what is inside US any infrastructure outside it will present a bigger challenge and there is no restraint to where bitcoin transaction facilitators will establish themselves.
182. Re:They don't get it by Pseudonym+Authority · 2013-03-22 10:27 · Score: 1
  
  What? I was making 1800$ a week in construction just a few years ago, as a non-union laborer just there for the summer.
183. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:29 · Score: 0
  
  Exactly, the main problem I have with BTC is that it's curve rewards early backers disproportionately to later backers and with a fixed cap on the total number of BTC you can have, there's a huge incentive to hoard all of them that you can.
  Then the other problem is that nobody is required to accept BTC, which means that as deflation sets in, there's nothing to unlock the supplies later on.
  A better designed digital currency could deal with the problems, BTC just wasn't designed for that kind of use.
184. Re:They don't get it by davegravy · 2013-03-22 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  Except that you can buy a house worth $400,000 using bitcoins.
  http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2013/03/alberta-man-accepting-bitcoins-in-exchange-for-home.html?cmp=fbtl
185. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:32 · Score: 0
  
  Buy gold/siver/copper/wheat/corn/cows/goars or some other commotidy with dollars. Sell it in bitcoin.
  http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57570925-38/need-bitcoins-this-atm-takes-dollars-and-funds-your-account/ Anyways most people aren't going to hit the reporting limit.
186. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · 2013-03-22 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  This has always been the case though. The US permits people to take and bring as much cash and financial instruments as they like, but if it's over the threshold they expect you to declare it. Nothing is new about this, except that the rule would more clearly relate to BTC.
  And BTW, money laundering is illegal, so if you're doing that for any reason, then you are a criminal, not like a criminal.
187. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-22 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  There is such a strong anti-bitcoin sentiment on Slashdot. It makes no sense to me.
  
  Usually it seems like people cling to one of a few false ideas.
  
  Pyramid - Bitcoin is not a pyramid. In pyramids value flows one way. Pyramids don't work because you need an ever growing base at the bottom. In Bitcoin value does not flow one way. A few early investors who gambled by keeping the rewards of their early efforts will eventually cash out, hopefully at a gain, but that just amounts to more coin being in circulation. Circulation is the key word. Value flows in a circle with Bitcoin. Bitcoin depends on products and services being introduced to keep it flowing not on an infinitely growing base of people.
  
  Ponzi - Bitcoin is not a Ponzi. In Ponzi schemes a controller uses subsequent investments to pay make believe interest to early investors to solicit new investment. Bitcoin's value is not based on investment. Bitcoin has no innate value anymore than the USD does. It's mathematical tricks are about making it counterfeit proof not making it rare or valuable. A bitcoin represents a unit of buying power of goods and services. That isn't an easy thing to measure but lets pretend we know there is a total of 1 million dollars worth of goods and services in the Bitcoin economy (that won't change for simplicity) and there are 1 million bitcoins. Now lets say 10% of the coins are lost permanently. Now the remaining 900,000 coins still have to represent 1 million dollars. They've just deflated. Yes there is interest gained by someone who held on to their coins but it isn't fake or imaginary it came from the value represented by the lost coin. Sooner or later the early investors are rewarded and yes their profits come out of the pool of goods and services in the Bitcoin economy but provided they do it slowly enough for the market to bear there is nothing wrong with that. Their coins just slowly seep into common circulation and the economy continues to operate. The economy is driven by goods and services, not investors. Bitcoin is a currency not an investment. You can speculate on a currency but speculation is gambling not investment, whether it be speculation on stocks, commodities, currency or anything else.
  
  Limited Supply - Fiat currency inflates. If you need more units of value you just create more of it. Bitcoin deflates. Fiat is infinitely growable, Bitcoin is infinitely divisible. The only difference is the direction you move the decimal, moving it in either direction results in a 10 fold increase in the total number of value units. There is a limit of total Bitcoin blocks but there isn't a limit on the total possible value units. Currently the Bitcoin network agrees to recognize 8 decimal places. That can be increased but every bitcoin mined gives 10^8 units of value. If bitcoins were USD each 1 BTC would represent 10^6 or 1 million USD (leaving two places for cents). The Bitcoin supply is limited to 22 million BTC, so if the Bitcoin economy ever needs more than the equiv of 22 million million USD worth of value units an updated client that recognizes a 9th decimal place with increase that total supply by 10 provided more than 50% of those using Bitcoin vote for the extension by applying the update. There is plenty of Bitcoin and there is no theoretical limit on the amount of value units.
  
  Deflation - If you've read the above you already know why deflation doesn't create money out of thin air. You might also realize that where inflation creates a need to give out the new money somehow deflation simply spreads it evenly among everyone who has money in proportion to the money they have. But some believe you need inflation to prevent people from simply hoarding currency. This is simply backwards thinking. Mostly this view is held by those have an abundance of wealth and thus have no need to spend most of it. Inflation and deflation do not drive an economy they are driven by it. People needing goods and services are what drive people to spend currency or to work for currency. If someone is saving or hoardin
188. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:42 · Score: 0
  
  Look at technology like bitcoincard.org. Not yet operation, but the idea is sound. Everyone could carry around a payment gateway in their wallet.
  Actually many of the conversion sites let you transfer balances to an electronic card. If you have a prepaid card or talk someone into giving you one with a few pennies left on it, you can charge it up by paying bitcoin. As for banks, not yet, but not neccessarily never.
  There is not need for the tangible thing. It's useful to do so in order to force banks to be disciplined in issuance, however the issuance of bit-coin is inherently disciplined by cryptography. A requirement for something to be money is that it is not demanded for it's immediate utility, but that it has value in trade. People want a certain amount of it around so they don't have to resort to barter.
189. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:46 · Score: 0
  
  If a shop owner in new York accepts a euro for a candy bar, are they a money changer? No,
  Amazon could accept bitcoin for stuff that ships out of their warehouse and not be a money changer, but they are unlikely to fragment their marketplace like that.
190. Re:They don't get it by slimjim8094 · 2013-03-22 11:00 · Score: 1
  
  Bitcoins are losing ground because they crash in value every few months and the software has at least one (and certainly more) bugs that - rather than cause a program crash - *break* the currency. Read about the "block chain" bug from a few weeks ago - that's not an acceptable thing for a currency to have. And a good currency shouldn't change in real value particularly quickly, since people, employers, businesses selling products all need time to adjust to fluctuations. From 2011 to 2012, inflation seems to have been about 2%, which is pretty slow. Bitcoin has much larger market-wide fluctuations on the order of *weeks*, not years. How would you feel if you were being paid in Bitcoin and one week, you suddenly made half as much, and the gas station didn't change their price quickly enough and you still *had* to buy gas to get to work?
  Let alone the structural problems of having a fixed amount of money - Ill get to those later. Since the "early adopters" were able to get a lot of Bitcoins very easily, all it takes is one person deciding to dump their Bitcoins for a significant fraction of the total value of the market to be traded at once. That's not a good thing, and as we have seen (several times already!) the market crashes.
  But let me elaborate on the inflation thing. This is literally something that you learn in any school's "Introduction to Macroeconomics" class - it's the most basic of economic theory above "um well there's supply and demand and they balance out". Inflation is what allows the total value of the market to grow. And real markets need to be able to increase in value as the market grows, otherwise the value of the currency deflates - which is great if you already had money, but disastrous if you don't. Furthermore, the loans thing is really important. Again, basic basic macroeconomic theory says that if you want to build a new factory for Y and it will make you 2Y in profit, you should take out a loan to build it. But you'd be stupid to do that in Bitcoins because the currency could very likely deflate severely before the loan is due - and now your Y is worth a whole hell of a lot more than it was originally, maybe even more than the 2Y you planned to make. So nobody invests, ever - though even if they did it would just deflate the market further! You'd be a fool to store your money in a bank if it gains in value sitting under your digital mattress, so taking out a loan isn't even feasible anyway since there's no banks with money to loan.
  It just boggles my mind that people think Bitcoin will work. I wasn't a particularly good economics student and this is obvious even to me. The only conclusion I can draw is that the entire "Bitcoin fandom" has no grasp of basic, solid macroeconomic theory.
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
191. Re:They don't get it by pla · 2013-03-22 11:02 · Score: 0
  
  Haha, yes, I've seen the videos. "Watch me buy gas with bitcoins!" *transfers bitcoins to friend, waits 20 minutes, friend buys gas with USD*
  
  Haha, yes. Not watch me buy gold with BTC. *Loads one of a dozen sites selling metals for BTC, waits three days for a package, and flips it for cash the same day (or more sanely, keeps the metal for when Uncle Sam takes a cue from the UCB and comes for our savings accounts to pay off their useless debt).
192. Re:They don't get it by hydrofix · 2013-03-22 11:07 · Score: 1
  
  Bit Coin works even if there are no "firms" to issue or exchange. Therefore, there is no one to regulate.
  And where do you think people will get their BitCoins if there are no exchanges? Who will accept BitCoins? They as-is useful for only very few things.
  Businesses (read: entities that manage much larger cash flows than your monthly salary) will stop accepting BitCoins the very moment they can not be readily exchanged for local currency.
  So in essence, BitCoin is just a really geeky way of sending someone money online through these BitCoin <=> real currency exchanges. It has one downside though compared to PayPal: all BitCoin transactions are public, so it is devoid of any privacy, AFAIK. Anyone could write a script that will trace your transactions, if they can figure out your wallet number.. Not very nice!
193. Re:They don't get it by Marxist+Hacker+42 · 2013-03-22 11:25 · Score: 1
  
  At which point you limit your bitcoin money transactions to $999 *per bitcoin money exchange*. I learned this years ago dealing with the same regulation in casino chip transactions.
  There's a monastery in Vegas that has a chapel on the strip. A brother actually has the title of "Chip Monk" and runs around once a week cashing in chips found in the donation plate.
  
  --
  SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
194. Re:They don't get it by Marxist+Hacker+42 · 2013-03-22 11:37 · Score: 1
  
  If you trade for Amazon Gift Cards, then yes, under the new regulations this would be a "conversion to US Dollars" and thus any amount over $999 would have to be recorded with extra paperwork.
  Store gift cards ARE money- in a restricted form. You can think of them like debit cards. The IRS does.
  
  --
  SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
195. Re:They don't get it by Dunbal · 2013-03-22 11:38 · Score: 1
  
  Said entities do not have to be in the US. When was the last time the US got to regulate say, a European bank? Actually no, bad example, European banks fold under pressure and do what the US wants all the time...
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
196. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:42 · Score: 0
  
  Not to mention questionable anonymity claims (mapping out the transaction network is highly nontrivial, but possible with the resources of one or several law enforcement and/or intelligence organizations, even a private org could do it with the right motivation - not bad, but not enough for something that aims to be a global currency) and unavoidable deflation down the line (yes, even in the Austrian sense of numerically decreasing pool, wallet keys will be lost, there's likely a sizable pool of bitcoins sitting in such a limbo alreasy).
197. Re:They don't get it by Time_Ngler · 2013-03-22 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  These sound like reasons why you think bitcoin should lose ground, or why you want it to lose ground, not proof that it is losing ground. Take a look here to see a graph of bitcoin trading activity:
  http://blockchain.info/charts/bitcoin-days-destroyed-min-week?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&daysAverageString=7&scale=0
  And here is a graph of volume and price:
  http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#tgTzm1g10zm2g25zvzcv
  It's obvious from the above that its usage has been increasing. Also, if you have a google alert on bitcoin you'd notice that these have been increasing as well, so the media is picking up on it.
198. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 12:15 · Score: 0
  
  No, if amazon takes bitcoins, they would not be regulated as a money changer. Not unless they take bitcoins and give you dollars.
199. Re:They don't get it by almechist · 2013-03-22 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  The regulation is clearly going to happen at MtGox or any other place that exchanges bitcoins for USD. Once you are sending $10,000 USD to someone, the money laundering provisions apply. This should work for as long as businesses don't accept bitcoins directly, which is still mostly the case. There are a small number of businesses that will deal directly in bitcoins, but not enough that you could spend $10,000 on them reasonably yet.
  
  Ah, but among those few businesses is Silk Road, where I'm sure there are lots of people more than happy to deal in large amounts, probably the larger the better. So then, how about this:
  1) Acquire bitcoins in excess of US reporting requirements
  2) Use them to buy drugs on Silk Road
  3) Sell the drugs for US dollars
  4) Profit!
  Granted, if you make your living selling drugs to begin with, this procedure really isn't going to help you much.
200. Re:They don't get it by myowntrueself · 2013-03-22 12:51 · Score: 1
  
  The US is the only country in the world that taxes out-of-country income of its citizens.
  Not the only country. I'm pretty sure North Korea does as well.
  
  --
  In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
201. Re:They don't get it by slimjim8094 · 2013-03-22 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  Fair enough, but frankly immediate usage is essentially irrelevant for a currency. It's only useful for more than toys or novelty if it has long term prospects, because most of what actually having an economy is about is whether you have savings (bank deposits, etc) that match investment (loans, etc), and in Bitcoin you have neither. So I guess they're equal, but zero (or at least "trivial fraction of total economy") is not a healthy level for either.
  By the way, what's the GDP of the "Bitcoin economy"? At best it must be a small fraction of the total circulation. This is fine for a "currency" that's merely used for transferring "real" money around, but not good for something that people hope will have its own marketplace and people earning bitcoins by working and spending them on things.
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
202. Re:They don't get it by GrumpySteen · 2013-03-22 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
  Because it's in the constitution. Regulation of commerce has always been the domain of the US Government.
203. Re:They don't get it by Silentsoundguy32 · 2013-03-22 14:48 · Score: 0
  
  While prevalent, i doubt the average user is using Bitcoin to launder money at +$10,000 per transaction.
204. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:11 · Score: 0
  
  What tangible goods back the US Dollar today?
205. Re:They don't get it by Time_Ngler · 2013-03-22 15:24 · Score: 1
  
  Well, the point is that all the problems with bitcoin were present throughout it's history, yet it still grows. I've read many economic so-called theories explaining how bitcoin will fail do to this or that, but I don't believe you can treat what economists say with the same weight as say a mathematician or physicist. The reason I say that is at heart economic models behavior of people. People who have brains that are so complex we are unable to reproduce even a very crude representation of. So, take a single ever so complex human brain and multiply it by a million, then add culture, history, language, superstitious beliefs, religion, advertising, geography, weather, etc, etc, etc. and you can see why I find it difficult that an economist can model anything with a hundred percent accuracy.
  So I guess my point is that if bitcoin has not just survived but prospered over the 2 1/2 years of existence, and nothing significant is coming over the horizon to change this, I think that is better evidence for its continuous survival than some 100 year old economic "theories".
  If you could explain why it's survived and grown as it did so far, and then further explained why it would fail from there, IMO your arguments would hold a lot more weight. Otherwise, it just sounds like you are trying to say bitcoin's behavior (past and present) is impossible and therefore it should fail any second now, without explaining the incongruity of that statement.
206. Re:They don't get it by Zencyde · 2013-03-22 15:26 · Score: 2
  
  I love it when people compare a victimless crime to one of the most extreme of liberty violations. Please, do go on about how the two are oh so similar.
  
  --
  What day is it? Could you please tell me?
207. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 15:47 · Score: 1
  
  All that aside, the biggest problem with Bitcoin is that each transaction goes into the master bitchain and that file is massively redundant, often located on at least one of every single user's computers. Eventually if bitcoin were to gain mass appeal the hundreds of thousands of transactions a day would make these hosting the bitchain an unbearably large burden to an individual. If bitcoin became popular for use within just a single major city, the millions of transactions a day would completely cripple the blockchain. Bitcoin is a good idea, but it is a terrible implementation never intended for mass adoption.
208. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:10 · Score: 0
  
  No, they get paid with taxes (to keep the rich's money in tax heaven Cyprus safe.)
209. Re:They don't get it by slimjim8094 · 2013-03-22 16:10 · Score: 1
  
  If you could explain why it's survived and grown as it did so far, and then further explained why it would fail from there, IMO your arguments would hold a lot more weight. Otherwise, it just sounds like you are trying to say bitcoin's behavior (past and present) is impossible and therefore it should fail any second now, without explaining the incongruity of that statement.
  I believe I did - it's novel, and since people are playing around buying things with Bitcoin, it has enough value to be a decent decentralized way to send money electronically. But nobody takes a salary in Bitcoin, you can't pay your taxes in it, you'd be stupid to take out a loan in it (even if you could), and its deflationary nature makes it so prone to crashes (as demonstrated over and over!) that it'd be a terrible idea to store any real value. Thus it's essentially useless unless you're a miner (and very rapidly even for them) or a person using it "transitionally" by putting $50 in to buy some e-trinket or some webhosting or something because it's a cool new thing. When the second group runs out, there won't be enough value to be able to reliably transfer "real" money electronically from one point to another, and the whole thing will come crashing down.
  Would you take your salary or wage in Bitcoin? Keep in mind that you have to be able to pay your rent, taxes, utilities, gas, car maintenance, health care, and credit card bills with it. You could transfer it straight to your national currency, but then what's the point? It's just a really volatile way to get a paycheck. And if you therefore can't afford to live off Bitcoin, then what's the point of a currency?
  
  --
  I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
210. Re:They don't get it by Lehk228 · 2013-03-22 16:21 · Score: 1
  
  %gt; but not enough that you could spend $10,000 on them reasonably yet
  
  silk road
  
  --
  Snowden and Manning are heroes.
211. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 17:00 · Score: 0
  
  That depends on what it is. For drug sales there is no worry.
212. Re:They don't get it by Time_Ngler · 2013-03-22 17:16 · Score: 1
  
  Being novel isn't the only reason people buy things with it, however. With bitcoin you can be absolutely positively sure the person purchasing something with bitcoin is authorized to do so with a very minimal cost. With other forms of payment this is a horrendous problem and two people from distant parts of the globe always have to deal with., which comes as extremely high fees, fraud, or not being able to transact at all. So bitcoin opens up a huge market for this case for many businesses, especially those selling digital goods. I can't imagine this novelty purchasing is really responsible for the volume of transactions as you think it does. Mtgox currently trades $82M worth of bitcoin a month. How could this be mostly due to novelty?
  Crashes is a bit of a misnomer. There really was only one big crash, and it fully recovered since then. And the crash may not be because it's deflationary. The stock of companies is deflationary, gold is nearly deflationary, yet there are examples of companies whether the volatility is far less than bitcoin, and gold has been valuable for thousands of years. This whole bit where governments prints more and more money and gives it to who they wish just so they can stabilize a currency is somewhat hard to believe.. Name one currency which the government failed to inflate and then which led to a deflationary spiral.
  Bitcoin is still in it's infancy, and the market is still small, and just like the price of a small company, there is a lot of volatility, but if it continues to grow, it may reach a point where its fluctuations are much less noticeable. Besides, everything fluctuates to some degree, even currency, and people deal with it.
  
  Would you take your salary or wage in Bitcoin? Keep in mind that you have to be able to pay your rent, taxes, utilities, gas, car maintenance, health care, and credit card bills with it. You could transfer it straight to your national currency, but then what's the point? It's just a really volatile way to get a paycheck. And if you therefore can't afford to live off Bitcoin, then what's the point of a currency?
  Would I take my salary in bitcoin and then not convert any of it to my nation's currency? No, not yet. Also, there is a point to take my salary in bitcoin and transfer it to my nation's currency. If I worked for a foreign corporation and it was the cheapest and/or fastest way to send it, I would definitely consider it.
213. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 17:21 · Score: 0
  
  Bitcoins isn't the problem really. We already have USD. The problem is more that the receiver doesn't have to identify themselves. I suspect that in short order there will be an easy way to get stuff for bitcoins relatively easily. That is the real problem. You might say that they can then identify the receiver of the funds once they buy something. However there are virtual goods. Think software development, hosting, illicit pornographic materials, etc. In none of these cases does the person who sold illegal drugs have to identify themselves in order to purchase other goods that are legal and/or illegal. A carefully setup operation could probably safely launder funds with the help of bitcoins anonymously.
214. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 18:08 · Score: 0
  
  I agree with this kind of sentiment. It is an absolute fantasy to think that a institution-less currency can function in the real, physical world.
215. Re:They don't get it by AmiMoJo · 2013-03-22 19:01 · Score: 1
  
  Or Starbucks, Amazon, Google, Apple... Only chumps pay tax.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
216. Re:They don't get it by fatphil · 2013-03-22 20:51 · Score: 1
  
  Given how three of those four are in the top 50 of the fortune 500-list, I think I had those covered already.
  
  --
  Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
217. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 00:25 · Score: 0
  
  How many transactions over $10,000 in value are being done with bitcoins (the minimum for these rules applying)?
  During the last 30 days, 1248 transactions in USD above $10,000 in value were done at the major bitcoin exchanges, out of a total of 104,342 transactions involving USD during the same period, which makes up 1.2% of the transactions. In terms of the amount of money rather than the number of transactions, the numbers are $24.5M in transctions above $10,000 out of $69.3M in total, so 35% of all the money was exchanged in transactions of this size.
  In compiling these numbers, I have added together transactions that were broken up into packets of smaller ones, i.e. a single sell order for 10x 20 bitcoins at $60 each would count as one transaction of $12,000. I have not added up transactions for different sell orders, though, so 1 bitcoin at $60 followed by 1 bitcoin at $65 would not be combined to $125. A proper analysis for what this law actually would apply to would have to be much more thorough than this, but hopefully this will give a rough idea of the situation.
  PS. The current bitcoin speculation bubble seems to be in the process of bursting, for those interested: link
218. Re:They don't get it by F9rDT3ZE · 2013-03-23 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  i can't have been the only one to notice that MtGox, Dwolla, & many others involved in the BTC exchange circuit now require extensive amounts of pre-authorization identification (including scans of official photo IDs!) for exchanges any more. I am intrigued by BTC (and even more intrigued that the 6 BTC I bought for $4ea are now worth $70ea) but like many claims for "outlaw" technologies "taking over" from existing regimes of institutional power, I have trouble seeing how any potential "takeover" will immunize itself from just the sort of regulation that we see here. For a currency to be useful it has to have effective means of exchange into the existing forms of capital; but once it does, the existing forms of regulating capital will also come into play--or be blocked if regulation proves impossible. Like others have said here, even if BTC is in certain ways unregulable, exchanges between BTC and other currencies, and the use of BTC by regulated businesses in exchange for goods or services, absolutely can. I think there is evidence now that BTCs are being hoarded (& now probably sold off for nice profits!) & used (mostly) for illegal activities, & that the more "real" they become, the more untenable they will become for the latter & the more the former will be taken over by the professionals, & the more like any other currency they will become. but that's a guess, not a prediction--it's interesting to watch and I don't think the future of BTC is at all obvious.
219. Re:They don't get it by TheLink · 2013-03-23 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  What next you have to iron your money too, not just launder it?
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
220. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 05:28 · Score: 0
  
  you have told us something we didn't already know? are usa dollars tied to something tangible?
221. Re:They don't get it by TheLink · 2013-03-23 05:33 · Score: 1
  
  You'll have to go through all the pain criminals have to go through to launder their profits, and like criminals you're going to pay a hefty commission in order to get cash you can safely use.
  The big time criminals use banks like Wachovia, Bank of America and HSBC to launder money.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
222. Re:They don't get it by TheLink · 2013-03-23 05:49 · Score: 1
  
  Funny that you mentioned Mexico:
  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-29/banks-financing-mexico-s-drug-cartels-admitted-in-wells-fargo-s-u-s-deal.html
  
  Wachovia admitted it didn't do enough to spot illicit funds in handling $378.4 billion for Mexican-currency-exchange houses from 2004 to 2007. That's the largest violation of the Bank Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history -- a sum equal to one-third of Mexico's current gross domestic product.
  
  http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/10/news/companies/hsbc-money-laundering/index.html
  
  In Mexico, HSBC became the preferred bank for drug cartels and money launderers, according to the Justice Department. The government said the bank didn't raise red flags even when billions of dollars in transactions took place in cash, the typical mode of operation for drug dealers.
  
  They're not fighting crime that well are they?
  Mexico might be a far better place than it is now if those criminals in Mexico couldn't get their hands on all those billions of dollars from the USA. The banks helping them launder all that money have blood on their hands.
  And all they have to do is pay fines and often it's just the banks money not their own money. I don't see anyone in the banks going to jail for their part in it. All these laws aren't going to work till the people involved in such crimes also risk jail time.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
223. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 06:35 · Score: 0
  
  I see you haven't learned how commas work.
224. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 06:39 · Score: 0
  
  Indeed, your post is a fine example of Stockholm Syndrome, Charles Ponzi would be proud.
225. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 06:46 · Score: 0
  
  Haha, yes. Not watch me buy gold with BTC.
  Okay... I won't.
  It's kinda weird that you're still trying to do it, though.
226. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 08:00 · Score: 0
  
  You just buy hardare and mine your own bitcoins with it instead. The dollar-moneys will go through hardware industry and become bitcoins that way. After a while they will have to outlaw buying hardware with dollars or something of the sort.
227. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 08:03 · Score: 0
  
  It is not generated from nothing - it is generated by hardware. And no - bitcoins are not generated for free - they are generated from computational resources - which is extremely "tanglible". Maybe one of the very few valuable things left when most things are done by computers and robots...
228. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 08:06 · Score: 0
  
  How sure are you about that?
  For how long you think the banksters are gonna uphold the illusion that greeks and other countries national debts are the peoples "responsibility" to pay off with taxes? No it is rather a question of for how long they will be able to fool people with that...
229. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 09:21 · Score: 0
  
  The rest of us stick to currency and barter of things that actually exist.
  That's exactly the point - Bitcoins don't exist. Nothing digital can ever have any value.
  And Bitcoin is evil, it's the biggest DRM of them all, pretty much impossible to copy! We wouldn't even have an economy today if banks weren't allowed to lend out money they didn't actually have.
230. Re:They don't get it by Rakarra · 2013-03-23 11:30 · Score: 0
  
  boot-licking idiot
  So.... you got nothing.
231. Re:They don't get it by peawormsworth · 2013-03-23 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  BTC are basically just useful by a small number of people that aren't very good at math.
  I probably shouldnt bother responding, but... what do math skills have to do with it?
232. Re:They don't get it by peawormsworth · 2013-03-23 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  The US gov does not except Euros or gold either. Are these also useless? I guess the number of things I cannot pay taxes with are infinite. May I should convert everything I own to the paper currency in which my country accepts tax payments.
233. Re:They don't get it by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2013-03-24 01:36 · Score: 1
  
  Money laundering is a victimless crime?
  Sure, I guess. All that money being laundered from child pornography, drug cartels which can now safely get money from selling Taliban grown opium, trafficking of sex slaves. Totally victimless!
  I mean, there obviously no problems at all with providing a way for people to safely launder money from illegal activities. They probably don't commit any serious crimes doing so. We definitely didn't catch Al Capone because of tax fraud either and how to spend your illegal gains definitely isn't such a huge problem that it's a big business for crime because spending your illegal profits is a good way to get caught.
234. Re:They don't get it by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2013-03-24 01:39 · Score: 1
  
  The part where a major bank was caught laundering money for drug cartels, who in turn are the principle reason that town in Mexico has a death rate of 800 people per month? How about just sex slavery? Or child pornography production and distribution?
  The implication that just because enforcing a law is difficult (or being politically interfered with) doesn't mean we should bother is absurd. It is definitely a good thing to police BTC for these things.
235. Re:They don't get it by Zencyde · 2013-03-24 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you for shoving words into my mouth. You and I both know it's clear that I was talking about drug consumption, not money laundering.
  
  --
  What day is it? Could you please tell me?
236. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-24 04:08 · Score: 0
  
  Okay... I won't. It's kinda weird that you're still trying to do it, though.
  LOL... I misspelled "ECB", too, but strangely no one commented on that. Gotta agree though, the "not" certainly changes my intended meaning. :)
237. Re:They don't get it by shaitand · 2013-03-24 05:53 · Score: 1
  
  How about murder, genocide, malaria, and monsanto!
  
  I can name all sorts of bad things that aren't unregulated currency exchange too.
  
  Cartels use roads. Obviously those are akin to murder by your standard. I hear they wrap kilos in cellophane. Must we should regulate that too eh? This argument is as misguided as blaming drugs for the actions of the cartels.
  
  If murder is what you aren't okay with you only outlaw one thing, murder and your investigative techniques should be targeted to have the least impact on those who aren't committing murder as possible. Currency regulation is about the least targeted method imaginable. If the pesky rights of everyone else are making it difficult to catch some murderers... too fscking bad. Last I checked murder isn't a significant cause of death merely a significant cause of fear.
238. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-25 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  It does indeed smell like that, because bitcoin IS based on fundamental misunderstandings like that "government can't shut it down".
  It would seem undignified to attack bitcoin outright. What the government is moving to do is to tax it and prevent it from being used for money laundering. Since escaping tax and trading in illegal goods are the main appeals of bitcoin right now, I expect the exchanges will try to work around it. That's when government brings out the big guns.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
239. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-25 00:27 · Score: 1
  
  There has to be evidence that the person receiving the goods also paid for them.
  And that link in the chain the government will get when that person attempts to buy or sell bitcoins for conventional currency.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
240. Re:They don't get it by MyFirstNameIsPaul · 2013-03-25 00:35 · Score: 1
  
  Unless they don't use conventional currency at all. They get paid in bitcoins, and they spend bitcoins.
  
  --
  I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
241. Re:They don't get it by NewYork · 2013-03-25 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  https://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/
  
  --
  Casteism
242. Re:They don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-25 23:46 · Score: 1
  
  In which they can buy drugs and sell drugs, and little else.
  In general they can do anything a criminal can do with unlaundered money - yes, that includes small purchases too - but there's a reason criminals want to launder their income, you know?
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
243. Re:They don't get it by MyFirstNameIsPaul · 2013-03-26 12:05 · Score: 1
  
  What if someone just wants to have a 'supplemental' income? Offering services or selling small items of some sort. Bitcoin would present a great way for these people to avoid taxes, which is the goal of many people involved in such activities. The higher the tax rates, the more difficult it is to transfer from bitcoin to USD, the more likely that people will begin operating exclusively in Bitcoin. Rest assured, if people begin amassing wealth in the form of bitcoins, a market priced in bitcoins will develop.
  
  --
  I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
Simple solution by ccguy · 2013-03-22 04:26 · Score: 1

Solution (and business decision): Have the exchanges in tax heavens. Make all transfers bitcoin-only, until you really need to cash out. Not an easy thing to solve for the tax guys, but maybe this time they will bother do something that can eventually be used to prevent the tax evasion and money laundering happening until now with regular currencies.
1. Re:Simple solution by Bigby · 2013-03-22 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  That would be categorized as a capital gain...potentially a long term capital gain.
Good For Them by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:27 · Score: 1

Money launderers, drug dealers, and organized crime syndicates are weeping but this is a very good thing.
All these financial instruments must be regulated and monitored for our safety.
1. Re:Good For Them by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:35 · Score: 0
  
  Don't forget the terrists.
2. Re:Good For Them by jamstar7 · 2013-03-22 04:50 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I guess we really need to keep FinCrime busy now that all those bankers and investment brokers are in jail. Oh, wait...
  
  But foolishly, folks, this looks like a way to puff up the arrest numbers and make for some easy convictions to justify their shrunken budget (FinCrime got seriously defunded the instant they started looking at the big banks and investment houses) to Congress. The prevailing metric of any police force is their arrest record and conviction rates. Go after small fish you can steamroller cause the whales fight back.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
3. Re:Good For Them by QRDeNameland · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  All these financial instruments must be regulated and monitored for our safety.
  Yes, I remember the paralyzing fear and chaos of the days of a primarily cash economy, too. /sarcasm
  
  --
  Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
4. Re:Good For Them by cheekyjohnson · 2013-03-22 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  must be regulated and monitored for our safety.
  I got a good laugh out of that one.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
5. Re:Good For Them by GameboyRMH · 2013-03-22 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah if they weren't it would be just like the last decade or so of HSBC existing. Nobody would be safe in their own homes.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
6. Re:Good For Them by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:28 · Score: 0
  
  You mean Banks, Government sponsored drug cartel's, and governments themselves. Events like this Here You just are'nt buzzed in.
7. Re:Good For Them by DragonWriter · 2013-03-22 05:41 · Score: 2
  
  All these financial instruments must be regulated and monitored for our safety.
  Yes, I remember the paralyzing fear and chaos of the days of a primarily cash economy, too. /sarcasm
  If you actually were old enough to remember (or interested enough to have read about) when the printing of the kind of paper currency we now refer to as cash was unregulated, before it first became heavily regulated and then a government monopoly, you probably wouldn't use the sarcasm modifier.
  Ditto if you were even older and remembered (or, again, interested enough to have read about) the chaos and dislocations that happened before paper currency with specie currency (which was "cash" before paper currency was) when disruptions (in either the surplus or shortage direction) occurred in the supply of specie.
  The "primarily cash economy" with an unregulated money supply was, in fact, a source of not-uncommon paralyzing fear and chaos.
8. Re:Good For Them by QRDeNameland · 2013-03-22 06:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I wasn't talking about before currency was regulated by governments (no one is that old), I'm talking about before any transaction greater than $10,000 became subject to Federal scrutiny, like maybe 40 years ago, which I *do* remember, and yes it was a "primarily cash economy". How you took that mean "prior to gov'ts to controlling their currencies" is beyond me. My point was that the idea that we need these regulations "for our safety" is rather ludicrous when our society functioned just fine without them in recent memory.
  
  --
  Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
9. Re:Good For Them by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. It's easy to forget that the concept of money laundering was only born in the late 70's. The effectiveness of this new set of crime fighting tools should be judged in that light.
10. Re:Good For Them by stenvar · 2013-03-22 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  The "primarily cash economy" with an unregulated money supply was, in fact, a source of not-uncommon paralyzing fear and chaos.
  That's utter nonsense. The main economic advantage to having a single currency within a nation or across a trading bloc is that it increases efficiency somewhat. But in terms of stability and robustness, a lot of currencies operating in a free market are clearly better. And private and multiple currencies are a possible solution to many of the economic woes that we are currently seeing in the US and Europe. And they are likely going to happen anyway, whether governments like them or not.
11. Re:Good For Them by DragonWriter · 2013-03-22 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  That's utter nonsense.
  No, its historical fact.
  
  The main economic advantage to having a single currency within a nation or across a trading bloc is that it increases efficiency somewhat.
  
  That might be the main advantage now, its not the historical motivation. (Though I doubt that its even the main advantage now, and it might not even be true.)
  
  But in terms of stability and robustness, a lot of currencies operating in a free market are clearly better.
  Free markets are theoretical ideals, not real-world alternatives.
  
  And private and multiple currencies are a possible solution to many of the economic woes that we are currently seeing in the US and Europe.
  Many things are abstractly possible, but I don't see a coherent argument being presented that it is particularly likely that private currencies would solve any actual "economic woes" currently being experienced in the US or Europe.
  
  And they are likely going to happen anyway, whether governments like them or not.
  Private issuance of currency happens all the time, and there is historically a cycle where it occurs in a particular form, initially relatively unregulated, becomes more common, the system breaks down because some actors find ways of gaming it and produce widespread harm, and the government moves in and regulates, monopolizes, or bans the particular form. So, yeah, its a no brainer that its going to happen in new forms in the future.
12. Re:Good For Them by stenvar · 2013-03-22 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  The main historical cause for creating the US government monopoly on printing money wasn't stability, as you erroneously claim, it was financing the US civil war, i.e., increasing government spending. In different words, you are full of sh*t.
  As for the problems experienced by Europe and their relationships to currencies, are you living under a rock? If Greece, Spain, and other nations could devalue their currencies, this crisis wouldn't be so serious. Devaluing their currencies would punish those people who were stupid enough to lend money to them. Instead, Deutsche Bank and others now go to their respective governments, belly-ache about the consequences of their own stupidity, and ask for tax payers to cover their losses and risk taking. And just like the single currency causes these kinds of problems at a European level, similar mechanisms operate at a national level.
  As for "Free markets are theoretical ideals, not real-world alternatives.", gravity is also a "theoretical ideal", but we still use it usefully in engineering and science. Apparently, you don't understand how economic (or scientific) arguments involving theoretical ideals and abstractions work. Right now, we have a complete governmental monopoly on money. Creating a "free market" in money doesn't mean an ideal, totally unregulated market in money, it means the reasonable approximation we have for many other goods and services. That would allow the market to punish governments, banks, and businesses that misuse money or monetary policy.
And it had looked like a hopeful alternative... by Zemran · 2013-03-22 04:27 · Score: 1

...now it will be an also ran. Oh wait, it already is.

--
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Thanks for the stock update by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:27 · Score: 1

Did that submission totally just go through with Western Union Co. copy pasted out of a stock ticker?
1. Re:Thanks for the stock update by Infiniti2000 · 2013-03-22 04:35 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, and not surprisingly it has changed since the article posted!
I can solve this! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:28 · Score: 0

Send $9,999
Then donate $1.
Problam salved.
Life's cool up here in my Mansion tower.
1. Re:I can solve this! by devjoe · 2013-03-22 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Send $9,999 Then donate $1.
  Problam salved.
  Life's cool up here in my Mansion tower.
  And that is exactly the problem with this regulation. If transactions of more than $N into and/or out of bitcoins must be reported, criminals will keep their transactions under $N. They can create as many bitcoin accounts as they want. As long as they get the money into different US dollar accounts before buying bitcoins with it, there is nothing to tie the transactions together, and they won't be reported.
2. Re:I can solve this! by chill · 2013-03-22 05:31 · Score: 2
  
  And the problem with your reasoning is you have no experience in the industry and are just spewing shit out of your ass.
  Here, I'll link it for you to make it easy.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuring
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
What about gold mining in WoW? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

People exchange cash for the virtual currency, and exchange the virtual currency in the game all the time. Will Blizzard be subject to book-keeping and regulations?
What about other games with credits and item trading?
1. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:48 · Score: 0
  
  Blizzard explicitly disclaims and opposes any such exchanges, except in regards the trading of game-based product.
2. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 0
  
  Unless Blizzard is a party to the transaction, probably not. But I was thinking along the same lines as you seem to be. How will this impact things like Microsoft Points on Xbox Live? Steam Wallet? PSN? Nintendo's varied online shops?
  
  Actually, as I wrote this, I realized it probably won't impact them at all, since you can add funds, but cannot take them back out.
3. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by tokul · 2013-03-22 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  People exchange cash for the virtual currency
  
  For money laundering to work you should also be able to exchange virtual currency to cash. People are not exchanging money in WoW. They are paying for services and products.
4. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by alexander_686 · 2013-03-22 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe – The IRS has special rules to handle hobby and garage sale income. If it is an occasional thing that does not earn too much money the IRS lets it fly under the radar. If you are a full time gold miner in WOW then yes, the IRS cares about it. (It does not mean that WOW will report the transaction)
5. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by DigiShaman · 2013-03-22 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  If you earned a profit converting a virtual item for sovereign currency, it is taxable per IRS 1099-MISC form (miscellaneous income).
  It's quite possible that virtual game items could be taxable based on the US exchange rate. However, we are talking about children playing games here. But then again, that didn't stop regulators from sending the police to shutdown small front yard lemonade stands either. So there is that.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
6. Re:What about gold mining in WoW? by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  Even without this, if you buy and sell virtual goods from a game and make a real world profit from it, and are a US citizen, then you are legally required to report that income. Blizzard has nothing to do with it. Now the feds aren't going to be investigating this since it's such a small thing. But you are still breaking the law if you don't report that income even if you aren't investigated for it.
So then by fustakrakich · 2013-03-22 04:31 · Score: 1

What purpose does Bitcoin serve now if it can't avoid meddling by the banks and government? Now they can rob your Bitcoin account to bail out the banks?

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
1. Re:So then by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  Bitcoin itself is still meddle-proof and untouchable Exchanging bitcoin for dollars in the US will be subject to observation--that's the only change.
I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:31 · Score: 0

this isn't going to work so well.
This is meant to kill Silkroad by Xemu · 2013-03-22 04:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

They will use this law to strike against Silk Road.
Remember, Capone was convicted on federal charges of tax evasion.

--
Tell your friends about xenu.net
1. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 0
  
  SR is already illegal...
2. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  Or Mega and similar operations.
3. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:10 · Score: 0
  
  They can't even find Silk Road, let alone charge them with a crime, so I don't see how just adding yet another law for them to break is going to change anything.
4. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:14 · Score: 0
  
  Nonsense. Money laundering is used for much, much, much worse things than a few people buying weed on the internet.
5. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:53 · Score: 0
  
  They aren't converting BTC to USD. They're coverting BTC into THC.
6. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 12:19 · Score: 0
  
  Oh yeah? And just how the flying fuck do you propose they find Dread Pirate Roberts to charge him?
7. Re:This is meant to kill Silkroad by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 12:50 · Score: 0
  
  Silk Road sells child sex slaves, meth and meth labs and missiles. And that's just on the front page. It needs to be stricken!
Pot...kettle... by ProZachar · 2013-03-22 04:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

"I think it's inevitable that just like you have U.S. dollars used by thieves and criminals..."
Unfortunately, the worst thieves and criminals (the government and the banks that have bought the government) will be the ones doing the regulating.
1. Re:Pot...kettle... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  'I think it's inevitable that just like you have U.S. dollars used by thieves and criminals, it's sadly inevitable you will have criminals use a virtual currency. We want to work with authorities,' said Jeff Garzik, a Bitcoin developer.
  It seems as if he doesn't understand the concept of the product he created, like he is some type of Frankenstein who created a monster that he can't control. The sad thing is that there is an inherent need for an anonymous currency so that criminal activity can occur. One of the main reasons for allowing and condoning secretive "offshore" banking was so that Jews and businesses in Europe, for example, had some place to stash their money during Nazi rule.
  The sad thing is that for the big players, like the United States government (remember Iran-contra when the U.S. government was buying and selling cocaine to its citizens during the Just-say-no-to-Drugs era?, and the black budget that never makes it into the news).
  For the drug cartels, and the millionaires and billionaires in countries like Greece it is business as usual, as well as for the bankers who never did get convicted during the most recent banking fraud crisis.
  For people who have a hard time buying medical marijuana or pain killers (don't laugh, in places like Russia and Africa, people sometimes kill themselves instead of living in pain, because Conservatives fear that having cancer should not be an excuse to have any type of pleasant or relaxing feelings while on pain killers. The U.S. is getting more "conservative" in their medical-moral practices as well. It isn't just Islamic Africa).
  So regulating bitcoin will hurt the small time criminal. Too bad that people in positions of power demonize criminals when instead they should be demonizing conservatism and religious ideology. If the developer of bitcoin is joining the dark forces, then everybody else should abandon bitcoin, because its only real value is as an anonymous currency.
2. Re:Pot...kettle... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:56 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, because laundering money from health destroying drugs and automatic weapons is way better for society than money spent on Streets, Schools, and Health care for old people.
  People need to pull their heads out of their asses. The Government isn't perfect but it does a hell of a lot to benefit society.
3. Re:Pot...kettle... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:45 · Score: 0
  
  Except the government isn't actually enforcing the regulations, slap on the wrist is just another cost of doing business.
4. Re:Pot...kettle... by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 07:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I think you have to separate the question of whether X/Y/Z things are bad from the question of money laundering. AML is an extremely complex, expansive and vague set of laws that more or less attempt to fight crime by creating a systematic network of surveillance and control over the financial system. That's why you read about people having to automatically file paperwork for transactions that are "suspicious" (what this means is not well defined). That's why anonymous banking is illegal - the assumption is anyone could be a criminal so everyone has to monitored, all the time. And in fact, it appears that parts of the USG have created a system in which not only are such reports dumped, but all records of all financial transactions ever (this is the TFTP).
  One may question whether systematic surveillance is the right way to fight crime ... whether the costs are worth the benefits. Most western societies instinctively reject widespread surveillance - we wouldn't accept government controlled security cameras in our homes despite the obvious application to crime fighting. However without anyone really noticing this is what's happened to finance.
  The other scary thing about this system is that with the ability to track every transaction comes the ability to veto them too. Consider the case of the US citizen who got on the wrong side of Israel and was put on the sanctions list for 17 years. He was finally removed (and they agreed he was not a terrorist) after the Treasury was sued, 1 day before the law stated they had to respond. This kind of rampant abuse of power comes due to the ability to punish people without going via the courts, a power made possible by extensive AML controls.
5. Re:Pot...kettle... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:12 · Score: 0
  
  So regulating bitcoin will hurt the small time criminal. Too bad that people in positions of power demonize criminals when instead they should be demonizing conservatism and religious ideology
  Politicians shouldn't be demonizing anybody, and you got your villains mixed up. Social conservatives on the right are united with progressives on the left in creating big, intrusive government that tracks and manages everybody's life (they just differ on the details). Social liberals, fiscal conservatives, and libertarians want less government intrusion, less government tracking, and more liberty.
6. Re:Pot...kettle... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 09:37 · Score: 0
  
  If AML laws didn't exist, there's basically no way law enforcement would ever get any info about money transfers at all. It's easier for banks (and other financial institutions) to do things anonymously, not keep records, etc. AML laws are a tradeoff where we give up a bit of financial privacy, in exchange for a compelling law enforcement tool.
  It's sort of analagous to why we need car license plates, gun registrations, and the myriads of other permits the government gives out. We need a paper trail so that laws can be enforced.
7. Re:Pot...kettle... by riondluz · 2013-03-24 00:28 · Score: 1
  
  Pot (govt), Kettle (mafia)
  I used to be a believer in democracy and the rule of law.
  Now I feel that laws are the hammer of the Elites and we simple citizens are pawns in the ruthless games of conquest between Organized Elites and Organized criminals. They are an equivalency, they often work together to the same ends and they both do not care an iota about the harm done to society writ large.
  Each use their wealth and power to purchase the same types of people who have an unnatural need to be an 'authority' figure holding the less-pointy end of the stick at the masses who often find themselves victims of circumstance and who want to just get on with their lives.
  
  --
  resist propaganda
Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by Uberbah · 2013-03-22 04:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

Same as when banks started having to report transactions of a few thousand dollars to the feds, because it could be "money laundering". If it's not the mob, it's terrahrists or pedos.
Same shit from both parties, different day.
1. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by ADRA · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  If the largest harm in cracking down is to listen to you whine, I'd happily take the law. Tax dodges and more importantly drug slingers are the major problem in society and they directly/indirectly kill thousands of people yearly in US/Mexico alone. Your high minded slights on over-reaching control fanaticism makes me sick to my stomach. Get a grip and reality and tell me your GOVERNMENT is the bigger threat than the gang bangers around the corner.
  
  --
  Bye!
2. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:04 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Get a grip and reality and tell me your GOVERNMENT is the bigger threat than the gang bangers around the corner.
  When I pass through airports, I can honestly say that I am more afraid of the anti-terrorism and customs officials than I am of the terrorists.
3. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by bobbied · 2013-03-22 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  Same as when banks started having to report transactions of a few thousand dollars to the feds, because it could be "money laundering".
  And you would expect something different for BitCoin over Western Union money orders?
  Nothing is really different here. If you don't use some institution that is subject to the reporting rules or physically move money over national boundaries, you are free to make transactions anyway you choose. Want to spend $100K as stacks of $20's and buy something you can (assuming somebody is willing to sell what you want to buy). Same with BitCoin.
  What's really changing is that when you buy or sell BitCoin from a currency exchange house, they are required to report transactions over a set value (assuming they are subject to US laws in the first place). The rule simply puts BitCoin on the same playing field as other ways to move currency.
  If they are justified with the current reporting rules, then including BitCoin is justified too... Actually, I don't understand how these rules would really help much in stopping one from using BitCoin to import and export wealth or launder money, as long as you keep transactions under the reporting limits when you convert to hard currency...
  By the way.. Big Brother is *already* here and has been here for a LONG time....
  
  --
  "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
4. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:34 · Score: 0
  
  Fascist
5. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  If you're more afraid of law enforcement than you are of criminals, you're probably a criminal.
  Power corrupts people. I remember when good people were proud to be an american. Now-a-days if you're proud to be an american, you're probably a fascist.
6. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  The whole reason money laundering works is because it makes it impossible to track transactions to prove that someone's income was illegally gained. So add a reporting requirement to the banks and exchangers and money laundering becomes more difficult to make work. It does not prevent any transactions though, it does not infringe on anyone's right to conduct business, and the reporting requirements do not even require you to say where you got the money from.
7. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by mpeskett · 2013-03-22 09:42 · Score: 2
  
  The problem isn't necessarily the government of today, in it's current state. The problem is that granting any government greater power than it already has is an action that's very difficult to undo; that power is unlikely to be relinquished without a protracted fight. That means you're not just trusting the government of today not to abuse whatever you allow them to do, but also every conceivable future government.
  If you want to truly evaluate whether the government should be permitted to do a thing, first imagine the worst possible abuse of that power. In this case... I'm not actually all that overwhelmed by the worst case, it's true, but in any other sphere, saying "the government is less of a threat than the criminals, best give 'em whatever power they say will help fight crime" is a fucking terrible idea.
8. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by fatphil · 2013-03-22 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  > Tax dodges and more importantly drug slingers are the major problem in society
  
  Or, as we like to call them, "big business", and "big pharma".
  
  --
  Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
9. Re:Translation: Here Comes Big Brother by dbreeze · 2013-03-23 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  "If you're more afraid of law enforcement than you are of criminals, you're probably a criminal."
  I can't mod up the AC who replied so I'll just take credit for his good work......
  "Power corrupts people. I remember when good people were proud to be an american. Now-a-days if you're proud to be an american, you're probably a fascist."
  I'll add that most all of my friends. co-workers, family etc. engage in some sort of criminal activity or other on a regular basis.Hard to avoid it these days if you value liberty much at all. I tell everyone they'll regret ever saying anything bad about the police when they're trapped in a burning vehicle or being sucked into a sinkhole as per the recent event in FL. That being said, most everyone I know dreads interaction with law enforcement... it generally results in losing more than you can afford over something stupid($135 seat belt ticket for example).
  
  --
  When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
"We want to work with authorities" by PapayaSF · 2013-03-22 04:39 · Score: 1

Why do I always get a slight shiver up my back when people say things like that...?

--
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
1. Re:"We want to work with authorities" by jamstar7 · 2013-03-22 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  Because they're throwing you under the bus to save their own asses?
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Booo! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

Pry them out from my cold hard encryped grasp, if you can.
Satanic usery worshipping asshats.
1. Re:Booo! by dbreeze · 2013-03-23 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  damn I need mod points....
  
  --
  When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
Bit coin is growing up! by Mabhatter · 2013-03-22 04:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

Yea! Bitcoin is growing up! That means enough people are using it that the government is noticing. And of course the first thing the government does to show its appreciation is to start regulating it. Did they at least get a "Baby's first regulation" card?
1. Re:Bit coin is growing up! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  This is representative of how fast governments move, not Bitcoin getting on the radar.
  It took US government ~5 years to shut down online poker - with a few businesses in the industry passing 1 Billion dollar valuations - before the US government got around to shutting it down.
  For you, a million dollars is big money. For governments, that is 1 hour of work by one department at DOJ and it takes more than 1 hour to make things happen. They have much higher thresholds than you.
2. Re:Bit coin is growing up! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:15 · Score: 0
  
  They did miss a step in the 3 step program. 1. If it moves, tax it. 2. If it keeps moving, regulate it. 3. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
  On a side note, are these the same money laundering laws that weren't used against a prominent bank recently when they were found to have been doing that? Well, then we should be safe once we are "too big to jail".
Booo! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:43 · Score: 0

And then satanic usury worshipping carpetbaggers came for our bitcoins.
Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Akratist · 2013-03-22 04:43 · Score: 1, Interesting

The problem with all this is that "money laundering" generally comes from activities which are victimless crimes, and are therefore not a crime because they don't affect anyone but the person doing them. Gambling is illegal because it is market competition with state-run lottos and approved casinos. Drugs besides alcohol and prescribed pills are illegal because they circumvent a distribution apparatus. Etc. So, when you see a story like this, just realize it's because someone with political power is concerned that they might not be getting as much of a cut or sucking down as many tax dollars as they want, not because it is somehow making the world a better place to regulate it even more.
1. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by DerekLyons · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The problem with all this is that "money laundering" generally comes from activities which are victimless crimes, and are therefore not a crime because they don't affect anyone but the person doing them.
  Yeah - that money from a protection racket or from running a prostitution ring or from embezzling... no victims there. Or to put it another way, if you think ill-gotten gains only come from money that appears from thin air, you're either *very* innocent about how the world works or utterly and completely clueless.
2. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  The problem with all this is that "money laundering" generally comes from activities which are victimless crimes, and are therefore not a crime because they don't affect anyone but the person doing them.
  You're a fucking idiot if you believe that.
3. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  He was right about money laundering itself being a non-crime/victimless crime though the activities the money came from may not be. It's just another way to punish people twice.
4. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:15 · Score: 0
  
  Don't be naif. Prostitution rings and embezzling (which I imagine account for a very low percentage of the grey market -- most of it is drugs) leave many other trails behind besides money. What governments don't want is market freedom, because that makes it hard for them to get their cut, as said before.
5. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by serviscope_minor · 2013-03-22 05:16 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah - that money from a protection racket or from running a prostitution ring or from embezzling... no victims there.
  Well, it would be very hard to run an illegal prostitution ring if prostitution was legal.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
6. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Akratist · 2013-03-22 05:16 · Score: 2
  
  Uhh, explain to me why prostitution is a crime? If a person is being forced into sex work, this is kidnapping and slavery. If a person embezzles from another person, that is theft. You DO understand the difference between malum prohibitum and malum in se?
7. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by bobbied · 2013-03-22 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  you're either *very* innocent about how the world works or utterly and completely clueless.
  I don't think the proper word is "or" but "and".... Very naive AND completely clueless.. Victimless crimes, shesh, Just because you cannot point to a single person or small group that is a victim does not mean the crime is somehow less or that ripping off a large corporation is somehow better than stealing grandma's life savings.
  Wrong is wrong and unethical behavior is unethical even if you don't have a clear victim you harmed.
  
  --
  "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
8. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by dkleinsc · 2013-03-22 05:42 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Drugs besides alcohol and prescribed pills are illegal because they circumvent a distribution apparatus.
  That's not the reason why drugs are illegal. Harry Anslinger, who led the effort to outlaw pot in the 1930's, explained his motivations:
  "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."
  That why the drugs favored by white people back in the day (tobacco and alcohol) are legal, but the drugs favored by non-white people at the same time (marijuana, opiates) are illegal.
  The next major round of prohibitions was very explicitly because Richard Nixon wanted an excuse to lock up the hippies, who he saw as a threat to America.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
9. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Akratist · 2013-03-22 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  you're either *very* innocent about how the world works or utterly and completely clueless.
  I don't think the proper word is "or" but "and".... Very naive AND completely clueless.. Victimless crimes, shesh, Just because you cannot point to a single person or small group that is a victim does not mean the crime is somehow less or that ripping off a large corporation is somehow better than stealing grandma's life savings.
  Wrong is wrong and unethical behavior is unethical even if you don't have a clear victim you harmed.
  What is "wrong?" Unethical doesn't equal illegal. You can either show damages to another person or you cannot. If I knock down your mailbox with my car, for example, I have damaged your property. If I knocked it over with your hand in it, I've damaged you. If I grab your wallet, then you're a victim of theft. There is a clear victim. I'm at a loss to see anywhere in my posting that I advocated stealing from everyone. As for naive and clueless, name calling just means that you are having a hard time attacking my logic and want to run on emotion instead. If it makes you feel any better, I don't advocate a stateless society because the rights of children, among other things, need to be protected. I do not understand, however, why we waste time fighting a meaningless drug war and screwing with the free market just because we somehow think we can change society by attacking the symptoms of bad behavior, not the underlying reasons.
10. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Akratist · 2013-03-22 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you for pointing that out again. The marriage laws were also passed in order to control interracial marriage. It's funny how many people run around supporting bad laws and stupid ideas because of prejudice and ignorance a few generations back...maybe it's more evidence for memes, I don't know.
11. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by dcollins · 2013-03-22 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  I have a friend who's a former sex worker (now a PhD academic), who says her greatest joy came from that work, and her greatest regret is that it's not legal for her to open a brothel and expand the work. Read some of the stories at SWOP-NYC (Sex Worker's Outreach Program, NYC) and think carefully about whether that work should really be illegal to protect the "victims":
  http://swop-nyc.org/
  
  --
  We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
12. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Because there's a history of pimps using and abusing women with no marketable skills and hooking them onto addictive drugs or taking advantage of an existing addiction to push them into the line of work. It's a lot like robber-barons and wage-slaves, but with more a dire outcome and deeper hooks.
  There are prostitutes, strippers, and dancers that made a fair choice about their jobs, but it'd be hard to say what percentage got pushed into the field due to unreasonable social pressures and/or firm backhands.
13. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 06:47 · Score: 2
  
  The problem is that the average man on the street thinks the crime of "money laundering" means "hiding the proceeds of crime". That's the definition you'll find in the dictionary, on Wikipedia etc. If you actually read the regulations however, by far the majority of offences labelled as money laundering boil down to not filing the right paperwork or myriad other things. For example, it's quite routine for farmers to be accused of money laundering for depositing their money in chunks of less than $10k, typically to avoid filling out byzatine forms. When this happens, the US government just seizes (aka steals) the money. There is usually no court case.
  Over time, the more I learn about AML laws the more I dislike them. There's no rational cost benefit analysis of any of this stuff. The $10k limit was set in the 70's and never adjusted for inflation. The regulations and thresholds are made more and more extreme every year, yet evidence it actually succeeds in stopping drug dealing or terrorism is - as far as I can tell - minimal to non-existent. The costs, meanwhile, are staggeringly huge. The sheer amount of paperwork it generates alone is eye watering.
14. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by IamTheRealMike · 2013-03-22 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  That's fascinating and not something I'd heard before. However, according to el 'Pedia, the states were already outlawing cannabis in the years before Anslinger got involved and he simply picked up the pace. It's unclear if the motivations in the states were the same as his or not. Also, he appeared to truly believe that smoking marijuana sent people insane, and when a study that contradicted that idea was released it made him apopletic with rage. So I guess it didn't boil down entirely to racism.
15. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by roman_mir · 2013-03-22 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  Really big money does not get audited, really big money comes from the printing presses (figuratively speaking, they don't even need those anymore). Really big money cannot be touched and it is used to finance wars, murder, foreign occupation, destruction of individual liberty, monopolisation of various formerly free markets, destruction of people's savings. Really big money is used to set the law, which is used to prevent any type of competition and ability of people to thwart the Really big money from stealing from small time money. Really big money steals from everybody and murders hundreds of thousands if not millions and the perps get 'respect' from the media and the idiots, not jail time.
  
  --
  You can't handle the truth.
16. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Koreantoast · 2013-03-22 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  It's funny how everyone latches on to the example of prostitution and ignore the main point which is that the dangers of money laundering are very real. One can debate about the morality of a specific crime or two, but one can easily find other reasons: arms trafficking, extortion, good ol' fashion theft, corruption and slush funds, etc. At very least, cracking down on money laundering pushes more and more large financial transactions in the open, making it harder for LARGE entities, from cartels to corporations to governments, to hide their transactions from the public.
17. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  Rap. I bet Harry Anslinger didn't see that coming, or marijuana prohibition would never have happened.
18. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:54 · Score: 0
  
  And coca leaf was banned in the early 60s because Anslinger was convinced it made Andean peoples lazy, thus explaining the poor economic performance of South American countries. I guess he'd never seen someone mining in the Andes at 14,000 feet using manual tools, while chewing coca to stave off the effects of altitude. It is the hardest work I've ever seen. Coca does not make you lazy.
  P.S. coca is still used in the production of Coca Cola. The DEA regards this as the only acceptable use.
19. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by pla · 2013-03-22 11:25 · Score: 1
  
  For example, it's quite routine for farmers to be accused of money laundering for depositing their money in chunks of less than $10k, typically to avoid filling out byzatine forms. When this happens, the US government just seizes (aka steals) the money. There is usually no court case.
  
  The actual crime of money laundering requires the money to have come from illegal sources.
  
  The link you gave has the guy admitting that he structured deposits specifically to avoid reporting requirements. He could have deposited over 10k at a time at one bank for the next 40 years and no one would have blinked; As soon as he deliberately tried to dodge the reporting requirements, however, bam, he had committed a crime.
  
  Now, I'll stand beside you to denounce those reporting requirements as complete and utter BS we need to abolish; But by analogy, not all IP means "copyright".
20. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by forceman130 · 2013-03-22 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with all this is that "money laundering" generally comes from activities which are victimless crimes, and are therefore not a crime because they don't affect anyone but the person doing them.
  
  "It's a victimless crime, like punching a guy in the dark" - Nelson
  
  --
  Wow, a 7 digit ID - let that be a lesson in the perils of procrastination.
21. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by tragedy · 2013-03-22 16:05 · Score: 1
  
  There are prostitutes, strippers, and dancers that made a fair choice about their jobs, but it'd be hard to say what percentage got pushed into the field due to unreasonable social pressures and/or firm backhands.
  It's especially hard to say because they're afraid to step forward and say anything due to the fact that they'll be thrown in prison themselves. One of the reasons pimps have always had such an easy time preying on women already working as prostitutes or women that they force into prostitution is that, once a woman is working as a prostitute, her (generally correct) assumption is that the authorities won't really want to help her, but rather will want to punish her.
22. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by tragedy · 2013-03-22 16:09 · Score: 1
  
  Which is it then? Does the crime of money laundering require the money to come from illegal sources, or is dodging reporting requirements for legally obtained profit also money laundering?
23. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 16:33 · Score: 0
  
  No, Not particularly. Prostitution is legal here in Australia, but VERY HEAVILY regulated. This would make it very expensive for the brothels/girls. Transactions have to be done in an authorised brothel, by licensed prostitutes that get regular check ups, and have to practise safe sex.
  Legalising it has not stopped illegal prostitution in this country.
24. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by pla · 2013-03-22 16:56 · Score: 1
  
  Which is it then? Does the crime of money laundering require the money to come from illegal sources, or is dodging reporting requirements for legally obtained profit also money laundering?
  
  Entirely separate crimes. Resisting arrest doesn't require the police to have any other valid charges on which to arrest you. Same idea applies here - Trying to hide in itself counts as the crime.
  
  And as I said, I consider that absolutely, fundamentally wrong for anything claiming to call itself a "free" society. But as citizens of "that" society, rather than some imaginary idealistic one - Let's attack the actual bad laws rather than a parody of them.
25. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by tragedy · 2013-03-22 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  But they're not separate crimes. The law they used to go after the farmer was the Bank Secrecy Act, which is a money laundering statute.
26. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 09:41 · Score: 0
  
  Replace "prostitution ring" with "sex slavery". I think that's what GP was referring to. Yes, institutional prostitution can be done right, but that's not it's current status.
27. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 09:47 · Score: 0
  
  Um, yeah, trying to avoid filling out forms is about as good an idea as trying to evade taxes. derp
28. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Keybounce · 2013-03-23 14:06 · Score: 1
  
  Can you please provide citations/sources for this?
  Specifically, the quote itself, and that Harry Anslinger was the primary force behind this?
  I'm not trying to be mean or anything; I want to arm myself with facts and cites for my own such battles.
29. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 18:50 · Score: 0
  
  Gambling is illegal because it is market competition with state-run lottos and approved casinos.
  No, gambling is illegal because it is far too easy to cheat or swindle others. Hustling, weighted dice, marked cards, cards up the sleeve, false shuffles, deck stacking, non-biased dealer, fixed roulette tables, fixed slot machines, fixed lottos/raffles, etc. State-run lottos are such that the winners actually exist and cannot be any who are related to anyone working in the lotto. "Approved" casinos are such that they make sure there is no cheating going on, as there are laws in place that would cost the casino dearly if it was found they were facilitating it. Not to mention that the casino itself does not want to lose money to cheaters, nor does the casino want to lose the trust of their patrons that there is no cheating going on.
30. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 18:53 · Score: 0
  
  s/non-biased dealer/biased dealers/
31. Re:Money Laundering is a Non-Crime by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-24 13:20 · Score: 0
  
  It's amusing that Harry Anslinger's fears have materialized as one of the dominant fetishes of the porn industry.
Yeah so much harder than a 100 bill by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:46 · Score: 0

to trace,
Good way to devalue Fiat Currencies... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:47 · Score: 0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law
They're attempting to devalue bitcoins by making them less useful for legitimate purposes. All they are doing is incentivizing moving long term savings to bitcoin entirely. If they try to prevent people from exchanging them for cash you will just end up with money changers with an official exchange rate and an unofficial exchange rate.
They're driving bitcoin further in to the shadows where it will be harder for them to track but easier to demonize. That worked really well for drugs afterall. Why not let people pay taxes in bitcoins? It will go a long way towards fixing the deficit.
Much better article by SteveFoerster · 2013-03-22 04:49 · Score: 4, Informative

For the few, the proud, the article readers: Pelle Braendgaard of PayGlobe wrote a much better article on the same topic.

--
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
Inline stock quote by necro81 · 2013-03-22 04:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

The move means that firms that issue or exchange the increasingly popular online cash will now be regulated in a similar manner as traditional money-order providers such as Western Union Co. WU +0.17%

Sigh. Inline, updating stock quotes in business and finance articles are annoying enough in their own context. When taken out of that context by a lazy and sloppy copy-paste, as had happened with this article summary, is just plain disappointing. Does nobody bother to copy-edit these things before they go live? I thought this was /., not reddit.
1. Re:Inline stock quote by DragonWriter · 2013-03-22 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Does nobody bother to copy-edit these things before they go live?
  
  Yes, nobody bothers to copy-edit these things before they go live.
  
  I thought this was /.
  
  Exactly, which explains the previous answer.
2. Re:Inline stock quote by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  I thought this was /., not reddit.
  LOL. You must be new here.
  /Go back 8-10 years
  /Read comments in stories
  /Realize that you are one of thousands to utter "Does nobody bother to copy-edit these things before they go live?"
  /Realize that this will not change until the heat death of universe
  /Sit back, wonder why you bother
  /Go to reddit, where you don't have such high expectations, and live life again
3. Re:Inline stock quote by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  Sigh. Inline, updating stock quotes in business and finance articles are annoying enough in their own context. When taken out of that context by a lazy and sloppy copy-paste, as had happened with this article summary, is just plain disappointing. Does nobody bother to copy-edit these things before they go live? I thought this was /., not reddit.
  They also give plagiarized credit. Why not just say that so and so quoted the article? Cutting and pasting is not writing. Is this place professional or not? I'm betting the lazy editors get paid.
4. Re:Inline stock quote by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:40 · Score: 0
  
  glad im not the only one to notice this
Money monopoly = wealth transfer by moeinvt · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

Money laundering? BS. If they cared about money laundering then they'd go after the bankers who are laundering millions of dollars in drug money for the cartels.
What this is really about is a banker-government that will do anything and everything possible to prevent alternatives to their fiat + fractional reserve monopoly on money. These parasites absolutely can't have us serfs using a money supply which they can't control and manipulate in order to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild
1. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  Fucking 'A'!
  Nail on the head.
2. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by markass530 · 2013-03-22 05:12 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  they did go after them, you didn't hear about that especially brutal slap on the wrist they got?
3. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by DerekLyons · 2013-03-22 05:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  What this is really about is a banker-government that will do anything and everything possible to prevent alternatives to their fiat + fractional reserve monopoly on money.
  
  The problem with your thesis is this - it's utterly and completely wrong. Subject to a few simple rules, the government doesn't give a shit whether you conduct your business in dollars, bitcoins, or mason jars full of hamster poop.
4. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by Errol+backfiring · 2013-03-22 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  No. That must have been a hell of a slap.
  
  --
  Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
5. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:37 · Score: 0
  
  Who told you about my mason jars?!
6. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by markass530 · 2013-03-22 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  just monetary, as far as ac, actual legal charges, they were deemed "To Big to Prosecute" (I shit you not, google it)
7. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:47 · Score: 0
  
  they can print money. pretty sure they want to keep it that way.
8. Re:Money monopoly = wealth transfer by abigsmurf · 2013-03-22 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  They're too big to prosecute in because there's no effective target for prosecution.
  
  Want to prosecute the person at the top? Even if they did know about the laundering, it'll be near impossible to prove it. Try the "you have a responsibility to organise your company to follow the law", you've then got to prove that they didn't make reasonable attempts to follow the regulations and the activity wasn't caused by rogue traders, innocent mistakes or simple beurocracy.
  
  You could try to go against the middle managers, you'll possibly have the same outcome.
  
  Eventually you might get to 4 or 5 low level traders or accountants who carried out the transactions. You spend 3 years dragging it through courts and appeals, they go to jail for a few years. Meanwhile, the instability at the bank causes job losses, they stop lending as they build a financial buffer and people's investment and pension funds start shrinking. But hey, you got those 5 guys who nobody really cares about!
Grammar Hammer by scorp1us · 2013-03-22 04:53 · Score: 1

helping trigger this week's move from the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCen." to what?
oh you meant "by":
helping trigger this week's move by the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCen."

--
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
Buhbye Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 04:55 · Score: 0

We hardly knew ye!
1. Re:Buhbye Bitcoin by sexconker · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 2
  
  We hardly knew ye!
  The price jumped from $40 per BTC to $70 per BTC since this news broke.
  All this does is require people who buy and sell Bitcoins for USD to report their activities over a certain threshold.
  Anyone can still freely use BTC directly.
2. Re:Buhbye Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 00:47 · Score: 0
  
  That jump happened between 5 days ago and 2 days ago. Didn't this news break yesterday? In unrelated news, the value of bitcoins started falling about one day ago, and has been falling since. Not that the value of bitcoins has much to do with their usability - it is almost completely driven by speculation.
You don't get it by lcam · 2013-03-22 05:03 · Score: 1

Sounds like a neat way to avoid paying taxes...
As long as there is someone willing to accept bitcoin for goods and services, it has value.
Once nobody want's to accept a currency, it is worthless.
1. Re:You don't get it by h4rr4r · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  You try that and see how it works out.
  You would still have to report you bitcoin profits and convert some of them to USD to pay those taxes.
  At that point it is totally worthless, right now it is still deflating its way there.
2. Re:You don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:31 · Score: 0
  
  I'm 100% certain his idea can and will continue to work. you can't force people to become a bank.
3. Re:You don't get it by lcam · 2013-03-22 06:14 · Score: 2
  
  If you read legal definitions defined in the UCC 1-201 item 4 you see a definition for bank:
  "Bank" means any person engaged in the business of Banking.
  (http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-201.html)
  And the definitions of banking:
  The business of receiving money on deposit, loaning money, discounting notes, issuing notes for circulation, collecting money on notes deposited, negotiating bills, etc.
  http://thelawdictionary.org/banking/
  The fact is, all people are in the business of receiving money on deposits even if depositions of money or it's equivalent is done informally, they loan their monies to banking institutions or to each other, they issue notes (checks) and most do negotiate terms when they take a 2nd mortgage out or perform any number of commercial negotiations at one point or another.
  So while it may appear that we can't force people to become banks, it appears that that appearance is deceiving.
  As one last bid to offer support for my claim, grab a magnifying lens and your checkbook. Using the magnifying lens examine the line on any check where the drawer is indicated to apply his signature. Examining that line very carefully, you will notice the words "Authorized Representative" in very small letters. You sign a check as an authorized representative of the bank, as a banker, unless you specifically apply a different endorsement (most people don't) you accept being a banker through the principles of tacit acquiescence.
4. Re:You don't get it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  The profits aren't technically realized until the conversion to USD happens tho. If you never convert to USD, you havn't made any money.
5. Re:You don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  The government can't control what it does not have access to. It can even try to do it, but the very nature of Bitcoin makes it very hard. If it becomes more ubiquitous and people start to convert it less and less to fiat currencies governments will have a very hard time to control it, except by maybe outlawing it. Even that may be insufficient in the end.
6. Re:You don't get it by lcam · 2013-03-22 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  Government may not be able to regulate the currency directly. But US Corporations that may trade the currency have their corporate charter based on US law, making them "insular possessions" of the US Federal Government and subject to their regulation. That analogy can easily be extended to citizens (nice title of nobility there) as well.
  So while government may not be able to regulate currency, and technically they can't even regulate the US Dollar - that's done by a private institution called The Federal Reserve, they certainly can regulate how US corporations are required to manage the currency or any other asset. That includes provisions to police exchanges involving an asset.
  As I stated before, the value of any currency depends on people willing to accept it for goods and services, US dollar and Bitcoin alike. Perhaps part of the strategy the US govt is employing is to "sour the milk" and make bitcoin less attractive for exchanges. In that way force its devaluation.
  My opinion is that govt works from the presumption that legitimate transactions can easily be made using the standard currency, and that anyone who believes they require a bitcoin transaction is performing an exchange where they believe the bitcoin currency can offer protection from possibly legal retributions the current system and standard currency has in place. There may be tax evasion intentions buried in there too, but the focus has to be more sinister.
7. Re:You don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-22 08:01 · Score: 1
  
  Genius! Why haven't anybody thought of that before? They can just buy goods and services for each other using a ledger with their own toy currency, and dodge income tax completely!
  (Uh, no, Icam. This does not work. Don't try, or the IRS will explain it to you.)
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
8. Re:You don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-22 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  The government can't control what it does not have access to.
  It has access to you and all your property.
  If you try this, you're going to find out why criminals will pay a 50% "tax" to have money laundered.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
9. Re:You don't get it by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  If all your income is in a foreign currency, you still need to provide values on your IRS tax form expressed in US dollars. A yearly average exchange rate is allowed, or you can use specific exchange rate for a day if you want to provide the fine detail. So even if you are paid in bitcoins this still gets put onto your taxes. Though it would be amazingly stupid to be paid in bitcoins.
  However, you can pay taxes in a foreign currency in one case only. If you are a Fulbright scholar paid in a non convertible foreign currency, with more than 70% of income from that currency, then you can pay in the foreign currency.
10. Re:You don't get it by lcam · 2013-03-22 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  Buying goods and services using a ledger works. The problem is not everyone is willing to accept Vintermann notes. So your notes need to come with some guarantee. In the case of a check, that guarantee is that your bank will give the holder of your note Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in exchange for the note you signed.
  The bank's deal with you is that they reduce their debit to you by honoring your note.
  The FRNs are just like any other note, except that the only guarantee it offers is the backing of the entire financial institution and public policy that something of value is represented by the note. Ultimately we need to trust that the note has value, that the institution has value.
  Some circles claim that the American public's private trust accounts contains the asset that backs or guarantees FRNs'. But that is off topic anyway.
  If you use FRN's your whole life in cash transactions only, you won't get on the IRS's radar because they work with declared income that goes through corporate accounts. That is the difference between declared and undeclared income. You are actually taxed for your use of the financial system, not because you earn money or its equivalent. There simply is no evidence of income if you only deal with cash. (until the FBI knocks down your door and discovers a safe full of FRNs. Then if they don't have enough evidence to actually convict you for being a mobster, they get you for tax evasion.)
  The reason more people don't use a ledger based system is because the public is actually disorganized and untrusting of one another. They prefer to trust the banking organizations, the corporations and the government than each other.
  And fundamentally that's why these organizations are powerful, they have a public that sponsors them by confiding trust, productive efforts and life to their governance.
  Groups that don't fall inline, one example being the Davidian Group in Wako TX, get targeted.
  Another example that is emerging is this group that backs bitcoin transactions. Make no mistake that govt policy is specifically to target them. The first matter of business is to identify who are part of this group.
11. Re:You don't get it by fredprado · 2013-03-22 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  As long as it has no way of knowing how many bitcoins I have it cannot control this part of my property.
12. Re:You don't get it by ArsonSmith · 2013-03-22 11:07 · Score: 1
  
  I should just be able to point out that h4rr4r says that bitcoins are worthless so 35% tax rate on $0 is still zero taxes. sounds good to me.
  
  --
  Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
13. Re:You don't get it by Vintermann · 2013-03-25 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  Heh, sure, as long as they just sit there in their wallet and grow in your mind, they're yours.
  The moment you try to exchange them for something more solid than this fuzzy feeling of wealth, you're vulnerable. People who suddenly drive expensive cars and can't explain how they could afford them, get in trouble with the tax authorities.
  
  --
  xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Where can you trade BTC options? by stoploss · 2013-03-22 05:10 · Score: 2

The bubble is obvious: look at the 2013 BTC/USD chart.
Despite periodic "corrections", the price is still continuing to rise precipitously. The volatility is insane, but how viable is it that the price on 1 Jan 2013 was 1 BTC/~$15, and now it's trading for ~$70? The value has more than quadrupled in the 81 days so far in 2013. If the present bubble is extrapolated that represents roughly a 103,000% APY; clearly, that growth is unsustainable.
So... is anyone selling put options on BTC?
Seems like purchasing a few puts on BTC will pay off handsomely.
1. Re:Where can you trade BTC options? by Spy+Handler · 2013-03-22 05:17 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  bitcoin is already a pyramid get-rich-quick-scheme for enriching early adopters. You wanna add options trading to its features so insiders can pump and dump and fleece latecomers some more?
2. Re:Where can you trade BTC options? by shaitand · 2013-03-22 07:35 · Score: 2
  
  Quite viable. The price increase initially came as a result of the reward for mining being halved by the network so the supply of Bitcoin was halved. Additionally, ASIC miners are dramatically faster and slow to trickle in. These result in a dramatic increase in mining difficulty. That means the output of most miners dropped dramatically and the prices they must charge to cover their costs goes up. Miners don't just unlock new currency units, they process Bitcoin transactions and assure the coin used is not counterfeit and actually belongs to the sending address. So the value they provide to the Bitcoin economy is a very real market factor.
  
  So most of that is simple supply and demand economics. You can't get a more solid reason than that. Drop the total number of unlocked new coins by half and dramatically increase the cost to get them and that will and should increase the price.
  
  Additionally, this story is spun in a very negative way. The reality is this is nothing more than the US government saying Bitcoin is to be treated like any other foreign currency interacting with the USD. The United States is not only the largest Bitcoin hotspot but the largest and most influential economy in the world. They have just said that rather than engaging in war against this currency that no government controls they will treat it no differently than the Euro. That is a huge win for the long term viability of Bitcoin. This was actually several days ago and the market has responded accordingly.
  
  Further, in recent history something similar happened with a Bitcoin exchange being approved and registered as an EU bank. Only the Euro balances are protected by the EU of course. Bitcoin is not the EU's currency. But it also indicates the EU currently is not viewing Bitcoin as a threat or scam to be stopped but rather as another carrier of value.
  
  Not too far back Bitpay also came into the market and provided an easy gateway for merchants to use to accept Bitcoin without effectively becoming a Bitcoin speculator. This provides an excellent transition mechanism. If many merchants adopt this mechanism it becomes easy for consumers to spend Bitcoin and Bitcoin will be more stable due to trade volume. If merchants distributors begin using this mechanism, merchants no longer have a need for convert directly to fiat because they can both spend Bitcoin as consumers at other merchants and buy their business supplies with it. The same results in manufacturers doing the same. Needless to say this is a very good thing for Bitcoin long term.
  
  No doubt all this positive is going to result in a price bubble and drop when a market correction occurs (people take profit and thereby flood the market with Coin) but for those of us who actually use Bitcoin as a currency for trade it really doesn't matter much what the speculative price is. Currency speculation is highly risky. You are twisting things a bit in your extrapolation. There is no need for Bitcoin to continue to grow at current rate, growth can and will slow and stabilize and I doubt too many investors think otherwise.
  
  But remember Bitcoin is deflationary by design and that deflation isn't backed by any mysterious or unsustainable growth. Bitcoin not only can support say a $100 price per BTC but it SHOULD. We shouldn't be using entire units of BTC for day to day transactions for long. It is only a matter of time before we conduct trade in Bit pennies and Bit mils rather than whole Bitcoins. Fiat currencies grow by inflation, Bitcoin grows by deflation. Either provides more units of value they just create them by moving the decimal in a different direction.
3. Re:Where can you trade BTC options? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:50 · Score: 0
  
  "MKOPT|{MPSIC}|{qty}, which allows you to create a number of the quoted contracts, provided you have the BTC to put up as collateral. Each CALL requires 1 BTC of collateral irrespective of strike. Each PUT requires an amount of collateral equal to strike / spot BTC . Bear in mind that whenever someone exercises options of your symbol you will be allocated a portion of the executions corresponding to your total share of created contracts for that symbol. Thus if you create 100 O.BTCUSD.C50T and someone else creates 150, in case there's an execution of 50 contracts you will be assigned 20 of those."
  http://mpex.co/
  Go for it, many have been burned.
4. Re:Where can you trade BTC options? by stenvar · 2013-03-22 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, more of that "let's protect the stupid people" ideology.
5. Re:Where can you trade BTC options? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 11:03 · Score: 0
  
  Well any new thing usually hava first investor benefits. First mover advantage. However, first investors usually also take most risks. If no one had incentives to take those risks to start with.. well, that would not be so good for development and adaptation of new technologies.
Only if they accept $10,000+ at a time by raymorris · 2013-03-22 05:13 · Score: 2

The regulations Treasury mentioned apply to transactions of $10,000 or more at a time.
1. Re:Only if they accept $10,000+ at a time by RobertLTux · 2013-03-22 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  anything that deals with 10s of K$ on a regular basis will attract the attention of the Secret Service
  (im wondering how many SS agents have active SL accounts (or WOW accounts))
  
  --
  Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
2. Re:Only if they accept $10,000+ at a time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 09:16 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, that would actually apply to the Eve online community. If someone were to buy a fully loaded titan class vessel it could cost more than $10,000 depending on the going exchange rate between Plex/ISK and USD. Would they be protected by us law in this case as there isn't a sanctioned way to convert game money to real money?
3. Re:Only if they accept $10,000+ at a time by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 12:46 · Score: 0
  
  A few do. They're just people, even if their job is to guard the heads of the federal government.
Bitcoin value by Samalie · 2013-03-22 05:16 · Score: 1

And watch the value of bitcoins collapse if/when this goes into effect.

--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
1. Re:Bitcoin value by PRMan · 2013-03-22 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, they have gone up substantially in the last week, probably because people knew these regulations were coming.
  
  --
  Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
2. Re:Bitcoin value by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:04 · Score: 0
  
  From TFA:
  "The value of a bitcoin rose to more than $60 a unit from less than $49 on one exchange following the release of FinCen's new guidance"
  Since you disagree with the market, I suggest you go short Bitcoin and make a killing.
3. Re:Bitcoin value by pla · 2013-03-22 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  And watch the value of bitcoins collapse if/when this goes into effect.
  
  Actually, they've almost doubled vs USD since this news broke.
  
  Regulation both sucks, and legitimizes. Far from destroying BTC, this move recognizes them.
  
  Or put another way - Microsoft doesn't trash OS X in its ads; it doesn't even mention Apple. When the top dog suddenly starts bothering to fight back against a yippy little heel-biter, guess who gains more status from the exchange?
Money Laundering by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:26 · Score: 1

The largest money laundering event was the trillion dollar bailout. Done by the United States government.
1. Re:Money Laundering by gl4ss · 2013-03-22 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  The largest money laundering event was the trillion dollar bailout. Done by the United States government.
  I don't think you quite understand the concept of money laundering.
  making new socks isn't washing them.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Haahahaha by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:31 · Score: 0

copy-edit?
Seriously.. you must be new here.
The commenters don't even _read_ the linked articles, so why should the "editors" ?
Inflation is coming! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:36 · Score: 0

Gee, I thought QE1, QE2, QE3 etc where a bailout.... Oh wait, that's not really a bailout I guess. That's really just a money printing operation, albeit a "legal" one.
They will have a hard time by BlueCoder · 2013-03-22 05:37 · Score: 1

Of course they are going to try.
But you need companies to comply. These companies don't need to be in the United States even if they start there. They don't need to be in countries that bow to the United States. People can mail money and gold directly to them or to each other. The harder you make it to move money the less attractive that money is to deal in at all.
Bitcoin is transient. No doubt problems with it will eventually come up but the market will transition to another virtual currency. The thing to remember is that all currently only has a virtual value, in other world valueless, unless it is a commodity like gold. It's value is in it's popularity for trade. And like all currency it's best not to keep too much of it around but rather to invest in a commodity; something that you can touch.
There is too much of a need for unregulated financial transactions that they will never be able to block it. More than likely the black markets will prop up virtual currencies. Both providing limited insurance and backing with liquid commodities.
If I live paycheck to paycheck nothing stops me from using Bitcoin; it's virtually guaranteed that if you spend it as you purchase it, it will retain it's value outside of exchange rates. Say I start a computer repair business, there is nothing preventing me from taking payment in Bitcoin. So long as the money is spent in a timely fashion I'm guaranteed to get equal value which is all I care about.
Your solution to the Scrabble Problem of the day by Sloppy · 2013-03-22 05:40 · Score: 5, Funny

Problem: Someone just placed a W tile. You have these tiles available to play: H, O, O, S and H.
Your proposed solution: spell the word "HOHOWS".
Analysis: That's not a real word.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Re:Your solution to the Scrabble Problem of the da by bryan1945 · 2013-03-22 05:45 · Score: 2

What about "HOSHOW"?

--
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:50 · Score: 0

This decision coming just days after bitcoin ASIC product announcements. Somebody up the fiat food chain must feel threatened.
All I will say, though, is the Treasury Dept. would have to have a lot of damn gall to prosecute anybody for financial crimes.
Perfect time to buy by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 05:52 · Score: 0

They are up to $71 a pop. If anything, this gives them official recognition as a currency. If I have learned anything from daytime cable gold salesmen its to buy when the gold is the highest its ever been. Buy high, sell low.
1. Re:Perfect time to buy by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  Better yet. I should send in my bitcoins to have them determine how much they are willing to pay me for them.
three rocks by Thud457 · 2013-03-22 06:14 · Score: 1

Call me when the IRS accepts your taxes paid in Bitcoins.
To stress what has already been stated various ways numerous times throughout this thread, surely that's not a BUG but a FEATURE .

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:three rocks by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:49 · Score: 0
  
  Agreed. People who want to pay taxes should keep using USD and stay away from Bitcoin.
2. Re:three rocks by lgw · 2013-03-22 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  No, that's not a feature. You'll still owe taxes on any profits made in bitcoins. You still have to pay those taxes in dollars. And if you're not reporting those profits today, the IRS will eventually catch on and you'll have to pay those taxes, plus penalties and interest, at some exchange rate the IRS decides it likes. Won't that be fun?
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
3. Re:three rocks by Darinbob · 2013-03-22 08:11 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  No matter what you're paid with, you still need to pay the taxes to the IRS if you are a US citizen, and in almost all cases they must be converted to USD. Having income in bitcoins does not exampt you from tax obligations on that income. Even if you are paid in teddy bears you need to be reporting this.
4. Re:three rocks by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:15 · Score: 0
  
  And if you're not reporting those profits today, the IRS will eventually catch on and you'll have to pay those taxes, plus penalties and interest, at some exchange rate the IRS decides it likes. Won't that be fun?
  Sort of. Wouldn't that basically equate to an official government admission that bitcoins have some significant value? Could even boost public interest in them.
5. Re:three rocks by pla · 2013-03-22 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  No matter what you're paid with, you still need to pay the taxes to the IRS if you are a US citizen, and in almost all cases they must be converted to USD.
  
  Lol... Mod parent +5 funny!
6. Re:three rocks by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:31 · Score: 0
  
  There is a significant difference between what you OWE and what the IRS (and possibly state/city gov't) can PROVE that you owe. And since the US Congress sees fit to spend $1T more than it collects in taxes PER YEAR, my MINISCULE failure to fully document ALL income will not be missed. The IRS is perfectly happy to see my W2 wages and 1040EZ.
7. Re:three rocks by aNonnyMouseCowered · 2013-03-23 23:36 · Score: 1
  
  If I get paid by getting laid, do I still report it to the taxman? Seriously if I fix somebody's faucet and the payment is having that person fix my oven at some indeterminate future date, how would I report that?
FYI by 7-Vodka · 2013-03-22 06:31 · Score: 1

FYI, this is step one.
Step two will be to charge income tax if your bitcoins appreciate in value. Then other types of taxes. They will give it the same treatment as they give precious metals, just so there's no doubt that in their eyes FIAT money is the only money and the rest will be subject to additional taxation to discourage use as money.
If they removed the taxes on gold and silver, the dollar would collapse within a year.

--
Liberty.
What other virtual currencies? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 06:36 · Score: 1

What about MMORPGs? They're often exchanged for real $$$.
Odd spin on the news... by shaitand · 2013-03-22 07:10 · Score: 1

I started this as a reply to someone but it really belongs at top level. This is NOT the government saying it is going to hammer Bitcoin. This is a good thing for Bitcoin.

"BTC are basically just useful by a small number of people that aren't very good at math."

If you think so it would tend to suggest that it is you who isn't very good at math or has a poor understanding of Bitcoin. For instance your disparaging remarks about the fixed supply suggest you think that mathematically it matters if the currency multiplies rather than divides via deflation when in reality either solves the same problem by creating additional value units.

Of course the same poor math skills might lead you to believe that the ever increasing value relative to a fiat currency that is always decreasing in value is some sort of pyramid scheme. In a pyramid value moves in only one direction. Bitcoin has an economy, value moves in circles, with new value added as people produce goods and services. There are billions of dollars worth of goods and services purchasable with Bitcoin already and despite your voice it grows every day. That is why the existing Bitcoin is valued at roughly $700m dollars. You can buy dollars, euros, yen, gold, silver, bonds, stocks, cars, houses, and yes you can buy goods at Amazon. It doesn't really matter if Amazon takes Bitcoin directly, in exchange for x amount of Bitcoin their merchandise arrives at my door. If I can buy a blender for x amount of bitcoin consistently x amount of Bitcoin is worth a blender. If I bought from an European online store with dollars they would be converted to does that mean my dollars weren't worth enough to buy the merchandise?

Or maybe it is the Ponzi scheme myth? People wrongly think a Ponzi scheme is anything that rewards early investors. Just about everything rewards early investors because they assume the most risk over the longest term. If that were all that was required for a Ponzi scheme Microsoft and IBM would be Ponzi schemes. Early investors have traded (or continue to trade) risk. In this case the primary initial investment was labor to build a platform with no certainly their efforts weren't wasted. Now you can trade Bitcoin for goods or other currencies. Every day they continue to hold their investment they are risking the currency value of their holdings in hopes that it will grow in value. This is how all investments work. Risk and Reward. The bank gets money at low risk, loans it to someone willing to assume more risk but hoping for a greater reward from that risk. Anyone who is holding Bitcoins is not merely a symbol of confidence in Bitcoin but also reducing the number of coins readily available and effectively reducing readily available supply without a reduction of demand. The natural result of market pressure is an increase in the price paid for coin. At some point that price is too tempting and they sell some of them off. If they do it slowly they can avoid a market crash but there will be more bitcoin floating around and if demand has remained static the price will drop. This is a normal and healthy market, not a scheme or a scam. The original investors only gain if there is enough sustained demand absorb their holdings.

On Slashdot this story was given a negative spin like the government is slamming down the hammer. This was the complete opposite of that. These rules and regulations are essentially the same as those applied to any other currency interacting with the dollar. Those who change euros to dollars are subject to the same regulations. This is the US Government recognizing Bitcoin as a valid but foreign currency and stating it intends to treat it no differently with no concerted effort to shut it down. This actually happened several days ago and the market response was huge and upward. In the EU another Bitcoin exchange has actually registered as a bank as well.

Traditional banks simply aren't a safe place to keep money anymore. Banks used to protect your funds. Now banks give you some convenience and protect those wh
Nice idea. Bitcoin's way ahead of you, guys. by karlandtanya · 2013-03-22 07:16 · Score: 1

Now, go look up the word "unenforcable".

--
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Unshocking... by malv · 2013-03-22 07:31 · Score: 1

That the proponents of these regulations are these Zionist Jew scumbags like Chuck Schumer. The 21st century will be dedicated to realizing that Hitler was ahead of his time.
Good luck with that by J'raxis · 2013-03-22 07:40 · Score: 1

Let's Implement the Future Shall We?

The old Paradigm is over the mechanisms of monopolized force theft and coercion have been broken! The former PTB just don't know it yet and are desperately trying to keep the illusion alive. However it is evaporating like the dew in the morning sun!
Outlaw guns we'll just print them out. Try and steal our money and call it a tax to bad can't track our transactions nor break the encryption on our wallets. Don't need 3rd party financial institutions for transactions anymore so thieves posing as protectors can't steal our money. No more centralized manufacturing or food production with 3D printing and aquaponics, hugelkultur/permaculture, ethanol & bi-diesel, solar and wind, and new emerging energy technology etc. etc. These are the technologies of freedom! ...

--
Liberty in your lifetime
Okay by Mike+Frett · 2013-03-22 07:55 · Score: 1

Whatever man, call me when I can hold it in my hand. None of it is valuable to me anyway. A piece of Metal, Paper or a Bit; It's like going outside and grabbing a handful of Dirt and trying to buy something with it. This whole idea of 'money' needs to be dispelled and people need to learn, benefits for everyone come only when we work for the betterment of each other.
Money keeps rich people rich and poor people poor. Working for our advancement is the only way for equality and freedom. Go ahead, vote it troll, for me it'll be nothing more mathematical middle finger, worthy of about as much attention as those illusions of grandeur you have floating in your head about avoiding taxes with your newfound virtual fad.
Laughing all the way to the Bank you say? Good luck with that one, Heaven forbid somebody steals your 1's and 0's. Makes about as much sense as Software Patents. It's my lawn, I can piss on it if I want, It's really Yellow too; must be all those Bit Coins I ate. I'm sabotaging my Score aren't I.
1. Re:Okay by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 08:10 · Score: 0
  
  I suppose you prefer 'from those according to their ability, to those according to their need'?
Re:Your solution to the Scrabble Problem of the da by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 07:58 · Score: 0

What about "HOSHOW"?
Please insert another dollar...
ultra-necro-news, super outdated by slashmydots · 2013-03-22 07:58 · Score: 1

This news came out shortly after the 2nd largest BTC exchange went offline because of BSA laws OVER A YEAR AGO. A month or so later, MTGox implemented a must use real name policy for transactions over a certain amount and I think it was $1000 actually. That was to help not get blocked by the US government and they're 100% based in Japan. So yeah, this is ooooold news.
Good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 10:04 · Score: 0

I hope this makes life for potheads, pedophiles, and other criminals more difficulty.
BitCoins are the currency of criminal scum.
From the horses mouth by k10quaint · 2013-03-22 10:14 · Score: 1

This is the horses mouth:
http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.html

The TL;DR
Users of Bitcoin are not subject to MSB regulations.
Exchangers of Bitcoin for USD are subject to MSB regulations.

The WSJ is a poor lens to view math through ;)
1. Re:From the horses mouth by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:45 · Score: 0
  
  Those MSB regulations are only legal because of Shapiro v US http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/335/1/case.html
  The DISSENT is articulate, cogent, and well documented. The MAJORITY opinion is verbal diarrhea, and all Americans now suffer Federal overreach.
It's the reverse vampires by abigsmurf · 2013-03-22 10:42 · Score: 1

Yep it was all down to racism and of course, BIG PAPER!

Which naturally explains why cannabis is illegal or controlled in most of the northern hemisphere, including a lot of countries which have poor relations with America.

Cannabis is illegal because its effects are more pronounced than tobacco (which had addicted too many people by the time its effects were clear to realistically ban) and it's not as widely used and available as alcohol. It's that simple.

To introduce nonsensical conspiracy theories, often, like with your example, to try and introduce an ad hominem attack angle to opponents, may seem like a good idea, but it just destroys credibility.
1. Re:It's the reverse vampires by tragedy · 2013-03-22 16:18 · Score: 1
  
  Cannabis is illegal because its effects are more pronounced than tobacco (which had addicted too many people by the time its effects were clear to realistically ban) and it's not as widely used and available as alcohol.
  I spent a five hour stretch today with a heavy smoker who didn't have access to cigarettes for that five hours. He was off the wall crazy for most of that time. I would call it a pretty pronounced effect. Now, admittedly, that's a withdrawal symptom rather than a direct effect, but that desperate, almost constant need for nicotine in smokers really stands out to me.
Lots of US-centric thinking here by LF11 · 2013-03-22 11:00 · Score: 1

A lot of you are saying the same tired things about Bitcoin that people used to say about Linux. Now Android is taking over the hearts and minds of the world, and the Linux/OSS vs. Microsoft battle is all but called. (And some have called it already).
All you folks in America, thinking the rest of the world doesn't exist, pishh! Your currency is stable -- for now -- and you won't see the value of Bitcoin for a while yet, and by that time it will be a lot more expensive.
Argentina is going to make sure of it.
It does not matter whether Bitcoin is ever accepted in the US. Right now, Bitcoin is experiencing massive interest and influx from Cyprus, Spain, and Argentina. By the time you realize you should have bought Bitcoin, the banks will be on holiday and your money will be toast. Source: any recent news article on Cyprus. Think it can't happen here? That's OK, I'm sure the Cypriots felt the same way.
1. Re:Lots of US-centric thinking here by the+eric+conspiracy · 2013-03-22 12:51 · Score: 1
  
  The people of Argentina, Cyprus and Spain have plenty of other alternatives. Precious metals and any physical goods of value, or simple diversification as to where they keep their Euros are time tested techniques for preserving wealth in troubled times.
  Notice the term 'time tested'. That's where Bit Coin is scary.
2. Re:Lots of US-centric thinking here by LF11 · 2013-03-23 00:25 · Score: 1
  
  Right, but the problem is, metals are hard to buy sometimes, and can be made illegal. They are also difficult to hide in any quantity. With bitcoin, you can store and send $1,000,000 as easily as $10.
  I'm sure Argentinians are turning to other alternatives as well. However, I run a very small bitcoin exchange where you can buy bitcoin with a credit card, and most of my orders are from Argentina and Spain right now.
Ah so this explains the large rise in Bitcoins... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-22 11:22 · Score: 0

...they were being hyped/pumped-up the last week, so that people could get out early with nice profits, before this news sent it crashing down again. Surprise, fuckwits; this is why you don't ride speculative booms, and should treat them with suspicion.
Libertarians foiled again by TheRealDevTrash · 2013-03-22 15:33 · Score: 0

I guess you need more Pauls in the Congress.

--
I used to be /dev/trash but Slashdot no longer allows slashes for usernames.
Thanks by stoploss · 2013-03-22 16:52 · Score: 1

That place is like the Fight Club of Bitcoin.
Allow me by lightknight · 2013-03-22 21:03 · Score: 1

Allow me: "We've been noticing that a lot of money has been showing up in this BitCoin thing over the past few months. We want it, and here's a developer who is going to help us find a way to get it."

--
I am John Hurt.
wat by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-23 05:17 · Score: 0

what the fuck? is this for real bitcoins are $70 now? I thought there was some huge scam a few years ago and it all dried up. I have over 3000 of them from like 3 years ago. its on a thumb drive in my safe I just pulled it out. I can sell them on the exchange? How do I even report this income? this shit can't be for real.
Re:Your solution to the Scrabble Problem of the da by WGFCrafty · 2013-03-24 01:53 · Score: 1

What about "HOSHOW"?
Sorry, we're not playing Jeopardy! And the question is not "your Mother's occupation."
=-)