Slashdot Mirror


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

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.

13 of 27 comments (clear)

  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."
  2. 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 UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      +1 Informative.

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

    2. 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).

    3. 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"
    4. 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.

    5. 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"
  3. 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
  4. 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 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.
    2. 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
    3. 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.
    4. 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