Topic: Crypto regulation in the EU and the USA (Read 289 times)

First read the forum rules

---

Secondly, if you opened a topic in the Bitcoin discussion, then stick to the topic - and don't promote some shitcoin with a max supply of 50 billion invented by some doctor with a supposed degree in mathematics - Faketoshi claims that he has several doctorates, but at the end of the day he is just the owner of an ordinary shitcoin.

Can you look into Hedera Hashgraph and tell me why it would not totally replace Bitcoin + Ethereum in the near future?
The founder, dr Leemon Baird who is a mathematician (PHD) and computer scientist, invented the technology and says it completely kills all blockchain technology.
I'm not tech savvy but his main arguments were:

- Thousands of transactions per second, while Bitcoin can do less than 10 and Ethereum just a bit more.
- Far more energy efficient
- All transactions are traceable

With regards to EU regulation, I think that bitcoin and ethereum are completely inferior to this tech.
But if you think that's wrong, please tell me why. Google and various other corporations are already on board with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpXkMZqtLl0

---

Only if humans allow them to.

Control the money, and you control the people. This is what Henry Kissinger once said.
One of the most brilliant financial minds, but sadly someone who used it for governments to control people and for the USA to boss around the world because of their Federal Reserve. An endless supply to money backed by nothing.

The monetary system is a scam. More than 60% of Americans live from pay check to pay check. All it takes for the government to completely wipe out those people, is to cause inflation. Which is currently spiralling out of control due to decades of money printing.

Human beings have to redefine what money is. If you can print it, I don't want it. It is not a store of value and it allows government to destroy our purchasing power.
I believe that crypto has a huge potential to end banking corruption in the world. No more printing. No more manipulation.

I think that bitcoin is revolutionary but it will be replaced by better tech.
Governments will fight against it, alongside the media. But I don't think they can win.

Check out this iconic video of Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman predicting the rise of crypto currency to reduce the role of government, in 1999 (!!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leqjwiQidlk&t=2s

We the people, will stand up to them.

"Governments are good at collecting taxes on things that don't move. Like land.
The internet will make it extremely hard for government to collect taxes on goods and services, because they can move"

"The one thing that's missing, is a reliable e-cash"

The question is whether bitcoin is that cash, or not. For now it may be. But I think it will be replaced by better tech.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

yep
bitcoin 2009-2014 was not government recognised as "currency" thus financial regulators could not poke at it
then when recognised as a currency, everyone celebrated "mainstrem yeah" but.. then came financial regulator in the US(FATF) caused bitcoin exchanges to start needing to do AML/KYC

as a asset currency american regulators (SEC) applied. and as said AML/KYC applied but also some other things that the SEC was empowered with

ethereum as a currency had the same stuff. but was for years classed as a commodity. which meant CFTF regulators had their fingers on ethereum.

SEC do not have the power to impose environmental impact regulations of crypto businesses services non commodity crypto currencies..

but CFTF do have power to impose environmental impact regulations on cryptos,

this year there is a push to move bitcoin out of the SEC jurisdiction and into the CFTF jurisdiction. which changes the rules of trade law.. and also is a stepping stone into the EPA having a grip thanks to the CFTF jurisdiction

Regulations are inevitable, we have also heard for a long time that governments are introducing regulations for crypto. The government controls us and everything, if we want crypto to be widely accepted then we have to get used to the regulations they will impose on us. They will never let us out of their control.

Recently CZ, the CEO of the leading exchange also expressed his views on the Mica bill, he also thinks this will be the global standard for cryptocurrencies, it seems he agrees with these regulations.

They've already pinned down ETH to comply, I think there will just be tight regulations, the threat could just be banning BTC mining and then they will regulate BTC mining which they will release BTC mining license. I don't think they could kill crypto. It's unstoppable if that is what you are worrying about, markets will exist even if they will heavily regulate exchanges.

I don't know what exactly you mean by 'finalised', but it is expected to enter into force, which is what we are interested in, by the end of 2023:

' Así, se estima que la normativa recién podría entrar en vigencia a fines de 2023.'

Translation:

' Thus, it is estimated that the regulation could only enter into force at the end of 2023.'

https://hipertextual.com/2022/07/la-union-europea-da-un-paso-clave-para-regular-las-criptomonedas

We have been talking about it on our local board and we think that this will be the case, that the EU will make it mandatory to identify all cryptocurrency transactions with personal data and pass it on to the authorities.

This does not necessarily have to be the case, because in the procedures that remain until the law is finally approved and enters into force, there may be changes, but unfortunately it is most likely.

There are some proposals in the EU and U.S. that are being set in stone for crypto regulation and the basic premise, as they allege, are "anti-fraud" consumer protections and environmental regulations, some of which include European crypto companies to document/register their carbon footprints associated with their commerce (amongst other nonsense).

These regulations won't kill crypto, but anyone suggesting that this won't massively impact the market is under estimating how regulations impact global markets. Adding in hoops that crypto-based companies have to jump through in order to comply with the law discourages their growth.


Plan on shorting crypto/crypto assets? I would call that gambling more than investing. To each his own, I guess.

It's already expected that there's a regulation on crypto and ain't surprise by that, we know the government has been always combating fraud and money laundering and that's how to protect people against fraud.  But using crypto under government regulation isn't a problem if you're not hiding something illegal transactions that happen. 

Here it is, [BIG LIST] Buy/Sell Crypto (OTC, P2P, DEXs, CEXs, NO-KYC, ATMs, etc.).
P2p exchange doesn't require a KYC which for sure you're totally unregulated per every transaction.

That's right mate, there's no need to hide if someone didn't do anything wrong. Governments can easily require centralized exchanges to disclose the ids of users they suspect for checking if they are involved in unlawful cases.

Many bitcoin users ^{[included me]} use centralized exchanges. I'm sure I'm making a mistake if people start talking about privacy, but it's a tricky thing to explain because state regulations are not meant to be broken. But I have nothing to fear as long as I don't break any of their rules and regulations.

I think people who are in countries that prohibit bitcoin and crypto transactions will dominate the p2p market instead of centralized exchanges, there may be data on this but I don't know.

I'm not tech savvy, but I am here to learn about these methods.
Feel free to send a link with more info about this, or a PM.

It's not really crypto being culled, it's the exchanges. There are still methods for people to transfer outside of exchanges (p2p), it's just that exchanges made transfers pretty comfortable and easy for beginners, so it pretty much stuck. Not to mention that with actual regulations happening, it doesn't actually stray crypto far from adoption but rather it's accepting it, albeit limiting its capabilities. In a sense, we're paying for giving up some of its features in return for "security" given by the government (if you can trust that) and a bunch of other centralized features which make it comfortable for the majority to use.

One of my patients works for a bank in my country.
I asked her what happens when I withdraw crypto profits back to a bank account.
She said that this puts the bank on high alert. As a bank account owner, I have to be able to prove to them that no money laundering was involved in my crypto profit withdrawal. I'm not a criminal but I can't prove that. She said that the bank has the right to refuse me as an account holder, just for withdrawing crypto profits.

They can't kill blockchain and they can't erase crypto. But if I can't pay with it, what's the point and what gives it value?

Where do you see first or serious regulations on cryptocurrency and crypto market, it is where you will see better crypto adoption locally.

Regulations will serve as massive noise and expose more local citizens to Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. At the end, governments in developed countries won't ban cryptocurrency entirely. Just more and stricter regulations to control scammers, to protect their citizens as well as national economy.

In developing countries, whatever governments and social media declare, you should know that developing countries will have to follow developed countries for policies and it won't be an exception with cryptocurrency and crypto market.

Kill cryptocurrencies? Hilarious. This isn't the first time I heard about something like this and it certainly won't be the last op. Truth is that crypto is being regulated to an increasing extent over time around the world since they can't be banned completely.

Crypto investors have already gotten used to these regulations and many have even accepted them as the new norm which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

It's always possible to deal with cryptocurrencies anonymously despite all these regulations though based on what I have observed.

The state of cryptocurrency on in most of the European countries is still not clear because some European countries are trying to say bitcoin and most of the cryptoccurenies are being used for bad purposes and mostly they will say about money laundry and other dirty stuff while they are also trying to get things under control and by regulation of cryptocurrencies and track any transaction related to cryptocurrencies they want to track the p2p exchanges, in the other hand we see more and more bitcoin atms in countries including the USA and this will be another step for the regulations.

Aristotle once defined money as something that has 4 features:

1) a store of value
2) a medium of exchange (divisible)
3) portable
4) durable



Bitcoin is the only asset that ticked all boxes so far. Which is why there is so much demand for it. Central bankers can not destroy its value like they can with currency.

But this regulation is now aiming to erase crypto as a medium of exchange. Russians can't exchange crypto at the moment, for example. Governments have approached Binance to impose restrictions on Russians. So they can do it to whoever they want, at this point.
When governments erase it as a medium of exchange, I believe that demand will go down and so will the price.

I just hope (and think) that the world of crypto will bounce back and bypass the regulations. And when there is more clarity about it, I will get in.

This is just my view about it. If you think it's flawed, feel free to tell me why.

Whether this is realistic to you or not, this is already happening. And it doesn't need for a leak to happen so that we could get the idea that this is how they would do it. After all, our privacy only matters to us. It's sacred to us. But to those who are in power, it is more of a challenge or an obstacle.

Forget about centralized exchanges. They would easily bow down. But don't think the price would react that much. Neither will this kill Bitcoin. There's nothing to kill with Bitcoin, after all. So whatever form this EU landmark regulation takes, it won't decide Bitcoin's fate.

Care to tell how?
[/quote]

I'm not in the market so far. I always believed in the technology but I also believed, from the beginning, that government would fight back against crypto.
And that is happening right now. The crooked central banks want to keep their monopoly on finance and they will use regulation ("we must stop money laundering") to do so. I just wonder who will win in the end. An other argument that the EU is using against bitcoin particularly, is that it would generate too much CO2 emission. Which of course is a poor excuse, but they will use that argument.

I'm hoping that when this law gets passed, there will be more clarity about options to exchange crypto assets. In secrecy, and with no banks involved. If banks and governments are involved, they will either tax it or confiscate it.
I'm not an expert, but when exchanges get overregulated by government I don't see how a complete crash in value of crypto assets can be avoided.
And that is when I'll get in.

If you believe that all of this is BS, feel free to tell me.

If anything, all of that has already happened from about two years ago. I do not make it a habit to use exchanges here, still faster and better rates p2p but I do, for occassional convenience use an EU exchange.

Proof of funds, proof of income, source of funds, all done and dusted. They have not, apart from the seemingly annual requests for the above, asked for reason of exchange for each tx (which remittance and bank tranfers have asked for decades).

And if it gets to that, majority of people will comply. No big feal here.

Strengthening the regulation of cryptocurrencies by states is inevitable. To do this, states have a lot of leverage. Exchanges registered and operating on the territory of states will be forced to comply with their rules, which relate to the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Otherwise, states may close the operation of such exchanges. Here it is only important that the states approach this issue in a balanced way.