Pages:
Author

Topic: A Federal judge in new York has not recognized bitcoin as money - page 4. (Read 2539 times)

sr. member
Activity: 868
Merit: 259
Another thing to discuss is its also good if the government or whoever starts accepting BTC as a currency. It would mean we could also pay our taxes with it. One of fiat's important function is to pay what we owe the government with it. Its one property that makes fiat valuable.
legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
That is great news ! I want it to not be recognised as money, because we will have to pay taxes for it, but as a commodity, just as the judge told it ! There will be a lesser hype, but who cares, if it permits us to do not give a penny out of our sales !

I'm curious if that could actually help you with taxes

I don't know much about the US tax system (so bear with me), but as I understand it, taxing money is a meaningless idea as such (unless we speak about the inflation tax otherwise known as seigniorage, of course), i.e. if Bitcoin is recognized as a currency you can both hold and sell (as well as buy) your coins indefinitely without paying anything (would that count as capital gain?), while if Bitcoin is considered as a commodity (property), this may no longer be the case
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1000
Very good news, friends. Distinguishing bitcoin as money or commodity is very complicated, it really depends on how we look because bitcoin can be used for both. Bitcoin can be called as money because it can be used for transactions and even some shops start using it, but also can be called a commodity because it has a fluctuating value that is suitable for trading.

Actually I prefer if bitcoin is used as a commodity because of its fluctuating value. Also if used as money I think there must be legality from the government and have a form, so bitcoin still not fully qualified to use as money. That is a good case for learning bitcoin.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
A Federal judge in new York has recommended to cancel the charges of money laundering on local business based on the definition that Bitcoin does not fall under the definition of money. Instead, the judge Hugh B. Scott ruled that Bitcoin is more like a commodity. While he noted that Bitcoin might one day become so reasonable that it can be considered as money, Scott suggested that he currently has more in common with collectibles such as trading cards and other novelty items.
The case involved a 31-year-old man who allegedly sold Bitcoins for $13 000 to the agent in an attempt to launder money and distribute drugs. However, the interpretation of Scott was adopted by the district judge of the United States Charles Siragusa, who expressed skepticism about the possible consequences.
This is a controversial issue, so lawyers for the defendants said that they will try to withdraw the petition. In this situation, the protection refers to the scepticism of Siragusa as a defining factor in their current strategy. Lawyers of the defendant also stressed that their client is in no way connected with the so-called darknet market and just traded Bitcoins, like other trading "baseball cards, stamps or coins."

Well, that was some luck their for the defendant.

IF i was the judge and i just bothered to read over what the hell is bitcoin about for 1 minute before I made the decision, i would have stayed with the money laundering charges. Perhaps the government just wants to keep bitcoin not legally defined as currency, i don't know.

Bitcoin is a commodity, sure. But it's definitely not trading cards. It has much more potential than trading cards, and it's not a collectible. It's much more liquid and easy to trade across the globe. No way a trading card can serve what bitcoin is doing right now.

Japan already said that bitcoin is a legal currency, when will USA say that?
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1000
A Federal judge in new York has recommended to cancel the charges of money laundering on local business based on the definition that Bitcoin does not fall under the definition of money. Instead, the judge Hugh B. Scott ruled that Bitcoin is more like a commodity. While he noted that Bitcoin might one day become so reasonable that it can be considered as money, Scott suggested that he currently has more in common with collectibles such as trading cards and other novelty items.
The case involved a 31-year-old man who allegedly sold Bitcoins for $13 000 to the agent in an attempt to launder money and distribute drugs. However, the interpretation of Scott was adopted by the district judge of the United States Charles Siragusa, who expressed skepticism about the possible consequences.
This is a controversial issue, so lawyers for the defendants said that they will try to withdraw the petition. In this situation, the protection refers to the scepticism of Siragusa as a defining factor in their current strategy. Lawyers of the defendant also stressed that their client is in no way connected with the so-called darknet market and just traded Bitcoins, like other trading "baseball cards, stamps or coins."

Bitcoin is not known as money at USA so is normal such action. If I am not wrong, according to USA regulators bitcoin is a digital commodity and as for me in such way must be interpreted everything connected with it in order that be conform the regulations.
sr. member
Activity: 868
Merit: 259
It depends on what position youre in. Some want BTC to be defined as a currency so that it will become a legitimate and a valid form of money.

The courts at present arent ready to handle cases that involves BTC because the definition itself is so open to interpretation.

legendary
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1188
That is great news ! I want it to not be recognised as money, because we will have to pay taxes for it, but as a commodity, just as the judge told it ! There will be a lesser hype, but who cares, if it permits us to do not give a penny out of our sales !
Yes, really good news. I don’t care of what if someone is recognizing it as money or not. In fact the person is actually helping you to get rid of the additional taxes that you will have to pay. I am okay with it if someone doesn’t call it or recognize it as a currency. I need it to be useful and it is for now.

There were innocent people who got punished just for running exchanges for the reason of helping money laundry. This is judgement was made late till good one.
sr. member
Activity: 379
Merit: 250
That is great news ! I want it to not be recognised as money, because we will have to pay taxes for it, but as a commodity, just as the judge told it ! There will be a lesser hype, but who cares, if it permits us to do not give a penny out of our sales !
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
A Federal judge in new York has recommended to cancel the charges of money laundering on local business based on the definition that Bitcoin does not fall under the definition of money. Instead, the judge Hugh B. Scott ruled that Bitcoin is more like a commodity. While he noted that Bitcoin might one day become so reasonable that it can be considered as money, Scott suggested that he currently has more in common with collectibles such as trading cards and other novelty items.
The case involved a 31-year-old man who allegedly sold Bitcoins for $13 000 to the agent in an attempt to launder money and distribute drugs. However, the interpretation of Scott was adopted by the district judge of the United States Charles Siragusa, who expressed skepticism about the possible consequences.
This is a controversial issue, so lawyers for the defendants said that they will try to withdraw the petition. In this situation, the protection refers to the scepticism of Siragusa as a defining factor in their current strategy. Lawyers of the defendant also stressed that their client is in no way connected with the so-called darknet market and just traded Bitcoins, like other trading "baseball cards, stamps or coins."
Pages:
Jump to: