Digging into the bill a bit, this does not appear to be true, as stated in the second letter: "House Bill 289 would allow Coinbase to operate in North Carolina free from competition." The letter represents this to be the case because Coinbase is the only bitcoin business in NC licensed as a money transmitter currently. Nothing in the bill would prevent any other business from registering as a money transmitter (in fact, the bill would require it), but it's something Coinbase has already done, not something they are exempted from. In fact, Coinbase would still be subject to every other requirement of the bill as well, it's not a case of them being exempt.
If you accept that money transmitters should be regulated, they should all be regulated, and bitcoin businesses that operate as a point of exchange between fiat and crypto should not be exempt. If you believe no money transmitters should be regulated period, then you should fight to lift those regulations, not carve out a special exemption for bitcoin.
Topic: Anti-Bitcoin bill -- Please tell N.C. to vote no! (x-post: Bitcoin Discussion) (Read 585 times)
May 19, 2015, 08:54:53 PM
May 19, 2015, 08:29:35 PM
Seems to me it would be ridiculous to regulate every money transmitter in the state except bitcoin businesses. Whether or not money transmitters should be regulated is one issue. Asking to exempt bitcoin because "the IRS says it's not money" is an entirely different issue, and one that makes little sense.
May 19, 2015, 05:26:40 PM
Should've known that Coinbase was cool w/ this considering they'd like to limit competition by the small fries. Also, there is no VAT tax in the US tho I believe capital gains is where gold would fall under, bitcoin appreciation too.
May 19, 2015, 05:19:15 PM
Please sign the second letter!
May 15, 2015, 07:08:46 AM
Quote
property, not money, as defined by the IRS. For federal tax purposes, Bitcoin transactions are taxed like property transactions. If Bitcoin processors are regulated as money transmitters through this act, then gold dealers and stockbrokers should be as well.
Now that argument doesn't make sense to me. People are using Bitcoin for payments while payments with gold or stocks are virtually non-existent.
Otherwise it makes a mockery of the regaulations to say that on the one hand it isn't money, but if you try to trade it is money!
I would just treat Bitcoin like a commodity if I were a government. Make it the same as Gold, then all of the regulatory measures are already in place.
Though that should be able to kill bitcoins. Because then, as long as you are a business, you would need to charge vat when selling bitcoins. And a currency cant live with such a tax being applied.
Or is gold vat exempt in the US?
May 15, 2015, 05:49:24 AM
Quote
property, not money, as defined by the IRS. For federal tax purposes, Bitcoin transactions are taxed like property transactions. If Bitcoin processors are regulated as money transmitters through this act, then gold dealers and stockbrokers should be as well.
Now that argument doesn't make sense to me. People are using Bitcoin for payments while payments with gold or stocks are virtually non-existent.
Otherwise it makes a mockery of the regaulations to say that on the one hand it isn't money, but if you try to trade it is money!
I would just treat Bitcoin like a commodity if I were a government. Make it the same as Gold, then all of the regulatory measures are already in place.
May 15, 2015, 01:08:04 AM
I hope it does not pass. It's good to get bitcoin talked about by goverment in a way, but I don't see that this bill will push acceptance just tax.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
Yes, you're exactly right. Rep. Ross's campaign contributors include several banks and banking entities:
http://www.followthemoney.org/show-me?f-core=1&c-t-eid=10886102#[{1|gro=d-eid
Appears his single biggest donor (not including party) is also tied in with banking aswell. Is there a date as far as when it's voted on?
The bill has already passed the state House, and is currently in the state Senate. To make a long story short, the bill is moving quickly.
The bill must pass only one Senate committee before heading to the Senate floor for a vote.
May 15, 2015, 12:41:58 AM
I hope it does not pass. It's good to get bitcoin talked about by goverment in a way, but I don't see that this bill will push acceptance just tax.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
Yes, you're exactly right. Rep. Ross's campaign contributors include several banks and banking entities:
http://www.followthemoney.org/show-me?f-core=1&c-t-eid=10886102#[{1|gro=d-eid
Appears his single biggest donor (not including party) is also tied in with banking aswell. Is there a date as far as when it's voted on?
May 15, 2015, 12:31:23 AM
I hope it does not pass. It's good to get bitcoin talked about by goverment in a way, but I don't see that this bill will push acceptance just tax.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
Yes, you're exactly right. Rep. Ross's campaign contributors include several banks and banking entities:
http://www.followthemoney.org/show-me?f-core=1&c-t-eid=10886102#[{1|gro=d-eid
May 15, 2015, 12:20:33 AM
I hope it does not pass. It's good to get bitcoin talked about by goverment in a way, but I don't see that this bill will push acceptance just tax.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
I would suggest you look into the rep that introduced the bill. Him being a banker makes it sound like he is not impartial.
May 15, 2015, 12:12:02 AM
Please tell North Carolina legislators to vote no by signing the letter at the link below. We need your help!
www.bitcoinregs.org/#second
Edit: Please sign the second letter!
www.bitcoinregs.org/#second
Edit: Please sign the second letter!
Jump to: