It has to be expected that there will be more stringent AML and KYC procedures in the future, and not just in regards cryptocurrency. It's likely in the future that users of (centralized) social media platforms will be subject to identity checks too. They need to know a lot about you before you can use fiat too, so it makes sense.
However, if things go our way, we might be able to store and transfer our identity through the blockchain, keeping our sensitive information encrypted and commuicating with the KYC or AML platform/tool only the information pertinent to the type of check it's performing. Even then (if it's done right) the raw information received by the KYC/AML platform/tool should remain encrypted. Now nobody has access to your identity (or information about you) and you're able to pass all KYC and AML checks too. Happy days.
Topic: AML compliance challenges by FinCEN (Read 167 times)
Does not necessarily "kill the market", as the large sales will be through platforms subject to tax laws and combating money laundering and thus give a kind of legitimacy and distance from the link between bitcoin and dark activities.
It all depends on how the market evolves. The largest sales happen through OTC markets already, which is done to avoid being subject to every twisted form of regulations, and to avoid being subject to incompetence of the current exchanges. If nothing changes in that regard, and right now there definitely isn't anything going to change, it will only make sure the OTC market grows even larger.By volume the OTC market is easily somewhere in the range of 10 times larger than all the on-exchange volume activities, but we unfortunately still depend on crippled exchanges to set the price. If we look at the markets as a whole, you can clearly see how exchange volumes have gone down consistently and OTC volumes have gone up consistently. The shift is massive and can't be discarded.
They are just doing their part for the government, what do you expect? That FinCEN, IRS, and even the SEC to look the other way around when the cryptocurrency market becomes a breeding ground for criminals laundering money and evading taxes? I don't think so regulation does not mean bad news for cryptocurrency we are not in the world living where the government is looking at Bitcoin the bad way they instead looking at it as something we need to adapt with, let us not get the wrong impression that they are out here to shutdown the cryptocurrency market for good.
How come heading towards centralization will be good for crypto??
Centralization is good for those looking for the use of Bitcoin as an investment where the price will enable stability and low-risk speculation.It contains most of the buying/selling "volumes" and therefore imposing restrictions on them will directly impact on prices.[1]
When it comes to normal KYC and AML practices, I am still ok, but overdoing the regulations will kill the market. Don't you think so?
Does not necessarily "kill the market", as the large sales will be through platforms subject to tax laws and combating money laundering and thus give a kind of legitimacy and distance from the link between bitcoin and dark activities.For investors with limited investment, they can experiment with decentralized platforms without the need to reveal their identity. "I do not think $ 2,000 will be used to finance terrorism or money laundering"
[1] https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/reported/
I think it will be a huge issue for crypto in near future as these compliances are meant for crypto.
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
The article essentially divides the crypto mass into three broad categories,
1. Individual
2. Exchange
3. Administrator
As per the definitions provided, we as a general user of cryptocurrency falls under the "Individual" category who uses the service of an exchange or an administrator for transmitting cryptos making them liable for any AML non reporting issue.
So here the exchanges and administrators need to follow the current AML guideline to remain compliant. Even though I personally don't support any censorship on cryptos, but the raising concerns regarding criminal activity and terrorism financing needs ro be stopped. I see no issues in the circular. If you find any, can you please point that out for us?
I am thinking about the future implications. Don't you guys think these compliances will strengthen in future i.e. more taxes and more regulations that may make it centralised?
I am stunned by your statement! How come more taxes and regulations will be good for crypto? How come heading towards centralization will be good for crypto??
When it comes to normal KYC and AML practices, I am still ok, but overdoing the regulations will kill the market. Don't you think so?
Ummm this is an advertisement for a compliance service. The article offers nothing new as far as regulations or compliance go. It went through a quick rundown of the current situation, and how a certain service uses AI to help businesses comply with AML regulations without really going in-depth as to how it does it. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course. I'd just like to remind people to be mindful of what they share.
I think it will be a huge issue for crypto in near future as these compliances are meant for crypto.
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
The article essentially divides the crypto mass into three broad categories,
1. Individual
2. Exchange
3. Administrator
As per the definitions provided, we as a general user of cryptocurrency falls under the "Individual" category who uses the service of an exchange or an administrator for transmitting cryptos making them liable for any AML non reporting issue.
So here the exchanges and administrators need to follow the current AML guideline to remain compliant. Even though I personally don't support any censorship on cryptos, but the raising concerns regarding criminal activity and terrorism financing needs ro be stopped. I see no issues in the circular. If you find any, can you please point that out for us?
Neither do I (see any big issues) but then again, knowing just how well these people guard the information we supply them (although that might change if GDPR regulations themselves enforce properly), I could easily see why increased procedures for verification could make people uncomfortable.
This isn't even about avoiding tax or commitments either. It's just a simple matter of privacy.
We're free to choose other systems that don't require an exchange or administrator. P2P comes to mind.
I think it will be a huge issue for crypto in near future as these compliances are meant for crypto.
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
The article essentially divides the crypto mass into three broad categories,
1. Individual
2. Exchange
3. Administrator
As per the definitions provided, we as a general user of cryptocurrency falls under the "Individual" category who uses the service of an exchange or an administrator for transmitting cryptos making them liable for any AML non reporting issue.
So here the exchanges and administrators need to follow the current AML guideline to remain compliant. Even though I personally don't support any censorship on cryptos, but the raising concerns regarding criminal activity and terrorism financing needs ro be stopped. I see no issues in the circular. If you find any, can you please point that out for us?
I am thinking about the future implications. Don't you guys think these compliances will strengthen in future i.e. more taxes and more regulations that may make it centralised?
I think it will be a huge issue for crypto in near future as these compliances are meant for crypto.
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
The article essentially divides the crypto mass into three broad categories,
1. Individual
2. Exchange
3. Administrator
As per the definitions provided, we as a general user of cryptocurrency falls under the "Individual" category who uses the service of an exchange or an administrator for transmitting cryptos making them liable for any AML non reporting issue.
So here the exchanges and administrators need to follow the current AML guideline to remain compliant. Even though I personally don't support any censorship on cryptos, but the raising concerns regarding criminal activity and terrorism financing needs ro be stopped. I see no issues in the circular. If you find any, can you please point that out for us?
FinCEN is only doing its jobs right now the AML compliance should really be focusing on the cryptocurrency market as it is recently the most use way to launder money, even the small time earners are not paying accurate taxes because they know that their market is not that strict yet. Rather than providing an outlime of AML compliance their department should be hunting down violators while maintaining a good management in cryptocurrency based in the US and their exchanges.
Why do you think this may be a huge issue for the crypto space? I think such regulations are a step in the right direction and will help to get Bitcoin a more professional touch. Additionally, large companies wont ever accept cryptos as a type of payment without such regulations.
I think it will be a huge issue for crypto in near future as these compliances are meant for crypto.
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Read more:
https://shuftipro.com/blogs/challenges-aml-compliance-fincen/
What you people suggest?
Jump to: