I think we are all overlooking the second part of Bitstamp's AML compliance headline: "COUNTER TERRORIST FINANCING ("CTF") POLICY"
It's not just AML/KYC it's also those extremely vague and often abused Terrorist Financing laws.
So basically, throw any common sense you might have out the window.
Topic: Bitstamp BLOCKs withdrawals to verified users - page 4. (Read 11706 times)
Question is, at what point KYC/AML goes? Their procedures are unheard of.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
What is Bitstamp? What do you use Bitstamp for?
Buying and selling. It is like the e-Bay. Even if they are registered as a finacial institution, BTC is not money. They may apply some procedure regarding money you sent there, only money. BTC is not money.
a) Bistamp is NOTHING like e-bay.
b) Bitcoin is considered most places as some sort of financial instrument or bearer bond or contract or whatever. The point being, most places DO recognise it as a surrogate for money. It's not a banana. And despite my funny "banana coin" comment at the San Jose Conference on the alt-coin panel- the government does indeed regulate bananas once you get to the volume the consider to be relevant to their interests.
So, you know. Citizen beware.
I personally trade for bananas. But it is not up to the business of any KYC/AML.
Right. The famous BTC/Banana pair.
I think you're getting it. You're not buying and selling Bitcoins. You're buying and selling US Dollars. Perhaps it would help you to think of it that way.
Buying and selling. It is like the e-Bay. Even if they are registered as a finacial institution, BTX is still not money. They may apply some procedure regarding money you sent there, only money. BTC is not money.
What do you buy BTC with? What do you sell it for?
I personally trade for bananas. But it is not up to the business of any KYC/AML. Money deposit is one thing, BTC deposit is another.
Buying and selling. It is like the e-Bay. Even if they are registered as a finacial institution, BTX is still not money. They may apply some procedure regarding money you sent there, only money. BTC is not money.
What do you buy BTC with? What do you sell it for?
Question is, at what point KYC/AML goes? Their procedures are unheard of.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
What is Bitstamp? What do you use Bitstamp for?
Buying and selling. It is like the e-Bay. Even if they are registered as a finacial institution, BTC is not money. They may apply some procedure regarding money you sent there, only money. BTC is not money.
Question is, at what point KYC/AML goes? Their procedures are unheard of.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
And the most important, it apllies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
What is Bitstamp? What do you use Bitstamp for?
Bitstamp are exposed to AML and KYC regulations. If you don't understand this, or don't want to be faced with AML/KYC - don't deal with Bitstamp. It's as simple as that. No one has a gun to your head.
It's just naive to give fake names to a company which has to comply with AML/KYC and not expect it to cause problems.
It's just naive to give fake names to a company which has to comply with AML/KYC and not expect it to cause problems.
Question is, at what point KYC/AML can and should go? Their procedures are unheard of.
And the most important, KYC/AML applies to money only. BTC is not money. It is just like a pan, an e-book or a banana.
Well, it's Florida State law, not USA law. So, it is a little unpredictable. :-)
What government jurisdiction are you under?
I'm a nomad.
Also I thought the secret service was involved, no? that's federal not state
i think the money service was a state thing then the feds got involved. I would have to check
Bitstamp are exposed to AML and KYC regulations. If you don't understand this, or don't want to be faced with AML/KYC - don't deal with Bitstamp. It's as simple as that. No one has a gun to your head.
It's just naive to give fake names to a company which has to comply with AML/KYC and not expect it to cause problems.
It's just naive to give fake names to a company which has to comply with AML/KYC and not expect it to cause problems.
I don't know where you live- I'm just giving you an example related to your question. Sure these guys are idiots- but nothing stoping any other state, or government from doing the exact same thing. Heck for all we know, some local sheriff could set up a localbitcoins sting purely with the intention of getting to keep the seized funds to buy a new cruiser after you're convicted as guilty.
Anyway, I was just trying to make the point that the government is hard to predict at the moment concerning bitcoin, but using a fake name is indeed, technically, illegal. (Depending)
But of course, get your own legal advice. None of what I say constitutes it. :-)
You pointed to a completely irrelevant situation where two guys were not only breaking state laws that explicitly prohibited what they were doing but also agreed to sell to undercover agents AFTER they told them they planned to use them illegally.
That isn't that unpredictable of an action from the government in the USA.
And I am 100% confident my government wouldn't do similar.
Fact is, using a fake name on my bitstamp account is no more illegal than me using a fake name on my facebook (which I also do)
You've gone from it being 100% illegal money laundering to "it depending" ....
Well, it's Florida State law, not USA law. So, it is a little unpredictable. :-)
What government jurisdiction are you under?
I don't know where you live- I'm just giving you an example related to your question. Sure these guys are idiots- but nothing stoping any other state, or government from doing the exact same thing. Heck for all we know, some local sheriff could set up a localbitcoins sting purely with the intention of getting to keep the seized funds to buy a new cruiser after you're convicted as guilty.
Anyway, I was just trying to make the point that the government is hard to predict at the moment concerning bitcoin, but using a fake name is indeed, technically, illegal. (Depending)
But of course, get your own legal advice. None of what I say constitutes it. :-)
You pointed to a completely irrelevant situation where two guys were not only breaking state laws that explicitly prohibited what they were doing but also agreed to sell to undercover agents AFTER they told them they planned to use them illegally.
That isn't that unpredictable of an action from the government in the USA.
And I am 100% confident my government wouldn't do similar.
Fact is, using a fake name on my bitstamp account is no more illegal than me using a fake name on my facebook (which I also do)
You've gone from it being 100% illegal money laundering to "it depending" ....
They enforce what they think is worth while enforcing.
That is not "rule of law".
I don't disagree on that point. Indeed I think leaving unenforced laws on the books is dangerous and potentially tyrannical. If I recall correctly, it's only recently that oral sex laws in the south (In the USA) were judged unconstitutional, and it only came up after someone got caught by the police giving a blowjob or something like that and they decided to charge them with it. (Might have my details wrong).
Anyway, I think we agree on this point.
What about all the trades on localbitcoins where I don't give a name? is that also money laundering and the police are just waiting to arrest me?
You obviously didn't read the news about the guys in Miami who were arrested for buying/selling Bitcoins on LocalBitcoins.
Like I said, the laws are on the books- it's up to governments to decide how and when they feel like enforcing them.
That said- there is some sort of lower limit you have to meet before the government considers what you are doing a crime. That said, there is also a law about deliberately staying below the lower limit specifically not to hit that lower limit. So, play nice.
I'm not in Florida, so what the hell does Florida have to do with me?
Those idiots made themselves party to a criminal conspiracy by being utterly retarded, entrapment is legal in the land of the free. It isn't here.
I don't know where you live- I'm just giving you an example related to your question. Sure these guys are idiots- but nothing stoping any other state, or government from doing the exact same thing. Heck for all we know, some local sheriff could set up a localbitcoins sting purely with the intention of getting to keep the seized funds to buy a new cruiser after you're convicted as guilty.
Anyway, I was just trying to make the point that the government is hard to predict at the moment concerning bitcoin, but using a fake name is indeed, technically, illegal. (Depending)
But of course, get your own legal advice. None of what I say constitutes it. :-)
No no, I agree banks can freeze accounts.
But we are talking about a really grey company - Bitstamp.
* They are registered in UK but their bank is in Slovenia.
* They are NOT A BANK.
* No AML or KYC rules for businesses require what they ask for.
No let me explain this, I'm running a EU business and I know what I'm talking about. NO NON BANKING COMPANY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD IS ALLOWED TO TAKE DEPOSITS. Even god damn Seychelles do not allow this (had an offshore). So either this is going through their books as sale/return of a product (that's what my local law is saying, but they will take VAT because of this) or something else.
Nowhere can you find any data on their registration. Nothing else. They are AS shady as BTC-E.
Now I have no problem with btc-e - there must be a free market like silkroad - and they must remain silent.
I have a problem with people claiming Bitstamp is better than Gox or Btc-e, because they are the same.
I really hope this problem will resolve and I receive my funds. I will update this topic but for now 5 hours passed without any answer from Bitstamp which is concerning.
brokerage firms can take your money in the EU. But we are talking about a really grey company - Bitstamp.
* They are registered in UK but their bank is in Slovenia.
* They are NOT A BANK.
* No AML or KYC rules for businesses require what they ask for.
No let me explain this, I'm running a EU business and I know what I'm talking about. NO NON BANKING COMPANY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD IS ALLOWED TO TAKE DEPOSITS. Even god damn Seychelles do not allow this (had an offshore). So either this is going through their books as sale/return of a product (that's what my local law is saying, but they will take VAT because of this) or something else.
Nowhere can you find any data on their registration. Nothing else. They are AS shady as BTC-E.
Now I have no problem with btc-e - there must be a free market like silkroad - and they must remain silent.
I have a problem with people claiming Bitstamp is better than Gox or Btc-e, because they are the same.
I really hope this problem will resolve and I receive my funds. I will update this topic but for now 5 hours passed without any answer from Bitstamp which is concerning.
Except of course, Bistamp isn't 'they'. It's not a government
Oh right, AML-KYC laws just fall out of the sky. No governments involved.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I'm baffled by this as Bitstamp aren't widely known to pull these kind of bullshit manoeuvres
Um, what rock have you been living under?
Bitstamp is #1 for using AML-KYC to screw people out of their money.
The only difference at gox is that they don't bother with the excuses.
hope not
They enforce what they think is worth while enforcing.
That is not "rule of law".
If you don't have anything to hide- then you will be fine. If you do have something to hide- they have rightfully suspected you of it. So......
First they came for the people with nothing to hide. Then,
Except of course, Bistamp isn't 'they'. It's not a government or overly powerful monopoly. It's the opposite. Bitstamp is similarly just as scared and nervous about being unfairly singled out by the government as OP is of them.
The way the law is written, entities like Bitstamp (Not only banks, but other organizations dealing with money like this as well) are legally obliged to take precautions that include REPORTING YOU TO THE GOVERNMENT only based on the SUSPICION you might be doing something wrong. They don't have to prove or know anything conclusive about you. So yes, it feels a bit like "thought crime" but thats the law they are forced to adhere to. Charlie Shrem should have taken a hint himself.
Jump to: