The topic is a mess.
Basically, this topic is copy-paste product only
So, don't look for meaning so much. 
Topic: g20 FATF regulations to demand kyc for recipient - page 2. (Read 376 times)
The topic is a mess.
Basically, this topic is copy-paste product only
So, don't look for meaning so much. 
what's your source for this stuff? i've seen very little information about the G20 crypto discussions. all i've heard is they are taking cues from japan re regulations, which is bad news as it is.
The topic is a mess.
The G20 is simply a meeting, every topic discussed there even if agreed on it's only formal and needs to be put in law by a country to country agreement.
The FATF is more of a react and pursue ways to deal with stuff organization.
It does not investigate or prosecute but its guidelines sometimes carry more weight that everything.
People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
which court would that be? International court for.....care bears.
You simply can't sue the government for adopting a recommendation of an organization which the country is a member.
Even if a court would grant a process it would have only one outcome and that would be for the country to renounce its membership which would be at least damaging for the financial sector.
No country on earth would do such thing for 10-20k crypto lovers.
But just as other topics here, this was blown out of proportion.
#DdmrDdmr posted a link that clears a lot of stuff.
This is another sources that reports on FATFs intent: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-11/crypto-exchanges-are-facing-biggest-regulatory-hurdle-yet?srnd=cryptocurrencies
I can’t really see mandatory KYC of a kind to identify recipients of TXs, unless the whole system changes completely or extreme outbound restrictions are made to centralized exchanges, which would likely shift balance off to true DEX type exchanges. Nevertheless, tighter regulation is just a question of time and pace, whilst the extent of it will be a struggle between desire and feasibility.
I can’t really see mandatory KYC of a kind to identify recipients of TXs, unless the whole system changes completely or extreme outbound restrictions are made to centralized exchanges, which would likely shift balance off to true DEX type exchanges. Nevertheless, tighter regulation is just a question of time and pace, whilst the extent of it will be a struggle between desire and feasibility.
That's not safe, and that's not what crypto was meant for. If you can identify cold wallets you can track people. The travel rule applied to crypto i calamitous. And people who rely on anonymous exchanges like me are deeply in trouble. Most of these exchanges won't even accept americans.
People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
It is a proposed draft to have strict procedure and rules set for exchanges, that does not mean that all your funds will be made public and will hurt your privacy, they will monitor the flow of funds from exchanges and that is not a bad thing either, with the N number of hacks in the past and all the frauds that happened here, we need such things to protect the user funds. Investor protection is a major factor when it comes to any investment and we have not seen that in the virtual market till now and have seen billions of dollars worth of scam and one way or the other the government will enforce that in the future. People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
this is a good summary of the actual FATF release which I read https://ciphertrace.com/response-to-fatf-on-vasp-regulation/
what i state are the ultimate consequences. Imagine expecting a fund manager or whale to store millions on a cold wallet hardware wallet address that is tied to an identity, or expecting them to send it to a software wallet or another wallet that is identifiable, then they send it to their anonymous private wallet. Now bad actors will hack databases to get names attached to wallets and amounts and target those people.
what i state are the ultimate consequences. Imagine expecting a fund manager or whale to store millions on a cold wallet hardware wallet address that is tied to an identity, or expecting them to send it to a software wallet or another wallet that is identifiable, then they send it to their anonymous private wallet. Now bad actors will hack databases to get names attached to wallets and amounts and target those people.
I am really shocked at how little this is being spoken about online. There's going to be a deep amount of chaos over this. They dont even have the technology to enforce it. What they are basically saying is that they are going to force you to associate your hardware wallet with an identity if you want to use it to receive funds from any FATF country regulated exchange, which is basically every meaningful country on the planet. That's not safe, and that's not what crypto was meant for. If you can identify cold wallets you can track people. The travel rule applied to crypto i calamitous. And people who rely on anonymous exchanges like me are deeply in trouble. Most of these exchanges won't even accept americans.
what's your source for this stuff? i've seen very little information about the G20 crypto discussions. all i've heard is they are taking cues from japan re regulations, which is bad news as it is.
People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
which court would that be?
I am really shocked at how little this is being spoken about online. There's going to be a deep amount of chaos over this. They dont even have the technology to enforce it. What they are basically saying is that they are going to force you to associate your hardware wallet with an identity if you want to use it to receive funds from any FATF country regulated exchange, which is basically every meaningful country on the planet. That's not safe, and that's not what crypto was meant for. If you can identify cold wallets you can track people. The travel rule applied to crypto i calamitous. And people who rely on anonymous exchanges like me are deeply in trouble. Most of these exchanges won't even accept americans.
People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
People need to sue the government. This is supreme court international court level stuff, this has to be contested in court.
Jump to: