which is why you people need to stop demonzing bitmex. You don't understand how dangerous these laws are and how dangerous and shitty and anti poor the american exchanges are. They arbitrarily demand exorbant amounts of financial information all the time. Most of us can only prove our income with our exchange trading history that is it. I have no tax history, no tax information, no employer, nothing.
Centralized exchanges are a scam. The Ren VM tools need to hit main net, and people need to start building a fully functional decentralized derivative exchange with no central server or liquidity provider and put an end to this crap.
Topic: How long realistically before global mandatory kyc on all exchange/VASP? (Read 451 times)
July 07, 2019, 12:00:53 PM
July 07, 2019, 11:23:30 AM
The question is will paying for tracing every single customer out of for instance 100k people is going to be worth it for the exchange. They will probably limit the screening to whales, but still CipherTrace won't do a thousand traces a day for cheap.
As for Gemini there are stories about them circulating on the forums. For instance, they tend to lock your account and demand a pay slip from your job to unlock it. Imagine that! Like what would that prove if? Say I'm selling 10k worth of crypto every month, but I'm earning 1k a month at my day job. How does that help them establish if I could or couldn't have that specific number of coins. I personally know an unemployed guy with over 10 BTC stashed away. They'd probably lock him forever on Gemini for money laundering.
As for Gemini there are stories about them circulating on the forums. For instance, they tend to lock your account and demand a pay slip from your job to unlock it. Imagine that! Like what would that prove if? Say I'm selling 10k worth of crypto every month, but I'm earning 1k a month at my day job. How does that help them establish if I could or couldn't have that specific number of coins. I personally know an unemployed guy with over 10 BTC stashed away. They'd probably lock him forever on Gemini for money laundering.
July 01, 2019, 05:15:00 PM
Is this even possible and/or worth the time and money put into retracing transactions? Even if they (in general) agree to not receive transfers from non-compliant exchanges, how much effort will they put into it.
They just hire a company like CipherTrace to do it. I don't think it'll cost them much beyond what they're already paying for.
They already analyze customer transactions -- both in and out -- to identify transfers to/from casinos and sportsbooks, and they terminate accounts over it. This is to comply with the Wire Act and UIGEA. They are prohibited from transferring money to/from gambling businesses on behalf of customers.
I guess we need to wait and see what national regulations look like before making any assumptions.
What will happen if somebody sends money to a third party first and then to the exchange, or sends money from a casino, or from a mixer?
It's going to be one of those laws people agree to obey and then they don't like speed limits and no parking signs.
It's going to be one of those laws people agree to obey and then they don't like speed limits and no parking signs.
It's becoming increasingly common for exchanges to hold funds hostage and demand proof showing the source of funds.
To use Gemini as an example again, it's against their terms to send them coins from a mixer or a casino. They'll terminate your account over it. I hope they send your money back too.
July 01, 2019, 03:24:39 PM
Very true. I was initially under the impression that compliance was pretty widespread. It's the opposite really. Many dozens of monitored countries fail to implement the majority of FATF rules. This is decades after these standards were initially put in place. Often times, a mere pledge by a country to work towards implementing some of the standards is enough to stave off FATF pressure for years.
That means we'll probably see non-compliant exchanges persist for many years. My biggest concern is how compliant exchanges will interface with customers who send coins from non-compliant exchanges.
Let's say BitMEX continues their no-KYC policies in the face of these rules. What happens when you send a few bitcoins from your BitMEX account to your Gemini account? Will Gemini close your account? Seems possible to me.
Is this even possible and/or worth the time and money put into retracing transactions? Even if they (in general) agree to not receive transfers from non-compliant exchanges, how much effort will they put into it. Probably not much because time and effort = money. Who's going to pay them to retrace millions of transactions back to their origin and sending transactions back? What will happen if somebody sends money to a third party first and then to the exchange, or sends money from a casino, or from a mixer?
It's going to be one of those laws people agree to obey and then they don't like speed limits and no parking signs.
June 30, 2019, 05:29:36 PM
FATF rules aren't accepted all around the world. Even within the EU some countries do not participate in this "project" so it's not the end of the world yet.
Very true. I was initially under the impression that compliance was pretty widespread. It's the opposite really. Many dozens of monitored countries fail to implement the majority of FATF rules. This is decades after these standards were initially put in place. Often times, a mere pledge by a country to work towards implementing some of the standards is enough to stave off FATF pressure for years.
That means we'll probably see non-compliant exchanges persist for many years. My biggest concern is how compliant exchanges will interface with customers who send coins from non-compliant exchanges.
Let's say BitMEX continues their no-KYC policies in the face of these rules. What happens when you send a few bitcoins from your BitMEX account to your Gemini account? Will Gemini close your account? Seems possible to me.
June 30, 2019, 09:40:50 AM
FATF rules aren't accepted all around the world. Even within the EU some countries do not participate in this "project" so it's not the end of the world yet. That said, it won't be long until all exchanges fall and you'll have to use cash to remain semi-anonymous and even that will come to an end with the ideas of cashless society that more and more countries are supporting. Denmark is one of one of the current leaders when it comes to going cashless.
June 29, 2019, 11:51:23 AM
The big question then becomes, how will highly compliant and tightly regulated exchanges (like Gemini) deal with noncompliant exchanges? Will they close your account for depositing coins from them? Gemini already prohibits mixing services, for example.
Reading FATF recommendations, if I'm not wrong, it looks like you'll only be able to withdraw your coins to whitelisted exchanges/services (those who would closely participate in exchanging information). Same goes for depositing, if the coins don't come from an approved source you won't be able to use that exchange.
Even shitcoin exchanges like bittrex are now asking for proof of funds & relevant documentation:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bittrex-account-disabled-5157078
June 27, 2019, 03:11:41 PM
If you believe you will find any problems on such exchanges don't keep your fund on that first. KYC is a mandatory for many exchanges reason days many crypto users does not like to to share their information for using other services.
define any exchanges without KYC policy you could have tried to avoid the hassles.
define any exchanges without KYC policy you could have tried to avoid the hassles.
June 27, 2019, 03:07:39 AM
If we are talking about laws then this might take a while because international laws are just some kind of set standard where the country still has some choice to follow the rest or not, still domestic laws are what most follow if we are only talking about that certain country.
The FATF expects countries to begin implementing domestic laws within a year. They'll be reviewing compliance in June 2020. The G20 countries already pledged to implement the rules, so we'll probably see most of them passing laws -- or at least in the process of it -- by then.
Most monitored countries are still noncompliant with existing FATF rules, though. So there will probably be plenty of places where non-KYC exchanges can still set up shop.
The big question then becomes, how will highly compliant and tightly regulated exchanges (like Gemini) deal with noncompliant exchanges? Will they close your account for depositing coins from them? Gemini already prohibits mixing services, for example.
June 26, 2019, 06:59:22 PM
Despite all the talks of global regulation, I also highly doubt that one uniform set of restrictions can be put in place against crypto exchanges per se. Unregulated exchanges, as mentioned above, should always exist.
Unregulated exchanges are always going to exist for sure, but I also expect them to get targeted by regulators once they get large enough. They're also likely going to be ignored by the general public (who view regulations as protection) and would need to cater to a niche audience.
You raise a very good point.
It'll be a long way to go before any DEXs will fulfill the functions of a centralised exchange, in my opinion, which is why I think that if regulations do tighten in the future, the default thing that people are going to do is to go to newer exchanges that are willing to potentially operate unregulated.
Of course, eventually we'll see them succumb to regulations, if global mandatory KYC was ever going to be a thing. But I think that the profit margins for a new exchange will incentivise a lot of them to pop up so that there will never be a concern where you can't buy BTC without KYC as a consumer, if you are willing to carry a certain amount of risk.
June 26, 2019, 01:43:49 PM
If we are talking about laws then this might take a while because international laws are just some kind of set standard where the country still has some choice to follow the rest or not, still domestic laws are what most follow if we are only talking about that certain country. The tricky part here is if this KYC requirement was passed into law then all the local exchanges that operate internationally might as well require all their users to have KYC which will obviously affect as all.
June 24, 2019, 09:17:38 PM
Despite all the talks of global regulation, I also highly doubt that one uniform set of restrictions can be put in place against crypto exchanges per se. Unregulated exchanges, as mentioned above, should always exist.
They won't necessarily be uniform, but restrictions could be similar, a la global banking. I expect regulation to reach every country eventually, but considering crypto's small size, it'll happen much sooner on certain jurisdictions as others have more pressing issues to prioritize. Exchanges could, in the meantime, choose to set up shop in these places to avoid (or at least postpone getting hit by) the wave.
Unregulated exchanges are always going to exist for sure, but I also expect them to get targeted by regulators once they get large enough. They're also likely going to be ignored by the general public (who view regulations as protection) and would need to cater to a niche audience.
June 24, 2019, 08:50:45 PM
It's unlikely to become a global phenomenon, in my opinion, because of the fact that countries such as Japan, Malta, etc. now have somewhat of a vested interest when it comes to regulating bitcoin businesses positively, because they're actively gaining revenue from these activities and firms.
Japan is a member of the G20. All G20 members have already pledged to implement the recently published FATF rules.
Why do people think Japanese regulation is so great anyway? The FSA has been clamping down on privacy coins as a requisite for licensing, and their self-regulatory agency is prohibiting exchanges from listing them. Now they are taking things even further with new nanny state regulations:
Quote
Further, any company even storing cryptocurrency will be considered a “cryptographic asset exchange” and thus required to register and maintain what experts believe will be an expensive license.
“Smaller companies will need abundant funds if more stringent management systems are required. It may be impossible to maintain existing business unless it changes,” said Masahiro Yasu, CEO of ALIS, token-based social media system that will be affected by the change.
The new law, which had been in the works for months, will also limit margin trading in cryptocurrency.
“Smaller companies will need abundant funds if more stringent management systems are required. It may be impossible to maintain existing business unless it changes,” said Masahiro Yasu, CEO of ALIS, token-based social media system that will be affected by the change.
The new law, which had been in the works for months, will also limit margin trading in cryptocurrency.
June 24, 2019, 03:33:09 PM
Bitseven just pulled the plug on US residents today.
Things seem to be moving fast. I fear the days on bitmex, bybit etc are numbered.
What could Arther possibly do to stop this, what real recourse does he have? I'm sure he has a few tricks to stall. But I'm sure the other small exchange will buckle and comply.
I don't think anyon truly understands how incredibly few options American's have to buy crypto and the type and leverage etc. Regulators are breakin our legs. Total madness, makes me regret that I don't have close canadian family or friends, I'd use their kyc in a heartbeat.
Things seem to be moving fast. I fear the days on bitmex, bybit etc are numbered.
What could Arther possibly do to stop this, what real recourse does he have? I'm sure he has a few tricks to stall. But I'm sure the other small exchange will buckle and comply.
I don't think anyon truly understands how incredibly few options American's have to buy crypto and the type and leverage etc. Regulators are breakin our legs. Total madness, makes me regret that I don't have close canadian family or friends, I'd use their kyc in a heartbeat.
I think that the trend right now is really something that is US-based, with so many exchanges seemingly closing their doors on US residents.
It's unlikely to become a global phenomenon, in my opinion, because of the fact that countries such as Japan, Malta, etc. now have somewhat of a vested interest when it comes to regulating bitcoin businesses positively, because they're actively gaining revenue from these activities and firms.
Despite all the talks of global regulation, I also highly doubt that one uniform set of restrictions can be put in place against crypto exchanges per se. Unregulated exchanges, as mentioned above, should always exist.
June 21, 2019, 01:16:12 AM
it'd be awesome if some crypto-only exchanges gave the finger to these rules. since they don't even need transmit fiat to/from customers, it might even be sustainable for a while. but this would definitely move services like bitmex from the "grey market" to the "black market" because if history is any indicator, most of the world will be enforcing these rules within a couple years. exchanges won't be able to keep running to new jurisdictions for long.
June 20, 2019, 04:31:57 PM
Yup, it was rebranded as Coinbase Pro but totally different in terms of rules and ToS. I wish they bring that back, or at least get a working DEX which everyone can use freely without having to submit lousy KYC to regulators and exchange operators every so often.
I don't think the right course of action is to see centralized exchanges set up decentralized exchanges, because it counters their main business and for that reason will end up being similar to BinanceDEX.People have been hyping up Binance DEX for a long time now (very likely because they own BNB and think it will go up), but for people watching from a distance not being biased it's clear that it isn't a decentralized exchange at all.
If decentralized exchanges will be a thing of the future, the last thing we need is to have centralized exchanges get into it. The sole reason decentralized exchanges are needed is because to no longer deal with them.
June 20, 2019, 12:09:24 PM
They're creating it to presumably be fully US compliant and as this thread ably demonstrates the US doesn't want people playing with margin unless they're big swinging dicks.
This is true. For the most part they'd side on those who can do big favors for them and not really the average Joes who don't have deep pockets on them. The rich always gets the exception for silly rules applied to all who can't afford to be in the 1%, and that's just saddening.
The very short lived gdax margin trading was for institutions and stuff only.
Yup, it was rebranded as Coinbase Pro but totally different in terms of rules and ToS. I wish they bring that back, or at least get a working DEX which everyone can use freely without having to submit lousy KYC to regulators and exchange operators every so often.
June 20, 2019, 04:23:04 AM
they've been known to liquidate positions and terminate accounts over logging in from the USA, but i've never heard of them confiscating deposits over it. americans should definitely limit the funds they keep there, but for many of us it's a risk worth taking.
I'm not saying they'll deprive you of your money. You may find yourself cut off with some sort of open position that winds up getting screwed though. I dunno what their process is. I'm sure they're still infested with Americans and they know it.
June 20, 2019, 03:18:17 AM
there seems to be a consensus that codification of the local laws (and taking effect) will take some time---some months at least. at the same time, we're seeing exchanges prepare for the inevitable. one government (lithuania) has already passed legislation reflecting the new FATF rules even before they've officially been published.
they've been known to liquidate positions and terminate accounts over logging in from the USA, but i've never heard of them confiscating deposits over it. americans should definitely limit the funds they keep there, but for many of us it's a risk worth taking.
I do hope you don't have any money on Bitmex because it's been shut for Americans for ages. Presumably you're accessing through a VPN. Make sure you don't slip up.
they've been known to liquidate positions and terminate accounts over logging in from the USA, but i've never heard of them confiscating deposits over it. americans should definitely limit the funds they keep there, but for many of us it's a risk worth taking.
June 19, 2019, 09:40:24 PM
I think that there will always be certain platforms that are unregulated
Yobit and the rest of the shitcoin exchanges will happily continue to offer their services to anyone without holding back. The more competent exchanges start to comply with regulations, the more Yobit will benefit. I doubt they will grow out to such size where they become interesting for authorities to chase after. Yobit will continue to have an easy ride.
Too bad Yobit is a shady entity. If they behaved normal I actually would support them to stay unregulated. It's always good to have a non-kyc exchange where you can dump your forks and airdrops without hassle.
Unfortunately, unregulated exchanges I think will always have this notion of them being shady associated with their platform, and a lot of that will be of good reason. So you're definitely right in that regard.
However, p2p trading I think will continue to go on, independent of even unregulated exchanges. And I doubt that for their own profitability, all of these p2p platforms will be willing to comply with the standards of a regulated exchange.
I think we'll see the trend continue where smaller exchanges get popular because of the fact that they accept anonymous accounts, and then once they reach a certain size of operation, they are forced into offering KYC. But there is also a possibility that countries like Malta will offer a safe haven for services which do not want to do KYC, which it is already doing on a small-medium scale.
Jump to: