Up to a certain point yes,
been wondering about this case as well about the state of NY's executive power overreach in which it "arbitrarily and inappropriately by using Bitcoin companies as "Guinea Pigs" when it promulgated its virtual currency regulation."
Looks to me like the wall street crowd got greedy, wanted to force the independent BTC brokers out once they saw the real value of BTC and their way of getting just a little bit more was to force the independent brokers to be fully licensed (not in itself a bad thing) but still a bold move by a single branch of government with possible conflict of interest motives going on since it's NY
been wondering about this case as well about the state of NY's executive power overreach in which it "arbitrarily and inappropriately by using Bitcoin companies as "Guinea Pigs" when it promulgated its virtual currency regulation."
Looks to me like the wall street crowd got greedy, wanted to force the independent BTC brokers out once they saw the real value of BTC and their way of getting just a little bit more was to force the independent brokers to be fully licensed (not in itself a bad thing) but still a bold move by a single branch of government with possible conflict of interest motives going on since it's NY
And honestly speaking BTC law at all levels, federal, state, local, are still in its infancy stages of being regulated with elected officials still needing to be briefed and lawyers with 20+ experience in regulatory and tax law STILL needing to do their diligence because of how new the currency is.
From what I've read from the stickied legal precedents and via wiki:
Quote
The U.S. Treasury classified bitcoin as a convertible decentralized virtual currency in 2013.[18] The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, classified bitcoin as a commodity in September 2015. Per IRS, bitcoin is taxed as a property.[19]
In September 2016, a federal judge ruled that "Bitcoins are funds within the plain meaning of that term".
In September 2016, a federal judge ruled that "Bitcoins are funds within the plain meaning of that term".
Which doesn't say much as I believe there are still issues of states rights here whether or not to implement the tax (FL has no property tax) and that sept 2016 ruling sounded like the judge just wanted to pass the buck to another judge to have his name on the books as setting the precedent.
Basically as long as your not running a business and needing things like payroll and receipts for write-offs i think you should be fine with the IRS (who is really who you should be concerned about reporting) and not state and local. BTW I live in GA
