Topic: Bitcoin deemed a commodity not a currency in Finland (Read 780 times)
Funny how people totally outside of the bitcoin world think they can "categorize" it.
As long as it is being mentioned it doesn't really matter what they classify it as 
This is not news, this has been the stance in Finland since the beginning. Hasn't changed.
well a commodity sounds good. it sounds like my bank-fold getting bigger, my coins gaining value.
an asset sounds better as its better fitting of a description, but also officiates bitcoin into a category that government and taxmen can use, to then allow transactions and holdings to happen without bans.
I'm Finnish, so I know this is what will happen: We wait until Swedes make some decision about it, and then officially decide the same. This is how its always been and will be.
you like cats on fire?
I'm Finnish, so I know this is what will happen: We wait until Swedes make some decision about it, and then officially decide the same. This is how its always been and will be.
well a commodity sounds good. it sounds like my bank-fold getting bigger, my coins gaining value.
It would be shame if Bitcoin is called currency, the same way as dept based fiat
Countries labeling it a "commodity" and not a "currency" seems to be a growing trend and I don't expect it to stop. Also I see nothing wrong with that, nothing wrong with having it in a certain category and then applying applicable tax and other laws to it as a commodity. Also there's a lot of truth about the commodity aspect of bitcoin since it's so volatile and still not something most people accept or most people actually spend.
Anyway, I think it's a step in the right direction to have it classified as SOMETHING , that way businesses know how to stay in line with the law and governments know how to properly regulate it.
Anyway, I think it's a step in the right direction to have it classified as SOMETHING , that way businesses know how to stay in line with the law and governments know how to properly regulate it.
Guys, cmon...they are thinking about it, they are categorizing it. This is not bad at all. It's not like it's illegal or something. What i can read out of it: "right now it doesnt fit to any category defined by law"...who sais they wont change law to fit it in there if they see that they can get tax out of it?
For bitcoin, anything official that is not banning is good thing.
For bitcoin, anything official that is not banning is good thing.
Paeivi Heikkinen needs to learn economics.
bitcoins features and usage resembles an asset, in no way is bitcoin anywhere near a commodity.
and also this is just Paeivi Heikkinen unofficial opinion based on a telephone call. not the official stance of Finland. so please do not meander/chinese whisper this guys unofficial opinion into something the media will pick up as european fact.
bitcoins features and usage resembles an asset, in no way is bitcoin anywhere near a commodity.
and also this is just Paeivi Heikkinen unofficial opinion based on a telephone call. not the official stance of Finland. so please do not meander/chinese whisper this guys unofficial opinion into something the media will pick up as european fact.
Bitcoin deemed a commodity not a currency in Finland
Bitcoin doesn't meet the definition of a currency or even an electronic payment form in Finland, where the central bank has instead decided to categorize the software as a commodity.
"Considering the definition of an official currency as set out in law, it's not that. It's also not a payment instrument, because the law stipulates that a payment instrument must have an issuer responsible for its operation," Paeivi Heikkinen, head of oversight at the Bank of Finland in Helsinki, said in a Jan. 16 phone interview. "At this stage it's more comparable to a commodity."
http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Bitcoin-deemed-a-commodity-not-a-currency-in-5160291.php
Bitcoin doesn't meet the definition of a currency or even an electronic payment form in Finland, where the central bank has instead decided to categorize the software as a commodity.
"Considering the definition of an official currency as set out in law, it's not that. It's also not a payment instrument, because the law stipulates that a payment instrument must have an issuer responsible for its operation," Paeivi Heikkinen, head of oversight at the Bank of Finland in Helsinki, said in a Jan. 16 phone interview. "At this stage it's more comparable to a commodity."
http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Bitcoin-deemed-a-commodity-not-a-currency-in-5160291.php
Jump to: