Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Launches Task Force To Scrutinize Cryptocurrency Risks and Benefits (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the no-mercy dept.

U.K. Finance Minister Philip Hammond unveiled a task force that examines the risks and benefits of cryptocurrencies on Thursday. From a report: Hammond announced Thursday that the task force includes Britain's central bank, the Bank of England (BOE), and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) watchdog. He said that the BOE and FCA would also take the "first steps" toward automating financial compliance in Britain. The cryptocurrency task force is part of a wider fintech, or financial technology, strategy laid out by Westminster. As part of its initiative, the U.K. signed an agreement dubbed a "fintech bridge" with Australia on Thursday that will enable British fintech firms to sell products and services in Australia. The deal will also look to build cooperation on policies and regulation surrounding the sector, Hammond said. Hammond said he wanted to make the U.K. the "most attractive home" for global fintech firms.

27 comments

  1. brexit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does leaving a customs union with your largest export market for fintech and with it discarding the market advantage of being able to act as a english speaking gateway into that market by throwing it to the wolves and failing to get passporting defined early on during exit negotiations constitute "most attractive home" nowadays?

  2. Dunno by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they are as competent as those evaluating the risk of a Brexit, God help us all.

    1. Re:Dunno by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      To be fair, evaluating isn't really standard operating procedure. Normally they just decide to ban things - it goes down well with the sherry-sipping shirefolk.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. Let me Assist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's save them some effort: All cryptocurrencies are a scam.

  4. And yet they've objectively increased productivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitcoin allowed a know-nothing 20-something-year-old to build a website that explicitly flaunted Uncle Sam's War on Drugs to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

    That wasn't possible before Bitcoin.

    So, call it a scam if you like, but the rest of us will be finding ways to use it to unlock greater productivity in our logistical systems.

  5. I remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... when Slashdot was all about figuring out new technologies. Optimism. Now you're all just a bunch of cranky old farts in an old folks home. I don't know why I still visit this place.

    1. Re:I remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin/alts are hardly new technologies, and they have precious little utility to show since their inception lo these many years ago.

  6. Tax by Big+Bipper · · Score: 1

    They just want to make sure no taxable income can slip through their fingers

    --
    You live and learn, or you don't learn much.
    1. Re:Tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't they have capital gains tax in the UK? That would cover cryptocurrency affairs.

    2. Re:Tax by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      +1 Informative.

      Exactly. This is the _other_ Golden Rule: "He who has the gold, makes the rules."

    3. Re:Tax by coofercat · · Score: 2

      Maybe, although gains by gambling (so long as gambling isn't your profession) are actually not taxable here.

      Another thing to know: the Bank of England (who apparently have an acronym BoE, which I've never seen used) have been developing their own crypto currency (presumably as a replacement for Sterling, rather than for any decentralised benefits).

    4. Re:Tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they want to determine whether cryptocurrencies actually have a chance in hell of replacing fiat currency, and if so, they want to make sure it never happens. Fiat currency is a key tool of every superpower government, if not THE key tool.

    5. Re:Tax by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Maybe, although gains by gambling (so long as gambling isn't your profession) are actually not taxable here.

      Just curious, how do they decide whether gambling is or isn't your profession?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:Tax by coofercat · · Score: 1

      They look at what income you're getting (or declaring). A lot of 'traders' do a bit of public speaking, seminars and training courses "on the side" so that they can call that £30k/year profession their job and the trading is just 'gambling'.

      Ultimately, the Tax Avoiders Guide to Gambling says that you need a "job" of some sort (ideally part time, to give you time to gamble) which pays a reasonably decent amount of money. If your "job" pays £15k/year and you make £100k/year gambling, then you'll end up getting taxed on the 100K. However, a "job" that pays £30K + 100K of gambling will look a bit less attractive to HMRC as you're already paying a reasonable amount of tax on your job. I'm making the numbers up here, so YMMV, and beware, there are no hard-and-fast rules, so if they want to get you they can, regardless of the ratio between "job" and "gambling". As always, keep them happy and they'll leave you alone.

    7. Re:Tax by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Check. "Gambling" isn't taxable if they like you, aye....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  7. Finance Minister? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
    The UK doesn't have a Finance Minister, we have the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

    Just saying.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  8. I'll save them some work by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    Risks: Loss of control over foreign exchange, massive ease to criminal finance (tax evasion, ransomware, black market purchases, terror funding, sanctions evasion), massive energy consumption, massive risk of irreversible loss due to cybercrime or scams, accelerating inequality due to early purchaser/miner advantage, potential for infinite tulipmanias.

    Benefits: Warm n' fuzzy feelings for the very nuttiest libertarians.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:I'll save them some work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can assure none of the items you listed are what they worry about. Try harder.

    2. Re:I'll save them some work by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      A crypto currency, does not need to be mined, it simply can be minted, so no particular cost in energy. Most actual cryptocurrencies, most notable bitcoin, are not anonymous at all.
      A government e.g. could even go so far to actually back the currency ... which would probably not make much sense, because of the involved costs.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:I'll save them some work by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Most actual cryptocurrencies, most notable bitcoin, are not anonymous at all.

      O RLY? Well what is the command for returning the real name of a bitcoin wallet's owner? There are some ransomware and cryptojacking operations I would like to bust. And I'll solve that Satoshi Nakamoto mystery once and for all.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:I'll save them some work by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      As you probably know the FBI had no problem to find the "real names" behind some bitcoin transactions.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    5. Re:I'll save them some work by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Yes, some. So all we have to do is hope that a person compromises their own anonymity with a traceable transaction so they can be deanonymized. Sounds pretty anonymous to me.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  9. Bitcoin is a scam! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If so-called cryptocurrencies are really good innovation, why they attract so many criminals/criminal activity?
    Could it really be because, all cryptocurrencies themselves are scams, and that is why they attract all kinds of criminals/criminal activity?

    If so-called cryptocurrencies are really currency, why no company/store can use Bitcoin as currency anymore?
    Because the price of Bitcoin proved to be extremely unstable to use as a currency?
    Would the result be different, if Bitcoin replaced by any other "cryptocurrency"?
    Aren't all work the same way?

    Or, they are not actually virtual currency but virtual investment?
    But, if they are actually investment, why we need/want them?
    What would happen to world economy, if people invested in virtual investments, instead of real investments?

    Or, all so-called cryptocurrencies are actually just a modified (made decentralized and paying variable interest) Ponzi Schemes?
    (Price of cryptocurrencies would keep increasing in the long term (by their design), so it is equivalent of paying variable interest to all long term investors.)

    As more and more people invest in cryptocurrencies, it will become harder and harder to ban their trading everywhere!
    All cryptocurrencies need to be banned globally before it is too late!

  10. also dogvideos! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scourge of modern society!

  11. So-called cryptos are scam! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If so-called cryptocurrencies are really good innovation, why they attract so many criminals/criminal activity?
    Could it really be because, all cryptocurrencies themselves are scams, and that is why they attract all kinds of criminals/criminal activity?

    If so-called cryptocurrencies are really currency, why no company/store can use Bitcoin as currency anymore?
    Because the price of Bitcoin proved to be extremely unstable to use as a currency?
    Would the result be different, if Bitcoin replaced by any other "cryptocurrency"?
    Aren't all work the same way?

    Or, they are not actually virtual currency but virtual investment?
    But, if they are actually investment, why we need/want them?
    What would happen to world economy, if people invested in virtual investments, instead of real investments?

    Or, all so-called cryptocurrencies are actually just a modified Ponzi Schemes?
    (Price of cryptocurrencies would keep increasing in the long term (by their design), so it is equivalent of paying variable interest to all long term investors.)

    As more and more people invest in cryptocurrencies, it will become harder and harder to ban their trading everywhere!
    All cryptocurrencies need to be banned globally before it is too late!