Pages:
Author

Topic: Fiat, Banks and the future of Cryptocurrencies - page 6. (Read 26313 times)

hero member
Activity: 1764
Merit: 584
I've never had issues with my bank before. And I've only cashed out through banks. My cheap ass refuse to pay the fee when cashing out via other methods (there are no fees when cashing out through banks). I've never bought BTC using money from the bank though, that might have been different.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47

...

Some of the methods are not "illegal" and I will take an example. I buy 50 items at a reduced prices from a Bitcoin merchant

and sell it for Fiat currencies. If you bargained for a good discount for bulk purchases, you might even make a profit. You

could also pay for a friends dinner at a merchant that accepts Bitcoin and that person can give you the cash. These are

simple examples, but they are ways to get around Banks. {This might be a much slower process, but you will never be

stuck with those bitcoins, because the Banks wants to sabotage Bitcoin.} The same goes for the Banks that sabotaged Bitcoin

by not allowing people to buy bitcoins with their credit card. I use the credit card to buy something else and sell that item

for cash and I buy the bitcoins. Problem solved. {There is always a way, not the easiest... but it is still possible}  Roll Eyes

I see now where we have the disconnect. I am not talking here about amounts that can be used up on an occasional dinner, but amounts with which to finance your life (i.e. as a regular, decent income) or as a large lump sump.

Take the later, and let's make this concrete. Assume you were lucky enough to have bought sufficient BTC years ago, so that you have now the equivalent of USD 10m sitting in your Coinbase account. You decide that this is more than enough to live on and quit your job. You still will need to use cash (or fiat) to pay the rent, continue shopping where you have been shopping so far and at shops that don't (yet) accept crypto currencies, or you might decide that you want to buy yourself now that Lambo you were dreaming about. What now? The Lambo dealer might only accept hard currency, and not bitcoin. Your landlord, grocery store, tailor etc. the same.

My guess is, you will not be able to get to your money without involving a bank or some finance institution. And unless they are of shoddy character, and unless they are already used to seeing millions being moved in and out of your account for other legitimate reasons, such transactions will raise alarm bells.

Also, the example of the credit card to get cash with which to purchase BTC is fine, except you did not say how you move the cash to an exchange to buy BTC. Ok, for small sums you could do a physical transaction at a local meet-up. But larger sums, and regularly? Again, I don't think there is currently a way to circumvent banks. Either way, moving money INTO the cryptomarket is less problematic. Moving it out again, however, still is.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 259
First I do not know why it is a problem to transfer some of your profit to fiat,you do not want to pay tax or your crypto exchange does not have KYC?

I think that banks are perhaps the most powerful institutions in the world,and if they want it is very easy for them to strike on cryptocurrency very hard.Imagine that all or most of worlds banks say that buying/selling cryptocurrency becomes illegal,it means no direct money flow from banks to exchanges and vice versa.People would have to find another way to to buy/sell crypto,so only to trade in person or maybe on ATMs.

So far banks still evaluate situation what to do with BTC and cryptocurrency in general,we see some news that they are not still seriously concerned(not losing to much profit I suppose),but if profits star to go down and Lightning Network really improve scalability and make transaction fast&cheap there will be some reaction from banks for sure.

Regarding ICO I do not have any opinion how would such scenario reflected on this kind of business,but in general they will also be affected if banks are set completely negative toward cryptocurrency.

It's not about not paying taxes for fiat, the bank refuses to take the money once it realizes that you earned it from crypto trading, and you can't really pay taxes without declaring that you received the funds from crypto trading.
You can't really bypass it and to transfer the funds into your local banks, the only way you can do that is by doing it illegal( transferring the funds into cash, and slowly use the cash, you can't really pay taxes on bitcoin, and that's the big problem).
Banks won't take the chance as they can't really verify that you weren't involved in money laundering.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1074
There are many other ways to move bitcoins to fiat, you do not have to work through your Bank. {Do some research and ask

the right questions and you will find the answer} A lot of these methods are not exactly legal, so you should be aware of that.

In most countries there are more than one group of Banks. Some are even "Bitcoin-friendly"  Roll Eyes ... I have yet to see one

Bank having total dominance in one specific country. They tried this in Australia and they were taken to court for

uncompetitive behaviour and the people won.  Wink


I am not interested in the "easy" route of illegal methods. And yes, some banks are bitcoin friendly. But the details and nuances here are important. My bank has also no issues accepting even large sums gained from cryptos. It is even know on the street as one of the more liberal banks with regards to ctyptos. I know of one case where somebody invested a few thousand USD in Monero at an early stage, and pulled out a few million. The bank questioned the origin of the money, and this person was able to show the flows from bank to exchange into ripple and bank. So all was OK.

But this "clean" flow is an exception. I have move my funds from one crypto into others and back, including some ICO's etc. There is no chance I would be able to provide a detailed trace to prove that I obtained my gains through legal means and unrelated to any AML.

With regards to the Australian Banks, I don't think it went to court. Do you have a reference?

I know NAB, ANZ, CBA and Westpac were in the spot light  :

https://www.smh.com.au/business/bitcoin-tensions-rise-as-investors-claim-banks-freezing-their-accounts-20171229-p4yy3z.html


And in there, the critical statement is the following:

“Where we cannot verify the origin of transfers we may act to ensure we comply with Australia’s anti money laundering obligations"

Again outlining the challenge that if somebody made large gains in cryptos over time, but cannot provide a detailed trace, they would have troubles getting to the money.

Some of the methods are not "illegal" and I will take an example. I buy 50 items at a reduced prices from a Bitcoin merchant

and sell it for Fiat currencies. If you bargained for a good discount for bulk purchases, you might even make a profit. You

could also pay for a friends dinner at a merchant that accepts Bitcoin and that person can give you the cash. These are

simple examples, but they are ways to get around Banks. {This might be a much slower process, but you will never be

stuck with those bitcoins, because the Banks wants to sabotage Bitcoin.} The same goes for the Banks that sabotaged Bitcoin

by not allowing people to buy bitcoins with their credit card. I use the credit card to buy something else and sell that item

for cash and I buy the bitcoins. Problem solved. {There is always a way, not the easiest... but it is still possible}  Roll Eyes
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
...
Now, this banks. It will always be the best way to get that large amount and they could stop anything you want to get through them without you explaining where you get it but there is this limit.
Will it work if I do it in different banks and not overflow the limit or they are all connected somehow?


I think it would be possible to use several banks right now, but only because there is not yet a regulatory requirement to report cash flows from crypto-exchanges. However, I would think if you just opened a few accounts and started to deposit money from crypto-exchanges without having any other regular flows into those accounts, or a history with the bank, then that would equally raise suspicion.

It is seems nearly impossible to move large sums from crypto-exchanges back to bank account(s) without raising any questions.

I wonder how crypto-day traders deal with this problem. They MUST move money back to fiat, to live on. And I know from my bank, they would not accept clients who do day trading in crypto, again, because it's difficult to ensure compliance with money laundering laws.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
Hi,

I don't really think that the issue for banks is about money laundering. Because this happens in some countries and large, worldwide banks have no issues being involved, as long as they make profit. I rather think that they see bitcoin as a threat.

I don't really have a solution to offer, but I would say that it is good for cryptos... it means we are on the right tracks, important enough now for traditionnal financial institutions to react.

Not so bad for a geeky tool without any future! Wink

Have you ever seen the internal policies of banks as they relate to their clients dealing in crypto currencies? I have. And what I posted is a paraphrased, shortened version of what some of the large globally operating banks (US, European and Asian banks) have as their policy right now. These banks don't see bitcoin as anything more than a toy for gambling and to hide illegal activities, certainly not as threat  (the blockchain related technologies are quite another matter though). The main concern for them is being caught up in any AML and money laundering scandal.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1251
Hi,

I don't really think that the issue for banks is about money laundering. Because this happens in some countries and large, worldwide banks have no issues being involved, as long as they make profit. I rather think that they see bitcoin as a threat.

I don't really have a solution to offer, but I would say that it is good for cryptos... it means we are on the right tracks, important enough now for traditionnal financial institutions to react.

Not so bad for a geeky tool without any future! Wink
jr. member
Activity: 224
Merit: 1
“Revolutionizing Brokerage of Personal Data”
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1008
flats is near to expire because bitcoin is gaining more fan following and investors are rushing toward bitcoin to make it the global coin of the world and i am sure banks will also exit when bitcoin will be implemented as currency and people are now really satisfied by using bitcoin,
The new era of cashless society yeah , still I'm a little bit doubt about this due how a lot of people keep thinking traditionally and won't welcome new things, new technology like electronic money, it would takes a long time . Anyway I personally haven't experience a strict service from the banks even they know about how I involve in crypto business.
hero member
Activity: 2912
Merit: 642
To summarize it all, they are preventing us from making money.  Grin
No difference with using fiat.
I heard a lot about this. But since I have never gone to a larger scale of withdrawal then I haven't experienced it.
But I am also worrying and that is why I am reading threads like this. There will always be a time that we will end up getting bored or just want to feel the profit and then rest and I want that to be clean without having any issues, banks or any other means.

Now, this banks. It will always be the best way to get that large amount and they could stop anything you want to get through them without you explaining where you get it but there is this limit.
Will it work if I do it in different banks and not overflow the limit or they are all connected somehow?

member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
Kyc requirement is not a big deal for most people, and if the money made is includes no illegal activity, then there is no difference as a income from others. Banks will not do that, this is a big loss for them

But what you are stating is not reality. Many banks (particularly global operating banks) would be required to take a very conservative approach. If you, as a client, can't prove the source of your (unusual and unusually high) income, then they would be forced to prevent the deposit, or cancel your account all together. And with moving in and out of crypto currencies, the proof of legitimacy is becoming a very difficult task.
full member
Activity: 1736
Merit: 121

I do understand the banks concern to ensure that there is no money laundering or criminal financing involved, but such restrictive, strict measures could have a significant impact on the entire cryptocurrency market. In a doomsday scenario, I could even imagine banks globally to impose similar restrictions worldwide, and thus even killing the entire cryptomarket. The fact that more and more internet shops, service providers, or even brick-and-mortar shops might accept cryptocurrencies does not really solve the problem, as these shops would be forced by THEIR banks to impose stricter measures on their clients. Thus the problem remains, but would be shifted along the chain.  Do you think such a scenario is plausible?



I will talk about this end of your post and I believe such restrictions would propel stakeholders in crypto business to buckle up in their trade. Stakeholders like exchangers because that is actually where it starts from.

Then, this could bring in proper regulations from the government. For me, bank restrictions is good for a start.
full member
Activity: 406
Merit: 100
Market Integration Platform
Kyc requirement is not a big deal for most people, and if the money made is includes no illegal activity, then there is no difference as a income from others. Banks will not do that, this is a big loss for them
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
While a bank could reject you it doesn't seem like that would be in their best interest at all. After all they are trying to get customers for their bank and if you are prominent and have lots of money will they are doing themselves a disservice. We have seen what lengths banks will go to with the HSBC cartel fiasco so lets not kid ourselves and say they won't handle some tainted money.

Not trying to defend banks, but I would think ensuring that no money laundering takes place on their watch is more important for them than keeping individual customers. And I am not talking here about the extremes, like super-ultra-high-net-worth customers, but the affluent crypto investor in general, having struck some "gold. For these normal affluent crypto investors who made perhaps even a few million, the bank would not do any special favors. If we would be starting to talk about 1bn or more ... then that would be another case all together.
full member
Activity: 202
Merit: 100
While a bank could reject you it doesn't seem like that would be in their best interest at all. After all they are trying to get customers for their bank and if you are prominent and have lots of money will they are doing themselves a disservice. We have seen what lengths banks will go to with the HSBC cartel fiasco so lets not kid ourselves and say they won't handle some tainted money.
full member
Activity: 504
Merit: 102
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 47
I have not experienced such problems with the Bank. But I have friends from other countries who have been facing exchange problems lately. Those exchanges that work with Fiat constantly limit the list of countries to which Fiat can be sent after the exchange. They are motivated by the requirement of KYC.

Good for you. Not asking for any details, but can you confirm that your inflows (i.e. from the crypto-gains translated into fiat to your bank account) have been "abnormal"? An example to illustate what I mean by that:

1) Assume you make USD 10'000 per month as a salary. If every few months you deposit 2k or 3k as a result of your gains, no bank would really care much.

2) However, if you started to deposit USD 15'000 every second week, or a lump some of say USD 1m from a crypto exchange, that would certainly trigger the alarm bells at many banks.

The second scenario is what I would label "abnormal" from a banks compliance perspective. And I would be surprised if a reputable bank would not react in such as case and demand some proof.
sr. member
Activity: 714
Merit: 261
1. If somebody has experienced such complications with their banks already, it would be interesting to hear about their stories
2. If more and more banks adapt similar measures (or even stricter ones, like some credit card companies disallowing financing of cryptos all together), what do you think the implications on the market place will be? For instance, do you think exchange without KYC's will suffer?
3. Do you think this could lead to "ICO heavens" where only ICO's will have a chance to survive that undergo a stringent background check that would be acceptable for banks?

There is no as such complication that I have experienced recently however I will skip to other discussion points of your where I can add something. Like you said exchangers without KYC's will suffer or not. Well, I believe they will suffer in the future a lot because day by day the KYC and KYS as well getting very strict. In my country the exchangers which are not collecting the KYC of their customers are themselves getting under surveillance because regulatory bodies think that they are making some spurious action which may disturb the nation economy somewhat.

Pointing towards the next point, "ICO heavens" well I believe it has to undergo vigorous change rather than smooth implementation by the banks. These projects are already getting funds off the chart and banks may not be able to tolerate it if they fail in the ICO project.
member
Activity: 476
Merit: 10
CAT.EX Exchange
Pages:
Jump to: