I admit it will be interesting and challenging for them to find everyone's wallet number but they might just copy the Americans seems some legislation is passing through and apply it to provinces and territories instead and bam pulled off. Well sort of, if you keep reading covers your points
A bill that would let states tax your online transactions will be one step closer to becoming law. The proposal’s been subject to an unusual battle that’s united liberals and conservatives while dividing big Internet companies. Amazon, for instance, supports the measure —partly because an Internet sales tax would hurt its smaller rivals. But the Senate bill, known as the Marketplace Fairness Act, could also unintentionally wind up serving an upstart of a different kind: Bitcoin, the much-discussed digital currency that some see as a rival to traditional cash or credit cards and others have dismissed as an impractical mashup of technology and money.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/what-an-internet-sales-tax-could-mean-for-your-bitcoin-stash-20130425Personally I agree with part of robert mccoys comment on marketwatch if regulations are made it just makes it even more err legit as a real means of trade but unlike his point I think it is practical just the regulations need to be made to increase acceptance probably something like Canada was thinking ahead.
I agree with John Kallionen and Rusty Slade below. The CRA has given government recognition to the bitcoin as having some sort of intrinsic value. Canada could be stepping into a mirky bog here. It raises an open question whether you can pay taxes in bitcoins. What happens when another internet currency gains acceptance. A thousand or so computer wizards will be vying to invent the next bitcoin.
What the CRA doesn't realize is the very nature of the bitcoin is a direct challenge to a government's sovereign right to create and manage its own currency. It also means the authority of central banks is no longer sacrosanct. This may represent a global fatigue with currency manipulation by these institutions, and many people everywhere are voting with their feet. The CRA's initiative could well end up ten years from now with the famous adage, 'What were they thinking?'
Frankly, I don't think bitcoins are practical because you you cannot make change with them though I can see exchanges with one half of a bitcoin in the future. Perhaps bitcoin bytes of .01 are not far off.
As we Canadians are fond of saying, "Only in Canada, eh?"
None of this is to suggest that bitcoin-based transactions are or should be exempt from online sales taxes—just that collecting them presents a new challenge. On the one hand, this could play out badly for Bitcoin if the ambiguity discourages retailers from adopting the tender. On the other hand, it also creates the possibility of a loophole. “Oops,” the businesses will tell the states. “We can’t collect this tax for you because the customer paid in bitcoins and we don’t know where he or she lives.”
Such a loophole would be a good reason for retailers and consumers alike to start flocking to bitcoins. It’s not clear what Congress could do to close the loop. If it tried, it would probably have to mention virtual currencies explicitly in the legislation, perhaps by setting a single national sales tax for all bitcoin-based purchases. Ironically, either outcome would likely help bitcoin gain, er, currency. Much as the Treasury Department cleared up legal uncertainty surrounding Bitcoin when it made its policy statement on it last month, a similar move by Congress would clarify things even more. That’d be a good thing for Bitcoin. As one widely read analysis of the currency explains, legal uncertainty has been one of the bigger obstacles to wider adoption.
