Slashdot Mirror
US States Edge Toward Cryptocoin Regulation
SonicSpike points out an article from the Pew Charitable Trusts' Research & Analysis department on the legislation and regulation schemes emerging in at least a few states in reaction to the increasing use of digital currencies like Bitcoin. A working group called the Conference of State Bank Supervisors’ Emerging Payments Task Force has been surveying the current landscape of state rules and approaches to digital currencies, a topic on which state laws are typically silent.
In April, the task force presented a model consumer guidance to help states provide consumers with information about digital currencies. A number of states, including California, Massachusetts and Texas, have issued warnings to consumers that virtual currencies are not subject to “traditional regulation or monetary policy,” including insurance, bonding and other security measures, and that values can fluctuate dramatically. ...
The article focuses on the high-population, big-economy states of New York, California and Texas, with a touch of Kansas -- but other states are sure to follow. Whether you live in the U.S. or not, are there government regulations that you think would actually make sense for digital currencies?
perhaps they will require a licence to accept payments using them?
The key phrase is about what makes sense.
To a legislator bought by the banking and payday loan industries, there will be a sense of panic to at least be _seen_ to be doing _something_; so that will make sense.
To an ambitious prosecutor, there will appear an opportunity to bring the full weight of the criminal 'justice' system down on some poor schmuck who orders something legal-but-distasteful using MathMoney without paying sales tax or submitting the forms no one can figure out how to order let alone fill out (NJ handgun laws), so that will make sense.
In short, jumping up and down, waving flags and flares, daring regulators to come after you pretty much guarantees the most draconian possible response (designer recreational drugs) because 'think of the children!'
You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
By treating it like currency and passing laws about what you can do it?
They make not be able to regulate the entire currency, but they can certainly pass laws regarding their own people and what they are required to do.
Did anybody really think that you could simply say you have a form of currency which isn't regulated and expect governments to just say "well, they've beaten us"?
That would be a neat trick.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Over half the Bitcoin exchanges have gone bust. Entire Bitcoin "stock exchanges" disappeared with the money. Bitcoin "investments" promising substantial returns each month were, of course, Ponzi schemes.
Bitcoin is a scam magnet. Irrevocable, remote, anonymous money transfers are the scammer's dream. (Yes, there are people talking about cryptographic escrow schemes so you can buy something with Bitcoins and have some recourse if it doesn't show up. So far, that hasn't reached usability.)
That's why Bitcoin needs regulation. If you're going to hold other people's money, you have to be regulated. Deal with it.
The irony is, in designing a de-centralized currency, I was thinking of the children.