~
Is that really what that means? I read the article and thought that the base salary had to be pegged to a fiat value, not the crypto itself. This would make sense as it protects employees from downswings. It's a ridiculous ruling otherwise.
Though I wasn't 100% sure, this was my understanding too. I mean, it would be weird for them to be mentioning bitcoin then suddenly only allowing the acceptance of pegged cryptocurrencies. Pretty much the wages are still "pegged" in a certain fiat amount, just converted to bitcoin at that moment when the wages are going to be paid.
Were in a vicious circle here
Then why should they be mentioning pegged to fiat value if we talk about wages which are already being paid in fiat?
LE as I found this:
https://www.classic.ird.govt.nz/resources/8/a/8ae480fc-a266-4e75-8d17-7d6e3b280169/brprd-1902.pdfThis Ruling applies only to salary and wage earners, not self-employed taxpayers; and
where the crypto-assets being paid:
• can be converted directly into a fiat currency (on an exchange); and either:
a significant purpose of the crypto-assets is to function like a currency; or
the value of the crypto-assets is pegged to one or more fiat currencies.
To me, the value being pegged to a fiat pair means the value is fixed in fiat, not that fixed value of fiat is being converted in cryptos.
But reading pages 6 and 7 of that document apart from just giving me more headaches do indeed say that some cryptos can be used as a money
bonus, whatever that is...
First this:
17. In the Commissioner’s view, crypto-assets are property. Crypto-assets are not
“money” as commonly understood (at least not at the present time). In particular,
because crypto-assets are not issued by any government, it is not legal tender
anywhere.
wtf ...
then this
Some crypto-assets are designed to function similarly to fiat currency in the sense
they provide a broad peer-to-peer payment system. Examples are bitcoin and
Litecoin (LTC). Some crypto-assets are designed with other functions in addition to
use as a currency, but the currency’s purpose is still a significant one. Ether is a
common example of this. The Commissioner’s view is that payment in these types
of crypto-asset (where conversion directly into a fiat currency on an exchange is
possible) is sufficiently “money-like” to be a bonus.
How about they skip all this bs and just make bitcoin legal tender and be done with it?