Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin Becomes Legal Payment Option In Japan, Prices Spike (investopedia.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the digital-currency dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Investopedia: A bill to amend Japan's Banking Act has finally come to fruition, recognizing Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as legal tender. The bill has far-reaching repercussions for the digital currency world as well as the way that cryptocurrencies can be traded and exchanged. The Banking Act was modified after a long process of debate and dialog which saw proponents of digital currencies arguing on their behalf. Now, after months of discussion, the bill has come into effect as of the beginning of April. Section 3 of the bill has been modified to including wording on virtual currency and is being called the Virtual Currency Act, according to reporting by Brave New Coin. Digital currencies like Bitcoin have finally received definition and recognition as a means of payment by the Japanese government. The Banking Act's Payment Services Act has also moved to define a digital currency as "property of value," meaning that it is usable for payment in the broader marketplace and that it may be bought or sold. At the same time, the Japanese bill distinguishes between digital currencies like Bitcoin and "electronic money." Digital currency, in this case, is not issued by a specific entity and may be used by any accepting individual, while electronic money can be linked to a specific issuer and can only be used by that issuer or persons specified by the issuer. Along with the recognition of Bitcoin and other digital currencies is the stipulation that profits from trading of those currencies may be considered as "income from business activities or miscellaneous income." This makes Bitcoin subject to various taxes, including capital gains tax.

77 comments

  1. Hey its a Bitcoin article by nitehawk214 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY

    Dear Lameness Filter,

    I am not the one that is yelling, it is the pump and dump people that make Bitcoin prices every time there is an article like this.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  2. "prices spike" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as bitcoin is compared to other currencies to find it's value, it's not worth bothering with.

    I don't go to the grocery, look at a milk, and think. Hmm, how many dollars is this worth today compared the Euros in my pocket.

    1. Re:"prices spike" by xvan · · Score: 1

      Come to live a year in Argentina, then we may talk about bitcoins worth.

  3. I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by EzInKy · · Score: 0

    ...for fraud. This is serious folks. Bitcoin is all about hiding transactions and avoiding taxes.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by zieroh · · Score: 2

      ...for fraud. This is serious folks. Bitcoin is all about hiding transactions and avoiding taxes.

      You mean like cash?

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    2. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by EzInKy · · Score: 0

      Cash can be regulated and tracked. Bitcoin not so much.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    3. Re: I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by Type44Q · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And, unless I'm missing something (whoosh?)... you've got it completely backwards.

    4. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by zieroh · · Score: 2

      Cash can be regulated and tracked. Bitcoin not so much.

      My mistake. I didn't realize you were from bizarro-world, where everything is backwards and the women wear goatees.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    5. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by inking · · Score: 1
      Yes, precisely like cash. Now I know that many on /. are very much from the "nobody knowing how much Sprite I buy is more important than busting tax evaders and preventing drug trafficking" camp, but there being an equivalent means of escaping prosecution now is not an argument for introducing new means in the future. From Mankiw's "Principles of Economics":

      One puzzle about the money stock of the U.S. economy concerns the amount of currency [read: cash]. In 1998 there was about $460 billion of currency outstanding. To put this number in perspective, we can divide it by 205 million, the number of adults (age sixteen and over) in the United States. This calculation implies that the average adult holds about $2,240 of currency. Most people are surprised to learn that our economy has so much currency because they carry far less than this in their wallets.

      Who is holding all this currency? No one knows for sure, but there are two plausible explanations.

      The first explanation is that much of the currency is being held abroad. In foreign countries without a stable monetary system, people often prefer U.S. dollars to domestic assets. It is, in fact, not unusual to see U.S. dollars being used overseas as the medium of exchange, unit of account, and store of value.

      The second explanation is that much of the currency is being held by drug dealers, tax evaders, and other criminals. For most people in the U.S. economy, currency is not a particularly good way to hold wealth. Not only can currency be lost or stolen, but it also does not earn interest, whereas a bank deposit does. Thus, most people hold only small amounts of currency. By contrast, criminals may avoid putting their wealth in banks, because a bank deposit gives police a paper trail with which to trace their illegal activities. For criminals, currency may be the best store of value available.

    6. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by Wootery · · Score: 2

      So I suppose Linux distros should stop distributing over BitTorrent if they don't want to be known for piracy?

    7. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by zieroh · · Score: 1

      Yes, precisely like cash. Now I know that many on /. are very much from the "nobody knowing how much Sprite I buy is more important than busting tax evaders and preventing drug trafficking" camp, but there being an equivalent means of escaping prosecution now is not an argument for introducing new means in the future. From Mankiw's "Principles of Economics":

      This is a terrible argument. First, you rely on the assumption that any one authority gets to "allow" Bitcoin to exist, when none do. Bitcoin already exists, people are using it, no permission was needed, and none was asked. Second, you seem to be saying that because cash can be used illegally (in addition to the substantial legal use that cash enjoys) that we don't need another currency that might be used illegally, while ignoring the substantial legal uses and novel features that a digital currency provides.

      Car analogy time: Gasoline cars can be used to mow into crowds of people, so we shouldn't allow electric cars to be licensed for street use, lest they also be used to mow into crowds of people.

      See? It's a dumb argument.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    8. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blockchains don't HIDE anything. But it needs to.

      We need the ability to purchase things without government being able to know what or where. If bitcoin existed in 1940, Hitler would have used it to track anybody that opposed him. Any resistance movement would have been crushed because they couldn't have purchased supplies or weapons without the SS knowing where and when it happened and who was involved with the transaction.

      Bitcoins and any other currency that is based on blockchains enables it to be tracked, and that is not an option.

    9. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > Not only can currency be lost or stolen, but it also does not earn interest, whereas a bank deposit does.

      This is not 1980, with 20%+ prime rate. http://www.fedprimerate.com/wa... Banks pay very low interest rates on deposits today. To add insult to injury, you pay income tax on what little interest you do get. You're lucky if you can earn enough interest, net after taxes, to pay monthly bank fees.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    10. Re:I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only can currency be lost or stolen, but it also does not earn interest, whereas a bank deposit does.

      Tell that to the people of Japan.

    11. Re: I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by inking · · Score: 1

      We shouldn't licence person operate cars to be used when autonomous cars are a viable alternative. If you want to go into silly analogies, we probably shouldn't also licence nuclear weaponry to the general populace even though they may find a creative use for it like killing vermin. Could be doing this all day, buddy.

    12. Re: I can't believe Japan wants to be known... by inking · · Score: 1

      People of Japan already receive interest on any and all yen they hold, because their currency has been deflating for the past couple of years. Needless to say, the are much better means of keeping wealth in a bank than on a checking account.

  4. Erm, not legal tender by Orgasmatron · · Score: 5, Informative

    FYI, "legal tender" means that people are obligated to accept it in repayment of debts. If I owe you 10 ounces of silver, and I try to give you an equal "value" of Federal Reserve Notes instead, you can't refuse to accept it and then sue me for nonpayment. The courts will consider my offer of the legally-privileged notes as a full defense against that suit.

    Merely having the option to accept something doesn't make it legal tender.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
    1. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      yes; but then again, I don't have to actually accept your debt. its the credit portion that triggers the legal tender; as a merchant, so long as I offer a pure transactional play, then I can turn down your shit money.

    2. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Legal tender is not the right word. What they have done is recognized it as a currency instead of virtual goods that are bought and sold. That means that instead of being theoretically subject to sales tax, it is theoretically subject to capital gains tax instead. And now that it is official, banks can choose to start exchanging it and other exchanges operating inside Japan can theoretically be subjected to regulation.

      Reality on the ground probably doesn't change all that much. The value of Bitcoin should probably go down if anything, rather than up, as its usefulness for organized crime is likely to be impeded by the increased regulation. The increase in value that it has seen would seem to be based on a fantasy that ordinary non-geeks and non-criminals are suddenly going to start using bitcoin instead of yen for their purchases once it becomes official.

    3. Re:Erm, not legal tender by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      you'd probably end up paying more than repaying in kind, like $20 for a Netflix disc

    4. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bah amateurs... in several countries already crypto currencies get taxed just like any capital gains producing what not deals do.

    5. Re:Erm, not legal tender by gumbi+west · · Score: 2

      OK, so I can't use cash for that purpose in several restaurants in my city. They operate under a (state issued) license that allows this. So, is cash not legal tender in the US?

    6. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay your debts in pennies... it's legal tender.

    7. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Orgasmatron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It depends. Legal tender laws only apply to debts. If you purchase the meal in an instant transaction (fast food), they can accept whatever they want to accept in trade. If they don't want to accept cash at that point, they don't have to.

      For a full service restaurant where the bill comes at the end, the question is: Is that bill a debt?

      Most likely, regardless of the answer to that question, they'll take cash if you raise a fuss. Can you imagine if that escalated to a police call? Cops already have to put up with all sorts of strange shit, but I'm imagining the restaurant manager rethinking a big part of his life when a cop asks him "You really want me to arrest him? For trying to pay his bill? With cash?"

      Ooh, or a judge. Judges love cases that waste their time.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    8. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are "pay up front" restaurants, legal tender doesn't enter into it. If they let you eat your meal first, and pay later, their rejection of legal tender would probably have trouble standing up in court if you are willing to try to be a test case.

    9. Re:Erm, not legal tender by mjwx · · Score: 2

      FYI, "legal tender" means that people are obligated to accept it in repayment of debts. If I owe you 10 ounces of silver, and I try to give you an equal "value" of Federal Reserve Notes instead, you can't refuse to accept it and then sue me for nonpayment. The courts will consider my offer of the legally-privileged notes as a full defense against that suit.

      Within reason. If I owe you £10,000 I cant pay you in £2 coins. A debtor has the right to demand a reasonable form of payment. Paying in chickens means that the debtor has to wear the cost of converting chickens into whatever medium for trade is suitable for them. If the debtor is OK with that (say you owed £10,000 to KFC) then the debt can easily be paid in chickens. However if its not, debtors are within their rights to set limits on what kinds of payments they will accept.

      So yes if you tried to pay a $50,000 debt in federal reserve notes worth $1 each, they can sue you for non payment.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:Erm, not legal tender by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It depends. Legal tender laws only apply to debts. If you purchase the meal in an instant transaction (fast food), they can accept whatever they want to accept in trade. If they don't want to accept cash at that point, they don't have to.

      For a full service restaurant where the bill comes at the end, the question is: Is that bill a debt?

      Most likely, regardless of the answer to that question, they'll take cash if you raise a fuss. Can you imagine if that escalated to a police call? Cops already have to put up with all sorts of strange shit, but I'm imagining the restaurant manager rethinking a big part of his life when a cop asks him "You really want me to arrest him? For trying to pay his bill? With cash?"

      A restaurant bill isn't really a debt, non-payment in these circumstances would be considered theft of service, at least in commonwealth countries but I'd be surprised if it was different in the US or Europe.

      A restaurant is under no obligation to accept cash or credit cards as long as the payment methods are known to the customer before the product or service is ordered. Hence "no cheques accepted" signs that some of us are old enough to remember, personal cheques used to be a common method of payment.

      When it comes to paying an actual debt, a debtor can put reasonable limits on how you can pay, or conditions on certain methods as long as its disclosed before the debt is agreed upon. For example, they can impose a credit card surcharge because they have to pay a charge to accept it or refuse to accept cash because they have no cash handling facilities. Also payment in legal tender must be reasonable. For example, if you have a £5,000 debt, a debtor can refuse to accept 2500 x £2 coins or even 1000 £5 notes where they would be obligated to accept 250 £20 notes.

      The keyword here is reasonable.

      Ooh, or a judge. Judges love cases that waste their time.

      This.

      The cops aren't too thrilled either.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    11. Re:Erm, not legal tender by markxz · · Score: 1

      When it comes to paying an actual debt, a debtor can put reasonable limits on how you can pay, or conditions on certain methods as long as its disclosed before the debt is agreed upon. For example, they can impose a credit card surcharge because they have to pay a charge to accept it or refuse to accept cash because they have no cash handling facilities. Also payment in legal tender must be reasonable. For example, if you have a £5,000 debt, a debtor can refuse to accept 2500 x £2 coins or even 1000 £5 notes where they would be obligated to accept 250 £20 notes.

      In the UK it depends on which country you are in.

      In Scotland the only legal tender for high value debts is £1 and £2 coins. Bank notes are accepted tender- but not strictly legal tender.

    12. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      A restaurant is under no obligation to accept cash or credit cards as long as the payment methods are known to the customer before the product or service is ordered. Hence "no cheques accepted" signs that some of us are old enough to remember, personal cheques used to be a common method of payment.

      I seriously doubt this is legal, at least in the US. Cash is legal tender. You *cannot* refuse to accept it to repay a debt. A check is not legal tender, so businesses have every right to refuse to accept them, just like they can refuse to take Paypal.

      When you eat at a restaurant, you get the bill at the end normally, not before you receive the food. So there is a debt there.

      Of course, I think it'd be pretty hard to find an example of this in real life. In real life, most restaurants *prefer* cash, because they don't have to pay transaction fees on it, and small restaurants really like it because they can avoid paying taxes on it. It's other methods of payment that are both optional, and generate extra servicing fees. The main things they offer are convenience for the customer, and safety/security for the merchant (carrying a lot of cash around can be dangerous, plus employees can steal it).

    13. Re:Erm, not legal tender by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      This is usually used at restaurants where a diner can be expected to pay $200+ at the end of the meal. Handling that much cash becomes a problem.

    14. Re:Erm, not legal tender by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Not in the US. We occasionally have disgruntled taxpayers pay their tax bills and such with wheelbarrows of pennies. Debtors do not have the right to set limits on what kinds of US currency they will accept; they can only do this if there's no debt (e.g. they haven't yet sold you the product). Once there's a debt, any US currency is fair game, and they cannot refuse it and then claim non-payment.

      If you're thinking of places where they refuse to take high-value bills, those places don't have a debt in place: they simply refuse to complete the transaction if you don't have payment they accept.

  5. April Fool's! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right?

  6. Best alternative names for bit coins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dunning-krugerrand
    autism kroner
    buttcoin

    1. Re:Best alternative names for bit coins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dunning-Krugerrand is funny.

      The others less so. Too bad that you had to add these offensive alternative names.

  7. Giveaway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In celebration of this I am giving away 1 bitcoin to the first person to send me the code for a sentient AI system.

  8. How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Seriously, it might be interesting to see some small nation switch to bitcoin for its money. It would allow ppl to see exactly what their gov is up to.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously, it might be AWESOME to see some small nation switch to Bitcoin for its currency, so people would finally shut the fuck up when they see it crash under the load.

      3.5 TPS. That's it. You can't run a small TOWN on 3.5 transactions per second.

    2. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You do know that bitcoin doesn't need to take over all transactions in order to be successful, right?

      Wait for the price to rise another order of magnitude or two and the world will be scrambling to move all of their settlement activity to it.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    3. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by ET3D · · Score: 1

      Hopefully none. Cryptocurrency, not a bad idea, Bitcoin, terrible idea. It has many problems and is almost exclusively mined in China these days, to the point where if China decided to take control of it, it could manipulate the blockchain to its will.

    4. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully none. Cryptocurrency, not a bad idea, Bitcoin, terrible idea. It has many problems and is almost exclusively mined in China these days, to the point where if China decided to take control of it, it could manipulate the blockchain to its will.

      Hopefully none. Economy, not a bad idea, Dollar, terrible idea. It has many problems and is printed in the USA these days, to the point where FED has always had control of it, and manipulates the economy at its will.

      You did not describe an issue with Bitcoin, you described a generic problem with a centralized monetary system.

    5. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thinking of buying it now. Stupid shit always wins out so now might be the time for me to finally STFU and buy some.

    6. Re: How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because nothing says "stable global currency" like jumping up or down in value (based off of an already stable global currency) an order of magnitude of two.

    7. Re: How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or*

    8. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      >You do know that bitcoin doesn't need to take over all transactions in order to be successful, right?

      I love how you idiots redefine what Bitcoin has to do every time any one of its fatal flaws is pointed out.

      Luckily, there are so many flaws to point out it's rare anyone bothers to name them all simultaneously, so you always have somewhere to move your goalpost to.

    9. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Seriously, it might be AWESOME to see some small nation switch to Bitcoin for its currency, so people would finally shut the fuck up when they see it crash under the load.

      3.5 TPS. That's it. You can't run a small TOWN on 3.5 transactions per second.

      As much as I agree with your point...

      But how do you define a small town?

      A town is widely considered to have a population of 1000 to 20,000 people, lets say a small town in the fourth (bottom) quartile of that. Up to 5000 pop. 3.5 transactions a second means that 210 transactions occur each minute, 12,600 transactions an hour, that means that every man, woman and child needs to make a transaction every 24 minutes (2.5 times an hour). This would be a difficult feat, even at multiple locations. You may experience a few seconds of delay at peak periods, other than that its not really a limitation for a small town. Now a large town of up to 100,000 pop (possibly more as towns are defined in the UK), then we're hitting a limit.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by thunderclees · · Score: 2

      I doubt that the CPC would ever do this as they like money. Considering the huge amount of computing the PRC has dumped into mining if the CPC decided to shut it all down could the slack be picked up elsewhere?

    11. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol, bitcoin is like gold. You don't buy coffee with it. You can use other faster and cheaper crypto currencies for that.

    12. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by vespazzari · · Score: 1

      What are all these flaws that all these idiots are unable to see? I thought it was the absolute perfect currency that cannot be bested by anything, I guess I was wrong ... You have singlehandedly and so eloquently disproven the entire basis of Bitcoin I am forced to see it for the absolute trash that it is.

      --
      "Alcohol, cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" -Homer Simpson
    13. Re:How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The Fed has general control over what banks can do, which results in expansion or contraction of the money supply. It has no control over what I do with my dollars. The paper ones I carry are under my control, unless armed individuals wish to persuade me otherwise, a service traditionally performed by the private entrepeneur. The ones on deposit are carefully recorded, and not normally subject to direct manipulation by government bodies, and any manipulation would be overt..

      If I understand Bitcoin, a cartel with over 50% of the computrons has a great deal of control over what happens and what has happened. Allowing Chinese entities to control that much sounds to me like a bad idea.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    14. Re: How soon for nation to depend on bitcoin? by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

      Sorry, were you expecting Bitcoin to spring fully formed upon the world, like Athena from the forehead of Zeus?

      It is new, and it takes time for new things to catch on, so it is still small. Small markets swing - they have less mass with which to resist.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
  9. Re:Ban bitcoin by CaptainDork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No.

    The legalization leads to regulation and documentation.

    Anonymity is out the window.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  10. If it becomes legit. Won't greed smell it? by Neuronwelder · · Score: 1

    Let's say bit coin becomes legit. How long before we got greedy copy cats sniffing money and start breaking in? How many forms of money will it take before money becomes worthless?

    1. Re:If it becomes legit. Won't greed smell it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      coinmarketcap dot com. There are already hundreds of copy cats.

    2. Re:If it becomes legit. Won't greed smell it? by zieroh · · Score: 2

      Let's say bit coin becomes legit. How long before we got greedy copy cats sniffing money and start breaking in?

      You're late to this particular party. Really late. Bitcoin has been legit enough for long enough that the number of copycat cryptocurrencies is fast approaching infinity.

      How many forms of money will it take before money becomes worthless?

      All of them.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    3. Re: If it becomes legit. Won't greed smell it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have it the wrong way around. Greed in the form of speculators jacking the price of bitcoin up, is offset by copy cats offering competition. Competition is healthy.

  11. Re:Ban bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bitcoin isn't anonymous.

  12. Re:Ban bitcoin by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 0

    "Anonymity is out the window."

    In that case, then what's the point of using Bitcoin? You can run a perfectly functional digital economy with yen or any other real currency.

  13. Re:Ban bitcoin by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In that case, then what's the point of using Bitcoin?

    1. Bitcoin cannot be inflated away.
    2. For international transactions, Bitcoin transactions are way cheaper.

    My company employs a graphic artist in Karachi. We pay her in bitcoin, which she then converts to PKRs for a transaction cost of less than 1%. Using a normal bank would cost 3-6%.

  14. Nice spin by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    The legislation, as far as I can tell, simply recognises it as a taxable commodity, not as legal tender.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  15. taxable commodity? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

    What if you never sell if for "cash", is there a gain (or loss)?

    Say you purchase 1 bitcoin for, say $700. Later, the purchasing power "appears" to be about $1000 (or whatever).

    I can see the argument for capital gains if I just sell it for the cash, but if I purchase something, it is just cheaper for me, like it is on sale.

    Like if someone has foreign currency left over from a trip and they go back later when it is worth more. (Glad I didn't keep any of my ~$1.55 euros from my 2008 trip, to use on my 2015 trip when they were only ~$1.07, it's not like I could declare a long term loss...)

    I am sure there are all kinds of rules about currency "trading" and ordinary tourists probably don't come under those rules... and I suspect small amounts of bitcoin will garner the same attention from taxing authorities.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  16. Legal tender dos NOT mean you have to accept it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that is something that is unique to the USA. Good luck paying a fine with coins in Europe.

  17. Bitcoin fluctuates to much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin fluctuates to much compared with real currency and is therefore not stable. $1127 to $1158 is comparison price against the dollar just in the last 24 hours and even over the last 30 days it has swept from $1280 to $935 and back up to $1158.That is to much swing

    1. Re:Bitcoin fluctuates to much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree. The dollar should be pegged to Bitcoin.

  18. No central authority by DrYak · · Score: 2

    In that case, then what's the point of using Bitcoin?

    The point of bitcoin (the protocol), is that it is distributed.
    There's (theoretically) no central authority.
    Any two endpoint can exchange currency (usually BTC) as long as they both follow the protocol.

    (anonymity was never a point. And goes against the way bitcoin works as every single (full) node on the network needs a local copy of the whole ledger to be useful. So ever node gets to see every transaction ever done).

    You can run a perfectly functional digital economy with yen or any other real currency.

    Yeah, and how do you send those yens around ? Say you want to send me 1'000¥.
    You'll need to use some system like PayPal (where we need to both have an account) and further down the line you'll need a credit card (so you'll need to also have a card at MasterCard or VISA).
    So for our transfer to work, there are a couple of companies (PayPal, MasterCard, etc.) that have central authority over any transaction we attempt.
    They could even block us (that actually hapenned to WikiLeaks and was part of the reasons bitcoin got popular).

    As opposed to the bitcoin protocol :
    - you could be using anything - e.g.: local bitcoin to buy a faction of BTC for some ¥s in your local market. or e.g.: use some exchange platform (whatever has currently replaced MtGOX and BTC-e)
    - I could be using some coin processor to convert them to real money (e.g.: BitPay or Coinbase) or simply store them into my local wallet (e.g.: Bitcoin Classic)

    As long as the end-point we each chose follows the protocol, the transaction can happen.
    There's no single central "Bitcoin Inc." that could control the transaction (massive mining pools aside) and freeze your account.
    There's no single BTCcard that we all must obtain in order to do the trasaction.

    And unlike PayPal, nobody can block donations to wikileaks.

    The closest to this type of freedom of choice is european payment system like SEPA.
    As long as your and my bank follow this system, we can send money accross accounts.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  19. After all, it was invented in Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    by Satoshi

  20. Re:Ban bitcoin by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... what's the point of using Bitcoin?

    You answer that with the next sentence:

    You can run a perfectly functional digital economy with yen or any other real currency.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  21. Re:Ban bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. it is worse than that, bitcoin is deflationary, far worse than inflationary.
    2. bullshit. international transactions are only expensive if you don't know correct exchanges to use, this is no different to bitcoin.

  22. And it's gone... by ZiakII · · Score: 1

    And it's gone...

  23. NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only cashless currency I will ever use is one that isn't under the control of government or corporations.

  24. Re:Ban bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because you want to own your money, not just promises from your bank.

  25. Re: Ban bitcoin by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    In that case, then what's the point of using Bitcoin?

    Exactly.

  26. Re:Ban bitcoin by Schmorgluck · · Score: 1

    1. Bitcoin cannot be inflated away.

    How is that a good thing?

    --
    There's nothing like $HOME
  27. Re:Ban bitcoin by EllisDees · · Score: 1

    If it's not anonymous, you're doing it wrong.

    --
    -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
  28. Re:Ban bitcoin by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    1. it is worse than that, bitcoin is deflationary, far worse than inflationary.

    Deflation is worse for the overall economy.
    But it is better for the individual holding the currency.

  29. Re: Ban bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol these types of comments are classics.