Author

Topic: Biden proposed 30% mining tax. what would impact on Bitcoin mining? (Read 629 times)

sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

There's no really viable alternative for Bitcoin, unfortunately.

I'm not sure I like the proof of stake idea but maybe proof of hard drive space or proof of RAM maybe something like that could be feasible. thing is, i'm not sure those are totally environmentally friendly either since production of hard drives and memory probably has environmental consequences but maybe less than ASIC mining. but it still wouldn't be bitcoin. but i really don't think anyone is going to be able to stop bitcoin from existing using Proof of Work. that's how it was made and it can't really change from that. not even if a quantum computer appeared tomorrow that could break sha256 bitcoin would just be dead.
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1363
www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games
and what would that something be exactly? isn't that the problem that there isn't really a good candidate for that? change bitcoin from Proof of Work and it really isn't bitcoin anymore. Because that would require a hard fork for sure.

There's no really viable alternative for Bitcoin, unfortunately. I was thinking something like a hybrid consensus mechanism (PoW + PoS) similar to what Peercoin is using today, but that wouldn't solve the problem of governments' alleged "high enery consumption". If you take away mining, BTC won't be the same. At least, the US has opened its doors to BTC miners. Tax rates are not that attractive, but that could change in the future as everyone lets their voice be heard. Once all parties (politicians, miners, etc) reach an agreement, the mining industry will flourish in the country.

I hope other countries become flexible in terms of PoW mining, to keep Bitcoin "flowing as usual". Banning PoW because of the "high energy consumption" will only make matters worse in the long run. The world needs pro-crypto government officials to speed up the "hyperbitcoinization" process. If all goes well, BTC may probably replace Fiat in the future. Who knows what will the US and other countries come up next? Just my opinion Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
Considering that most countries are turning "green", it's likely PoW mining will be banned in the future. Maybe BTC will change its algo to something better than PoS without compromising decentralization?

and what would that something be exactly? isn't that the problem that there isn't really a good candidate for that? change bitcoin from Proof of Work and it really isn't bitcoin anymore. Because that would require a hard fork for sure.

Quote from: Porfirii
I have witnessed it myself with all miners in Spain (big and small): back in 2017 the tax agency forced all miners to create a company or register as freelancers, which meant that they suddenly had to pay >300€/month regardless of their production just in order to be able to switch on their computer, plus between 25%-50% of their income in taxes every year. If we add the increase in the price of electricity to the equation, they simply killed Bitcoin mining in my country.

whether everyone obeys that new law is a different question though. you seem to think they do but i doubt it.

Quote from: HedgeFx
It is easy to expect that miners (at least the sizable ones) will leave the US in search of new countries with more favorable taxation. Obviously this could involve moving all the equipment to these countries
it depends. how do you move a oil field to another country? answer: you don't. you just pay up. or don't mine bitcoin.

and don't forget, just because you move out of the USA doesn't mean you don't have to pay income taxes to the USA unless you relinquish your American citizenship. that's just how it works. live where you want but you owe uncle Sam his taxes no matter where you live.


sr. member
Activity: 1056
Merit: 405
It is easy to expect that miners (at least the sizable ones) will leave the US in search of new countries with more favorable taxation. Obviously this could involve moving all the equipment to these countries

President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?

legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2354
The Alliance Of Bitcointalk Translators - ENG>SPA
I'm not sure whether this policy would kill Bitcoin mining in the USA, but the impact for many legit miners would make them close up their business.

I have witnessed it myself with all miners in Spain (big and small): back in 2017 the tax agency forced all miners to create a company or register as freelancers, which meant that they suddenly had to pay >300€/month regardless of their production just in order to be able to switch on their computer, plus between 25%-50% of their income in taxes every year. If we add the increase in the price of electricity to the equation, they simply killed Bitcoin mining in my country.
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1363
www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games
why would someone use bitcoin if they had to pay 30% tax on every purchase? that sounds like someone with a solution looking for a problem...

That my friend would be "overtaxation". It's something done by the government to intentionally drive away people from crypto/Blockchain tech. India tried to do it, but it failed. For now, the US will require miners to pay a 30% tax on their income. I don't think this will be approved by Congress, especially when there are many pro-crypto politicians in the country. Americans had enough with the SEC drama against exchanges. Adding more burden to the industry will simply drive innovators and companies away from the US.

One thing for sure is that PoW mining is a hotly-debated subject due to its "high energy consumption". Considering that most countries are turning "green", it's likely PoW mining will be banned in the future. Maybe BTC will change its algo to something better than PoS without compromising decentralization? Just my thoughts Grin
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
Take an example of Indian tax system. There were the first to levy tax slot of 30%. What is surprising is, this is not only for miners, this is basically for everything you do in association with the crypto. They still use crypto and nothing happened in terms of crypto economy.

why would someone use bitcoin if they had to pay 30% tax on every purchase? that sounds like someone with a solution looking for a problem...
full member
Activity: 1092
Merit: 227
It doesn't matter. It will anyway get compensated against the company book. For example there are electricity bills, cost of construction, mining maintenance which means employees around the mining farm and their salaries. I think it would be benefit the user in terms of their credit history building as they would be paying high taxes. Moreover this will be only levied once miner sell their crypto currencies. Whenever they will sell the crypto they will profit, they will have expenses to calculate, everything will substract at the end. The nett proceeds is what they will get charged for. The tax slot is huge but it does not mean that it is gonna impact the crypto economy badly. Take an example of Indian tax system. There were the first to levy tax slot of 30%. What is surprising is, this is not only for miners, this is basically for everything you do in association with the crypto. They still use crypto and nothing happened in terms of crypto economy.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
Why not help miners within your country? I have always been curious why countries make learning and gathering information on subjects so hard that competitive countries get a head start.


miners don't mean anything to the usa government. but it does make laws that it thinks help the environment like phasing out gas powered lawncare equipment and things like that.
newbie
Activity: 4
Merit: 0
Why not help miners within your country? I have always been curious why countries make learning and gathering information on subjects so hard that competitive countries get a head start.



sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

Using btc mining profits to build solar arrays does not hurt the environment.

we have built three arrays with btc profits.

45k
115k
275k

comes to over 2 mega watts a day.

I should not be treated like a piece of shit coal based miner polluting like mad to burn coal.

I should pay -10% on my power bill and coal based miners should pay 30% on their bill.

yeah that's the part of the proposed legislation that makes no sense. they throw in the good guys along with the bad ones....i understand an excise tax on someone that's using electricity from the power grid to run their operation but not for someone that generates their own electricity using solar panels. that doesn't make any sense at all.  Huh

people that are conscientious and trying to use solar for mining shouldn't be punished. if that crap passes, solar miners need to band together and make some formal complaints because that sh** aint right...
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1131
In Sweden, taxes will increase more. $0.0006 was a miner's paradise

Energy prices started to normalize in 2023, but the upcoming tax will likely stop any new investment in Sweden, which is currently home to about 150 megawatts (MW) of mining. The tax will increase from SEK 0.006 ($0.0006) to SEK 0.36 ($0.035) per kilowatt hour (kWh) starting July of this year, according to the financial budget published in November 2022.

Based on the average electricity prices last year, the tax hike could bring the all-in energy cost to $0.093/kWh, said Jaran Mellerud, senior analyst at mining services firm Luxor Technologies. A MicroBT Whatsminer M30s, a moderately efficient and commonly used machine, would be at break-even point given current market conditions, he said.

https://getblock.net/en/news/sweden-will-raise-the-electricity-tariff-for-miners-58-times/

Is it 3.5 cents per kilowatt hour or is it 9.3 cents? I am not sure what all-in energy cost means, if the tax is going to increase the cost from 0.6 cents to 3.5 cents where does the remaining 5.8 cents come from?

Anyway, 3.5 cents is way below average = great for mining, 9.3 cents is above average and terrible for mining.
If miners in Sweden pay tax as in Kazakhstan, then 0.035 US dollars is a tax or excise, which means the cost of electricity is 0.093-0.035=0.058. This is a mining tax, and you also need to pay income tax. The big mining companies don't say how they buy electricity, but almost 10 cents is expensive to mine.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
A typical company earns BTC to pay for the power.
as long as they have a predictable income that they know 100% sure they can pay for the power by using unrealized income then ok. but you don't go into a convenience store and eat a candy bar and then try and pay for it but then complain about the tax saying you can't afford it...


Quote
In this case it simply increases your electricity cost by 30%, so decreases your profit, and increases tax revenue from you.
what's wrong with that?


Quote
Read the topic:

yeah to kickstart a discussion. guess who created this thread. oops maybe it wasn't me this time.  Embarrassed

Quote
Your philosophical opinions of types of taxes are not the topic.

It's a simple - more tax, less revenue directed at mining.
it's not a tax it would be an excise tax. get your facts straight... Shocked

buying a candy bar doesn't harm the environment and contribute to higher electricity prices for everyone and also contribute to global warming. you still pay sales tax on the candy bar but an excise tax ON TOP OF THAT would be unnecessary.

excise taxes really aren't taxes at all, they are penalties for doing something bad that contributes to negative outcomes in the real world. therefore if someone insists on doing that activity they should be responsible enough to pay up for the damages they are causing don't you think?

Using btc mining profits to build solar arrays does not hurt the environment.

we have built three arrays with btc profits.

45k
115k
275k

comes to over 2 mega watts a day.

I should not be treated like a piece of shit coal based miner polluting like mad to burn coal.

I should pay -10% on my power bill and coal based miners should pay 30% on their bill.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
A typical company earns BTC to pay for the power.
as long as they have a predictable income that they know 100% sure they can pay for the power by using unrealized income then ok. but you don't go into a convenience store and eat a candy bar and then try and pay for it but then complain about the tax saying you can't afford it...


Quote
In this case it simply increases your electricity cost by 30%, so decreases your profit, and increases tax revenue from you.
what's wrong with that?


Quote
Read the topic:

yeah to kickstart a discussion. guess who created this thread. oops maybe it wasn't me this time.  Embarrassed

Quote
Your philosophical opinions of types of taxes are not the topic.

It's a simple - more tax, less revenue directed at mining.
it's not a tax it would be an excise tax. get your facts straight... Shocked

buying a candy bar doesn't harm the environment and contribute to higher electricity prices for everyone and also contribute to global warming. you still pay sales tax on the candy bar but an excise tax ON TOP OF THAT would be unnecessary.

excise taxes really aren't taxes at all, they are penalties for doing something bad that contributes to negative outcomes in the real world. therefore if someone insists on doing that activity they should be responsible enough to pay up for the damages they are causing don't you think?
hero member
Activity: 2464
Merit: 519
What are the prospects of solar power replacing government power sources for mining if regulations are supportive? When will the issue of power usage in mining end in the USA and other regions? Mining has become a privilege of the wealthy due to the costs involved, including equipment expenses. However, with the potential profitability of mining, the affordability of necessary equipment may not remain a barrier for long
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 6581
be constructive or S.T.F.U
In Sweden, taxes will increase more. $0.0006 was a miner's paradise

Energy prices started to normalize in 2023, but the upcoming tax will likely stop any new investment in Sweden, which is currently home to about 150 megawatts (MW) of mining. The tax will increase from SEK 0.006 ($0.0006) to SEK 0.36 ($0.035) per kilowatt hour (kWh) starting July of this year, according to the financial budget published in November 2022.

Based on the average electricity prices last year, the tax hike could bring the all-in energy cost to $0.093/kWh, said Jaran Mellerud, senior analyst at mining services firm Luxor Technologies. A MicroBT Whatsminer M30s, a moderately efficient and commonly used machine, would be at break-even point given current market conditions, he said.

https://getblock.net/en/news/sweden-will-raise-the-electricity-tariff-for-miners-58-times/

Is it 3.5 cents per kilowatt hour or is it 9.3 cents? I am not sure what all-in energy cost means, if the tax is going to increase the cost from 0.6 cents to 3.5 cents where does the remaining 5.8 cents come from?

Anyway, 3.5 cents is way below average = great for mining, 9.3 cents is above average and terrible for mining.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1131
In Sweden, taxes will increase more. $0.0006 was a miner's paradise

Energy prices started to normalize in 2023, but the upcoming tax will likely stop any new investment in Sweden, which is currently home to about 150 megawatts (MW) of mining. The tax will increase from SEK 0.006 ($0.0006) to SEK 0.36 ($0.035) per kilowatt hour (kWh) starting July of this year, according to the financial budget published in November 2022.

Based on the average electricity prices last year, the tax hike could bring the all-in energy cost to $0.093/kWh, said Jaran Mellerud, senior analyst at mining services firm Luxor Technologies. A MicroBT Whatsminer M30s, a moderately efficient and commonly used machine, would be at break-even point given current market conditions, he said.

https://getblock.net/en/news/sweden-will-raise-the-electricity-tariff-for-miners-58-times/
legendary
Activity: 3822
Merit: 2703
Evil beware: We have waffles!
Texas' anti-Bitcoin mining bill passed through Senate committee uncontested without a single opposition vote today. It is on the "uncontested" list, which means it has a 95%+ chance of passing the Senate. There is a possibility that Texas will become a global hub for mining.
Links please or it's just random Internet rambling...
hero member
Activity: 2464
Merit: 519
Texas' anti-Bitcoin mining bill passed through Senate committee uncontested without a single opposition vote today. It is on the "uncontested" list, which means it has a 95%+ chance of passing the Senate. There is a possibility that Texas will become a global hub for mining.
member
Activity: 966
Merit: 10
Allah is the Greatest
It's unlikely that the additional electricity tax will attract new miners to Bitcoin mining, as it would increase the overall cost of mining and reduce profitability, making it less attractive for new miners to enter the market.

Regarding the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax, it is difficult to estimate with certainty, as it would depend on various factors such as the current price of Bitcoin, the efficiency of mining equipment, and the availability of cheap electricity sources. However, in general, a 30% mining tax would increase the cost of mining, leading to a reduction in the number of miners and, in turn, a reduction in the overall hashpower of the Bitcoin network
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
The 30% is actually Biden's proposal, so it's a bit of a long question if it can be approved, I'm also sure that most of them will not agree with what Biden wants to happen.

That's a huge amount in fact, it seems like Biden wants to legally rob the people, the proposals he's making that are 30% are out of the question. Woe to those who will be hit when that becomes their law.

when you say "Biden" you mean the democratic party, right? surely Biden didn't come up with this idea all on his own.  Shocked

Quote
A typical company earns BTC to pay for the power.
you've got it backwards though. the idea is to pay for the power first. then generate the profits. just like a trucker has to pay up front for thieir gas before they can make that trip... gas has a built in excise tax.

Quote
It's a a standard govt double tax.
so i guess ups drivers or door dash delivery drivers should be really angry how they're being double taxed due to having to pay taxes on their net income but also the excise tax on gasoline they purchase so they can operate their equipment. but you don't see them complaining about it.

Quote
In this case it simply increases your electricity cost by 30%, so decreases your profit, and increases tax revenue from you.
Simple math.
that's the idea behind an excise tax is to punish or penalize people for doing some behavior that contributes to negative environmental outcomes. i disagree with an excise tax on solar power used for bitcoin mining since i don't see how that harms the environment but things like coal power plants or nuclear power or even hydro-electric even large wind turbines they all have environmental consequences thus an excise tax might be appropriate.

we all can agree that driving cars and using gasoline does have a negative impact upon the environment so the less of it we do the less we should be punished. the more of it we do the more we should be paying for that privilege. thus the excise tax. same with smoking. same with alot of things like that.


legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
Standard govt double dipping scam.

You pay tax on your bitcoin income but they wanna tax you twice on how you spend that already taxed bitcoin income.
it's not a double tax on bitcoin income. they would be taxing the electricity expense. not the income from mining. two different things.
A typical company earns BTC to pay for the power. It's a a standard govt double tax.
In this case it simply increases your electricity cost by 30%, so decreases your profit, and increases tax revenue from you.
Simple math.

Quote
Quote
Nothing new, hopefully it fails.
so you're against paying excise tax for gasoline?
Read the topic:
Quote
Biden proposed 30% mining tax

Your philosophical opinions of types of taxes are not the topic.

It's a simple - more tax, less revenue directed at mining.

Exactly it will slow growth in USA 🇺🇸 because  it will cost more to mine it phases in

10% 20% 30%

does not start till 2024 or never 👎
legendary
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Standard govt double dipping scam.

You pay tax on your bitcoin income but they wanna tax you twice on how you spend that already taxed bitcoin income.
it's not a double tax on bitcoin income. they would be taxing the electricity expense. not the income from mining. two different things.
A typical company earns BTC to pay for the power. It's a a standard govt double tax.
In this case it simply increases your electricity cost by 30%, so decreases your profit, and increases tax revenue from you.
Simple math.

Quote
Quote
Nothing new, hopefully it fails.
so you're against paying excise tax for gasoline?
Read the topic:
Quote
Biden proposed 30% mining tax

Your philosophical opinions of types of taxes are not the topic.

It's a simple - more tax, less revenue directed at mining.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
The 30% is actually Biden's proposal, so it's a bit of a long question if it can be approved, I'm also sure that most of them will not agree with what Biden wants to happen.

That's a huge amount in fact, it seems like Biden wants to legally rob the people, the proposals he's making that are 30% are out of the question. Woe to those who will be hit when that becomes their law.

Except that being able to enforce a law is hard.

I done it my wife has done it and my mom did it.

Most people talk about the power the IRS has and they do but the fucking tax code is tens of thousands of pages long.
I have two book cases of tax code books.

This proposal as written simply won’t pass. It can’t be enforced as it is written.

They already had to alter the reporting on trades my tax return had 117 pages of trades for a capital loss of 3200 usd last year.

To correctly review my return fully line by line would take two people two weeks and they would find I did it correctly.

I ask you if you rent from nicehash are you renting a s19 xp burning 21 watts a th at 5 cents located in the usa

or am i renting from nicehash a s19 xp burning 21 watts a th at 2 cents located in russia

So in order to decide this would mean court rulings and the IRS does rulings based on a one case per ruling.

Ie if I win and the say my power cost was 2 cents a th in russia the ruling applies to me. and no one else.

I can tell you they don’t have the manpower to enforce the excise tax across the board.

So they will do selective enforcement. My mom my wife and I have all worked on selective enforcement projects.

My mom is dead I quit the IRS twenty years ago and my wife retired 11 years ago. We still know people in the IRS and We are absolutely certain the IRS does selective enforcement. IE low lying fruit is selected first.

So a 2 megawatt farm will be paying a 10 percent bump on power if the bill is written the way it is worded in the link above.

So there is a small chance your power bill will go up 10 percent in 2024.

Then a new election happens in 2024 and maybe the bill if it is written and passed gets cancelled.

hero member
Activity: 1666
Merit: 453
The 30% is actually Biden's proposal, so it's a bit of a long question if it can be approved, I'm also sure that most of them will not agree with what Biden wants to happen.

That's a huge amount in fact, it seems like Biden wants to legally rob the people, the proposals he's making that are 30% are out of the question. Woe to those who will be hit when that becomes their law.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
Standard govt double dipping scam.

You pay tax on your bitcoin income but they wanna tax you twice on how you spend that already taxed bitcoin income.
it's not a double tax on bitcoin income. they would be taxing the electricity expense. not the income from mining. two different things.

Quote
Nothing new, hopefully it fails.
so you're against paying excise tax for gasoline?


example: you had electricity expenses of $1000 in some month. you pay 30% of that in excise tax, or $300. but lets say you didn't make a profit from mining? i guess you still have to pay the tax. Huh
legendary
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
Standard govt double dipping scam.

You pay tax on your bitcoin income but they wanna tax you twice on how you spend that already taxed bitcoin income.

Nothing new, hopefully it fails.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

If I say it is unenforceable in a mixed use business it pretty much is.
If I say it is unenforceable in a small home with a few pieces of gear it is.
i guess the next thing you're going to tell us is paying crypto taxes is unenforceable.

Quote
A) prove where the nicehash gear you rented was usa based = can not be done
you pay the tax no matter where it is based. as long as you live in the usa.
Quote
B) prove the power used by the nicehash gear if you say it was usa based = can not be done.
you got income from a mining activity and you live in the usa, you pay the tax. or you're a tax evader. simple as that.

Quote
So this is why the law will not be enforceable across the board.
best bet is to not try and cheat the IRS because you will be caught.  Shocked
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'

It is pretty much not enforceable for smaller mixed use business.
if you file a tax return and report any type of mining then you would kind of be on the hook. so a business would need to lie to the IRS for it to not be enforceable...

Quote
or for a home owner.
they always put the IRS in charge of collecting this type of taxes on peoples tax returns. so yeah unless you're going to lie to the IRS and pretend like you're not mining bitcoin then as soon as you file a schedule C showing you're running some type of bitcoin mining (for profit or loss), they'll probably have a form to fill out for computing your excise tax. just how the IRS works.



Quote
Plus it likely won't pass.

keep the democrats in power and it might just happen eventually.  Shocked

Quote from: NotFuzzyWarm
If and that's a BIG 'if' it is passed, 1 immediate action will it being fought in the courts...
unless bitcoin miners band together and try and fight it i don't see the general public getting too up in arms about it since bitcoin mining is such a niche thing and most americans have no idea about it and don't even care. but maybe some of the big bitcoin mining farms that opened up in texas or wherever else would put some money some good legal representation because if not then no one will.


Dude I worked for the IRS for 18 months.
I have a degree in accounting.
My wife worked for the IRS for 33 years she was a Revenue agent.
My late mother worked for the IRS for 25 years she was a Revenue officer.

If I say it is unenforceable in a mixed use business it pretty much is.
If I say it is unenforceable in a small home with a few pieces of gear it is.

I know it is enforceable in a big farm.

If you are a big farm and all you do mine it is enforceable and would be enforced since at least 25% of the network is large farms in the USA.



It is strictly based on the power used to mine.
So in a 2 mega watt farm it would be detected and enforced.

On a 1 kwatt miner in his home no one is going to be able to enforce it.

I know from my own experiences with multiple friends and family in the IRS.

If you read the law as it in the link above it says renting from nicehash would be taxable.

A) prove where the nicehash gear you rented was usa based = can not be done
B) prove the power used by the nicehash gear if you say it was usa based = can not be done.

So this is why the law will not be enforceable across the board.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

It is pretty much not enforceable for smaller mixed use business.
if you file a tax return and report any type of mining then you would kind of be on the hook. so a business would need to lie to the IRS for it to not be enforceable...

Quote
or for a home owner.
they always put the IRS in charge of collecting this type of taxes on peoples tax returns. so yeah unless you're going to lie to the IRS and pretend like you're not mining bitcoin then as soon as you file a schedule C showing you're running some type of bitcoin mining (for profit or loss), they'll probably have a form to fill out for computing your excise tax. just how the IRS works.



Quote
Plus it likely won't pass.

keep the democrats in power and it might just happen eventually.  Shocked

Quote from: NotFuzzyWarm
If and that's a BIG 'if' it is passed, 1 immediate action will it being fought in the courts...
unless bitcoin miners band together and try and fight it i don't see the general public getting too up in arms about it since bitcoin mining is such a niche thing and most americans have no idea about it and don't even care. but maybe some of the big bitcoin mining farms that opened up in texas or wherever else would put some money some good legal representation because if not then no one will.
legendary
Activity: 3822
Merit: 2703
Evil beware: We have waffles!
this is not a tax on profits it is a tax on the power cost.
so year 1  $10000 power cost becomes 11,000
year 2.     $10000 power cost becomes 12,000
year 3      $10000 power cost becomes 13,000

It is pretty much not enforceable for smaller mixed use business or for a home owner.

Plus it likely won't pass.
If and that's a BIG 'if' it is passed, 1 immediate action will it being fought in the courts for the simple reason being that unlike the largely Federaly funded interstate highway system, the electrical power systems aka 'the Grids', are not paid for by the US government. They are a collection of 5(?) regional Public Utilities that are pretty much non-federally funded. Hell, many even sell Bonds or shares as Publicly Owned business entities.

To me at least, that means the US gov has no legal standing to arbitrarily tax a specific use of the US power system which they all in all have no control over. At best that decision is a per-State issue followed by the actual regional grid operators
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
this is not a tax on profits it is a tax on the power cost.



so year 1  $10000 power cost becomes 11,000
year 2.     $10000 power cost becomes 12,000
year 3      $10000 power cost becomes 13,000

It is pretty much not enforceable for smaller mixed use business.

or for a home owner.

Plus it likely won't pass.
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 1153
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?
Bitcoin mining profitability is mostly seasonal with several factors determining the profitability such as Bitcoin Price, hash rate and the changes in Bitcoin transaction fees.
 
But the thing is tax is not seasonal though the tax is deducted from the net profit, it is still a huge profit loss on the part of miners.  But I wonder how would the government calculate the tax of the individual.  Are they letting the individual to report of the gain or they will set a standard?

Quote
Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?
Will the 30% tax on Bitcoin mining work outside the US?  Grin

Definitely those who live outside the US is exempted on this tax but as far as we know the US is ocountry that has the most hash rate and that 30% tax for the US based miner is too huge, if implemented I am seeing miners moving out of the country.  I think this will give way for other countries like Kazakhstan and Canada to be the 

Quote
What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?
Absolutely nothing, mining is not done only in the US. Also, not everyone in the US will stop mining because of the 30% mining tax

I think not everyone but I do believe that those who have the capability like huge mining farm will move out of the country and will settle on a more miner-friendly government that has cheap electricity cost.

sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
USA sucks to begin with in the first place.

they just want you to work and pay your taxes and not have anything to do with any other businesses outside of the usa. if you can put up with that then you might be happy.   Shocked

Quote from: philipma1957
. the best states do true net metering. 2 or 3 of them.

NJ does it due to all the midwest coal plants.

enjoy it while it lasts, buddy. something tells me all good things come to an end though. hope it doesn't for you.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'

it is 1 for 1 swap.
never heard of 1 for 1 swap. i always heard people saying you sell it to them for way less than they sell it back to you at. plus you can only offset your electricity bill you can never end up with a credit, that's what i heard too.

Quote
the 275 kwatt array uses 60 kwatts during sunlight and sends 215 kwatts to the grid.

the grid is a free battery. so when it gets dark they owe me the 215 kwatts .
but when you do it that way, you would owe the excise tax when you get it back from the grid. everything you get from the grid would get taxed that 30%. but if you had a battery system it would still get taxed there's no way around paying the tax from your solar. you're still using it. you're just storing it somewhere before you use it. right?


. the best states do true net metering. 2 or 3 of them.

NJ does it due to all the midwest coal plants.
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 2
USA sucks to begin with in the first place.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

it is 1 for 1 swap.
never heard of 1 for 1 swap. i always heard people saying you sell it to them for way less than they sell it back to you at. plus you can only offset your electricity bill you can never end up with a credit, that's what i heard too.

Quote
the 275 kwatt array uses 60 kwatts during sunlight and sends 215 kwatts to the grid.

the grid is a free battery. so when it gets dark they owe me the 215 kwatts .
but when you do it that way, you would owe the excise tax when you get it back from the grid. everything you get from the grid would get taxed that 30%. but if you had a battery system it would still get taxed there's no way around paying the tax from your solar. you're still using it. you're just storing it somewhere before you use it. right?

legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
yeah you can buy a dirty closed power plant burn dirty coal and mine with the power plant only attached. to your big ass mine.

even though you have an entire power plant it would be off the grid.

there's people that do that?  Shocked but i guess that answers my question.

Quote
my solar is on the grid and net meters so i think all of my solar would be untaxed.
how do you figure that? unless you never buy it back from the grid to do any mining...but i would think you sell it for less than you pay for it. maybe time to have some battery storage. like a power wall.

it is 1 for 1 swap.

the 275 kwatt array uses 60 kwatts during sunlight and sends 215 kwatts to the grid.

the grid is a free battery. so when it gets dark they owe me the 215 kwatts .

that would be more like 6 x 215 as we average 6 full hours a day. most people dont realize the first 3 and last 3 hours each day are shitty for charging so a decent location is about six hours a day.

legendary
Activity: 3822
Merit: 2703
Evil beware: We have waffles!
And thanks to Al Gore and his financial cronies, said coal power plant no doubt purchases carbon credits so on paper they are 'low CO2 emissions'.  Roll Eyes
That particular setup is also an outlier. Mines are setup where there is:
a. Abundant low cost power.
b. Friendly local governments.

Regarding 'a', the massive amounts of power the largest farms use is there because there is not enough local loads to run the power plants at maximum efficiency and it cannot be economically be sent across 'the grid(s)' to be used elsewhere. The farms that were once located in the Pacific Northwest existed because of the large hydroelectric dams that were built to power several massive aluminum refining plants all mostly owned by Alcoa. When those plants were shut down during the 90's & early 2k's the utilities needed a huge 'local' load to justify operations. When miners and data farms moved in everyone was happy. Finally around 2013 Canada established a high-tension link between the Northwest and their grid to buy power from the dams who now had a market willing to pay more for that power. That more than anything is what drove PUC to all but shut down large mining farms... In that case, also 'b' was not present.

These days the same supply/demand economics apply. Yes Texas has massive wind farms and guess what - they produce far more power than is usually needed to feed the all but isolated Texas power grid ran by ERCOT. It has only 2 ties to the rest of the national grid system and they are pretty limited in how much power can be sent through them. Now in their case the overcapacity was purposely built to accommodate local weather conditions and the amount of power produced & needed in the local areas. When there are poor winds in one area odds are they are good in enough other areas to cover it. That said, the end result is usually far more power than Texas can use.

Enter mining farms. Most folks have at least heard of the deals that ERCOT and the mega farms in Texas have: The farms get to soak up the excess power at reasonable rates but with 1 caveat - whenever circumstances require it (most often because of weather) the farms have to throttle back their power usage and even stop running entirely until things change. So much for 'the power usage harming other users'...

Yes ERCOT pays the farms a stipend for not running but it is a fraction of what the mines would earn if running plus that diverted power is still being used/bought by the other consumers that need it. Still, given how easy it is to switch a mine on & off vs any other type of mega power hungry industry to free up that power to be sent where it is needed more, not a bad deal. ERCOT gets to build up their safety net of over-capacity knowing they have a line of buyers waiting to get some of that (conditional) excess power. Win-win for all involved.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
yeah you can buy a dirty closed power plant burn dirty coal and mine with the power plant only attached. to your big ass mine.

even though you have an entire power plant it would be off the grid.

there's people that do that?  Shocked but i guess that answers my question.

Quote
my solar is on the grid and net meters so i think all of my solar would be untaxed.
how do you figure that? unless you never buy it back from the grid to do any mining...but i would think you sell it for less than you pay for it. maybe time to have some battery storage. like a power wall.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
I think the wash rule is more likely to be adapted than the power rule.
both of them need to be implemented. but i'd say the excise tax on power usage is the more important one. the only part i disagree with is someone that generates their own power being required to pay a tax on that. but maybe there is some rationale to it that i'm not getting...

yeah you can buy a dirty closed power plant burn dirty coal and mine with the power plant only attached. to your big ass mine.

even though you have an entire power plant it would be off the grid.

my solar is on the grid and net meters so i think all of my solar would be untaxed.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469
I think the wash rule is more likely to be adapted than the power rule.
both of them need to be implemented. but i'd say the excise tax on power usage is the more important one. the only part i disagree with is someone that generates their own power being required to pay a tax on that. but maybe there is some rationale to it that i'm not getting...
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
found full paper

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/General-Explanations-FY2024.pdf


Quote
IMPOSE DIGITAL ASSET MINING ENERGY EXISE TAX Current Law
Current law does not provide tax rules specifically addressing digital assets, with the exception of certain rules relating to broker reporting and reporting of cash transactions.
Reasons for Change
Digital asset mining is a process for validating transactions among holders of digital assets to record and transfer cryptographically secured assets on a distributed ledger by, for example, using high-powered computers to perform calculations to select the validator.
The computational effort involved in mining can be substantial and can therefore require a correspondingly large amount of energy. The increase in energy consumption attributable to the growth of digital asset mining has negative environmental effects and can have environmental justice implications as well as increase energy prices for those that share an electricity grid with digital asset miners. Digital asset mining also creates uncertainty and risks to local utilities and communities, as mining activity is highly variable and highly mobile.
An excise tax on electricity usage by digital asset miners could reduce mining activity along with its associated environmental impacts and other harms.
Proposal
Any firm using computing resources, whether owned by the firm or leased from others, to mine digital assets would be subject to an excise tax equal to 30 percent of the costs of electricity used in digital asset mining.
Firms engaged in digital asset mining would be required to report the amount and type of electricity used as well as the value of that electricity, if purchased externally. Firms that lease computational capacity would be required to report the value of the electricity used by the lessor firm attributable to the leased capacity, which would serve as the tax base. Firms that produce or acquire power off-grid, for example by using the output of a particular electricity generating plant, would be subject to an excise tax equal to 30 percent of estimated electricity costs.
Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, the term “digital asset” means any digital representation of value which is recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology as specified by the Secretary.
The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2023. The excise tax would be phased in over three years at a rate of 10 percent in the first year, 20 percent in the second, and 30 percent thereafter.
71
General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2024 Revenue Proposals






and


Quote
MODERNIZE RULES, INCLUDING THOSE FOR DIGITAL ASSETS
APPLY THE WASH SALE RULES TO DIGITAL ASSETS AND ADDRESS RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Current Law
Section 1091 of the Internal Revenue Code disallows a loss from a sale of stock or securities if the same or substantially identical stock or securities are purchased within 30 days before or after the sale (a “wash sale”) unless the taxpayer is a dealer in stock or securities and the loss is sustained in the ordinary course of its dealer business. If the stock or securities are purchased at a price that differs from the sale price of the stock or securities sold, appropriate adjustments are made to the basis of the purchased stock or securities. The holding period for the purchased stock or securities takes into account the holding period for the sold stock or securities. As a result, the effect of the wash sale rules ordinarily is to defer the recognition of a loss until the taxpayer finally disposes of the stock or securities. The wash sale rules also apply to sales of stock or securities where the taxpayer enters into a contract or option to buy the same or substantially identical stock or securities within the 30-day window, and to certain short sales of stock or securities. The wash sales are intended to ensure that taxpayers cannot recognize losses without exiting their position in a loss asset for a meaningful period of time.
The Internal Revenue Service treats a loss from a sale of stock or securities by a taxpayer that causes its individual retirement account or Roth IRA to purchase substantially identical stock or securities within 30 days of the sale as subject to the wash sale rule.52
Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary or her delegates (Secretary), brokers who report gross proceeds and basis from the sale of stock or securities determine a customer’s adjusted basis without regard to the wash sale rules, unless the transaction occurs in the same account with respect to identical securities.
Reasons for Change
Taxpayers with loss positions in digital assets are engaging in transactions that would be subject to the wash sale rules if the digital assets were subject to section 1091. For example, a taxpayer may sell a digital asset that is not considered a stock or security for wash sale purposes at a loss on one day and repurchase the same digital asset the next day. The same loss recognition rules should apply to digital assets held as investments or for trading as would apply for stocks and securities.
The wash sale rules should also be updated to provide statutory rules addressing related party transactions, and to reflect new types of financial instruments that have developed since the last amendments made to those rules.
52 Revenue Ruling 2008-5, 2008-1 C.B. 271.
190
    General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2024 Revenue Proposals
Broker reporting rules should be amended to reflect these changes to the wash sale rules.
Proposal
The wash sales rules would be amended to add digital assets to the list of assets subject to the wash sale rules. Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, the term “digital asset” means any digital representation of value which is recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology as specified by the Secretary.53 Regulatory authority would be granted to the Secretary to treat any security as defined by section 475(c)(2), or any commodity as defined by section 475(e)(2), or other assets traded on an established market as subject to the wash sale rules as necessary to prevent abuse. The basis and holding period rules applicable to purchased assets would be revised to reflect the expanded scope of the wash sale rules. These expanded rules are not intended to apply to ordinary course business transactions. The Secretary would have authority to prescribe regulations defining the term ‘substantially identical” and to provide an exception to the application of the wash sale rules for ordinary course business transactions (not including trading) involving digital assets.
The wash sale rules, as they apply to all assets and not only digital assets, would be modified with respect to transactions involving related persons, except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary. In the case of any loss from a sale of assets subject to the wash sale rules and a purchase by a related party of the same or substantially identical assets within 30 days of the sale, the loss would be deferred until the related party sells or otherwise disposes of the asset or such other time as specified by the Secretary, provided that the taxpayer and a related party do not reacquire the asset within 30 days before or after that sale or disposition, or the parties cease to be related. A related party would include members of a taxpayer’s family and tax-favored accounts such as individual retirement accounts controlled by the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s spouse. Two entities would be related to each other if one controlled the other, directly or indirectly, or both were under the common control of either a third entity or the taxpayer and one or more family members. An individual would be related to an entity if the entity is controlled, directly or indirectly, by the individual and the individual’s family members. The Secretary would have authority to issue regulations expanding this definition as necessary to prevent abuse, to provide rules for transactions where a taxpayer sold assets at a loss and both the taxpayer and a related party acquired the same or substantially similar assets, and to coordinate the operation of the wash sale rules with other rules dealing with sales of loss property between related parties (sections 267 and 707).
The wash sale rules also would be amended to address derivative financial instruments more comprehensively, including modifications to the basis rules to prevent abuse.
The Secretary would have authority to require brokers to report such information as may be necessary or appropriate to implement the wash sale rules. Except as otherwise provided by the
53 This definition is the same as that provided in section 6045(g)(3)(D). It is intended that the Secretary may exercise her authority to provide that the term “digital asset” has a meaning for wash sale purposes that is not identical to its meaning for purposes of regulations issued under section 6045.
191
  General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2024 Revenue Proposals

Secretary, brokers reporting a customer’s adjusted basis on a disposition of a digital asset or other asset subject to the wash sale rules would report the basis of the asset without regard to the wash sale rules unless the sale of the loss asset and the transaction causing the wash sale rules to apply occur in the same account with respect to identical assets.
No inference is intended as to whether the losses claimed by taxpayers from wash sales of digital assets may be deducted under current law, or as to the proper treatment of transactions involving related parties under the wash sale rules under current law.
The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2023.




I think the wash rule is more likely to be adapted than the power rule.

Also I read the power tax rule I think my 125 kwatt per hour  of which 60 kwatts is my solar nets to 65 kwatts as I  am net meter.

Thus if I pay 10 cents for 1 kwatt
first year I go to 11 cents
second year I go to 12 cents
third year I go to 13 cents.

13 x 65 = $8.45 an hour 202.80 a day by year three.

10 cents is not my price.

I am closer to 5 cents so 101.80 a day by 2026 in power vs 78  a day for my company  in 2023 if I understand the net metering correctly.

so 23 a day is 690 a month best case

worst case 1200-1300 a month

I can survive that

legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1363
www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games
well i'd say the usa is already hamstrung by the IRS backwards legislation about wanting to have a record of every single transaction you do even if it's just a cup of coffee you have to keep records on it and report it. so this won't really change anything who wants to use crypto in the usa?  Shocked

Too much taxation would greatly stifle the growth of the crypto industry within the country. Consider how things didn't end too well for India when it imposed huge taxes to crypto users. Taxes need to be moderate to help prevent big industry players from migrating to another country. I'd say a 30% mining tax is too high. Hopefully, it'll get rejected by Congress, else there will be a mass exodus of miners from the US to other countries that are much more flexible.

Every transaction made on the US with crypto is already considered as "taxable", so I don't get why the government wants to add more taxes on top of existing ones. It's all a deliberate attempt to try to harm crypto/Blockchain tech for good. Who knows where this will lead the country in the future? Just my thoughts Grin
sr. member
Activity: 1498
Merit: 271
DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?


   If Biden actually implements that, the only number 1 that will be affected are those who live there in the US. So my question to you is, is the 30% tax you are talking about related to bitcoin and altcoin mining? maybe you are only talking about the traditional mining industry?

Besides that, I don't think it has any effect if the US is no longer covered. Of course that will only be effective based on Biden's jurisdiction.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

My guess is if this happens we have to cut back to 60kwatts of free power and no cheap power with that 30% tax.

according to: https://cointelegraph.com/news/biden-budget-proposes-30-tax-on-crypto-mining-electricity-usage

The tax would be phased-in at 10% per year over three years and covers electricity generated from both on and off-grid sources.

Crypto miners who acquire their electricity needs off-grid would still be subject to the tax and would be required to estimate the electricity costs generated by any “electricity generating plant.”


so you would still have to pay the tax for the 60kwatts though.

Quote
No worries as that bill will bomb.
so then you don't agree that excise taxes are an acceptable thing or you just don't agree that excise taxes for crypto mining are an acceptable thing?
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
That bill is not passing.
legendary
Activity: 2394
Merit: 6581
be constructive or S.T.F.U
Simply put: wouldn't mining just move to non US domicile facilities? That is the most straightforward. And have a mix of JV entities in the end

In theory yes, but there is no other place on the planet that can facilitate the amount of hashrate the U.S has, the U.S is where the money resides,  U.S large miners who now make up nearly 50% of the total hashrate wouldn't be able to collect half the money elsewhere, investors in the U.S have a ton of money to risk which is why large U.S mining companies grow at a very unrealistic rate despite having made worse decisions than any rookie miner (like buying those tens of thousands S19s for $15,000 right at the peak of the cycle)

So not all of the hashrate will be able to move elsewhere if shit hits the fan, moreover, I think the proposed tax is just on the power bill, not the total income, so the companies that pay 5 cents per kWh will have to pay 6.5 cents, is it going to hurt? of course? is it going to be the end of the world for them? no.
full member
Activity: 626
Merit: 159
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that we in the US already pay taxes and fees on our electric bills. Seems like the exact definition of double taxation and is nothing more than a money grab.

full member
Activity: 614
Merit: 124
They are crazy, they want to earn 30% taxes from the miners, but they run to protect traditional bankers when they go broke...
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
I know a man in the U.S that use solar power to mine Bitcoin, I lost contact with him in 2022,  he told me how he makes money by selling power back to the Grid, I would have love to hear what he plans to do with this 30% tax on Bitcoin mining, because it is not possible to keep mining 24 hours per day using solar energy without the grid power.


We have 3 arrays

280 kwatts
110 kwatts
  45 kwatts

435kwatts total which with grid sales means we burn 60kwatts 24/7/365 and net zero

so 60kwatts of free power

but our mine burns 130kwatts so we buy 70 kwatts an hour on the cheap

My guess is if this happens we have to cut back to 60kwatts of free power and no cheap power with that 30% tax.


No worries as that bill will bomb.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

In my point of view that Bitcoin and also crypto might be in great danger because having 30% taxes on the Bitcoin could cause significant ending of mining powerhouse that run full on crypto and it could be a disaster for the Cryptocurrency community too.
30% of what exactly? 30% of your total electricity bill?  

I know a man in the U.S that use solar power to mine Bitcoin, I lost contact with him in 2022,  he told me how he makes money by selling power back to the Grid, I would have love to hear what he plans to do with this 30% tax on Bitcoin mining, because it is not possible to keep mining 24 hours per day using solar energy without the grid power.
i mean if he's mining with his own power then he doesn't have to pay anyone any tax for using that electricity. so he's good. if he has batteries then maybe he can be mining at night. but not sure how feasible that is
sr. member
Activity: 812
Merit: 315
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
I know a man in the U.S that use solar power to mine Bitcoin, I lost contact with him in 2022,  he told me how he makes money by selling power back to the Grid, I would have love to hear what he plans to do with this 30% tax on Bitcoin mining, because it is not possible to keep mining 24 hours per day using solar energy without the grid power.
newbie
Activity: 21
Merit: 0
Simply put: wouldn't mining just move to non US domicile facilities? That is the most straightforward. And have a mix of JV entities in the end
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 469

On the contrary, it will make BTC stronger and set the US back in crypto/Blockchain adoption.
well i'd say the usa is already hamstrung by the IRS backwards legislation about wanting to have a record of every single transaction you do even if it's just a cup of coffee you have to keep records on it and report it. so this won't really change anything who wants to use crypto in the usa?  Shocked
full member
Activity: 812
Merit: 120
https://combonetwork.io/
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?

In my point of view that Bitcoin and also crypto might be in great danger because having 30% taxes on the Bitcoin could cause significant ending of mining powerhouse that run full on crypto and it could be a disaster for the Cryptocurrency community too. So by the way if these miners are agreeing to paying taxes.
copper member
Activity: 2156
Merit: 983
Part of AOBT - English Translator to Indonesia
Yeah its a huge jump and most of them might run away or just pay the tax till the new regulation says "BAN ON CRYPTO MINING".  or  they might declare non-mining operation and say it datacenter or so.

Kazakhstan is crypto-mining friendly but I don't know until when it going to last. Since there is news that says "An individual's income from the sale of digital asset issued by a foreign issuer will be subject to personal income tax at the rate of 10%. The taxable basis will be the positive difference between the sales price and the purchase price of the digital asset." - https://www.mondaq.com/tax-authorities/1290116/changes-in-the-digital-mining-taxation-in-kazakhstans Just the sale of digital asset

Well Trump taxed  China imports at 30% I have paid thousand in import duties . It slowed my mines growth.

I would need to read the tax bill proposed to under stand if it will hurt my mine as much or more than the import tax.
Is the regulation import still there, I mean if tax on mining is approved you need more time to even ROI right?
legendary
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1363
www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?

That's a very high tax rate. Companies will move to another country instead of paying the tax. BTC is decentralized, so such a law (if it's approved by Congress) won't affect PoW mining in any way. On the contrary, it will make BTC stronger and set the US back in crypto/Blockchain adoption. The country has already been taking an aggresive approach against crypto, so it should only be a matter of time before EU takes the reigns as the world's biggest crypto hub.

I hope the 30% tax rate only applies to mining companies and NOT individuals. Because that would only make matters worse. Who knows what's next in store for Biden's "Anti-Crypto Agenda"? Just my thoughts Grin
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?


Well Trump taxed  China imports at 30% I have paid thousand in import duties . It slowed my mines growth.

I would need to read the tax bill proposed to under stand if it will hurt my mine as much or more than the import tax.
full member
Activity: 183
Merit: 100
In my humble opinion, this will lead to the concentration of miners in the large entities (eventually exposed to the government) that can afford having their own power plants (talking about the U.S. of course).
copper member
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1814
฿itcoin for all, All for ฿itcoin.
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?
Bitcoin mining profitability is mostly seasonal with several factors determining the profitability such as Bitcoin Price, hash rate and the changes in Bitcoin transaction fees.

Quote
Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?
Will the 30% tax on Bitcoin mining work outside the US?  Grin

Quote
What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?
Absolutely nothing, mining is not done only in the US. Also, not everyone in the US will stop mining because of the 30% mining tax

Quote
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?
If you were a miner, what would you think about the tax?
LDL
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 671
President Joe Biden's administration has imposed a 30% tax on bitcoin mining electricity use. Bitcoin mining was not very profitable even though this tax was not levied in the past. But what impact will the new electricity cost have on Bitcoin mining?

Will this additional electricity tax attract new miners to Bitcoin mining?

What will be the impact on hashpower for a 30% mining tax?

Even before the imposition of this tax, some mining companies were in losses.
What are the old mining companies thinking about this tax?
Jump to: