Topic: I am pretty confident we are the new wealthy elite, gentlemen. - page 140. (Read 631983 times)

sad days when people are too scared of their govt. to trade a few bits of harmless electronic data between them without threat of jail time ... is it really this bad?

Thanks for comment lyth0s... again I'm just researching this info for specifics -- my understanding is $2999 maximum per person per day OR LOWER would be adequate compliance with these FINCEN laws (i.e. if a localbitcoins trader stays under this, they're prolly okay?  Would going OVER this constitute what you're loosely referring to here as "a lot"... and conversely staying below this would be "not a lot"...?)

But, again, does anyone have a SPECIFIC case or cases, already prosecuted and convicted, where someone HAS in fact been "nailed to the wall" precisely for this scenario, OR is this just an assumption on the part of most (prudent? cautious? or paranoid?) people here, who've considered this situation and are just ASSUMING this is what the "authorities" will do...?

To the IRS Bitcoin is a commodity. To the rest of the government it is potentially a money and thus you would not be protected by stating that you are simply selling a commodity. If you are going to be exchanging a lot of bitcoins/USD you really need a money transmitting license and you WILL need to comply with KYC-AML laws otherwise they will nail you to the wall, if for nothing else but to make an example of you.

It's not worth jail time. Just don't do it, and if you're going to do it, make sure its on a very small scale and with trustworthy people. IE selling a few coins to a friend probably won't land you in a federal prison

Hi QuestionAuthority,

Thanks for posting, I've actually been researching this lately and would like to know more specifics IF you have details??

In particular, it's been my understanding (so far) that selling bitcoin in a direct person to person transfer (i.e. the proverbial meeting at Starbucks to exchange BTC for fiat) does NOT qualify as "money transmitting" under the law, for two primary reasons:

1. There is no "third party" involved who is "temporarily holding" the funds on behalf of the exchanging parties (i.e. as in Western Union)
2. Bitcoin is considered (by IRS for example) to be a commodity, or "value store" like maybe a gold coin or rare baseball card

Of these two, it's the first one that seems stronger to me. 

The asset in this case (bitcoin) is being simply handed over (albeit electronically) from one person to another, same way you might hand over the gold coin or baseball card DIRECTLY to the buyer, who is standing right in front of you there in the Starbucks.

Then, he hands you the fiat currency as payment.

There's no third party involved here, which appears is necessary (to me?) for the "money transmitter" element.

Of course, there IS the total bitcoin network but it's not quite the same thing: even ON the bitcoin network, this "asset" is immediately placed into the direct control of ONE party to the OTHER party (i.e. wallet to wallet, so again, no third party).

Again, if this is not correct in your understanding and selling bitcoin for cash person to person really DOES qualify under this law, I'd like to hear more specifically exactly WHY you say so (and please cite existing cases, prosecutions, etc... if they exist... and please NOT just that one arrest of that guy in Florida, i.e. the single instance LocalBitcoins.com case, that's already well known...

I know it now.

Not everyone knows that, which is why people need to care more

Snowden is right on par with MLK. Everybody knows that already. In which way should we "care" more?

HDBuck:    I realize that you are trying to maintain the image that you are NOT influenced by my prophetic posts, but really, dude, you stole all my idears, in your post.      I don't mind though, because I am a kind of charitable and sharing guy..    I cannot help myself like that.  

Snowden is a freakin hero, yet it seems no one really care.. blind sheeps in their consumerism prison, letting murica behave as they always do, bombing and comploting to rule (enslave) the world.

Pretty big personal sacrifice for Snowden to leak that information in order to shed light on some of the down and dirty of the government's actions.  Very rare person would be willing to make such an individual sacrifice.    One question remains, too, about whether we are better off as a society by knowing these kinds of things regarding governmental actions and the use of technology?  I am fairly certain that people wonder how secure that they are in their internet life, including bitcoin transactions, if the government has the potential ability to engage in ongoing monitoring of transactions... and we may NOT even know it.. and we may be an innocent target or we may be a fall guy because there could be guilt by association or guilt because we thought that we had free speech but we supported the wrong cause.. or we spoke up regarding governmental actions that we thought were misleading the people.  NOT easy to fairly effectively shed light on the underlying nefarious conduct that may be occurring by people who were elected or people who were appointed or people who were contracted out to carry out duties that were supposedly on behalf of "the people."

cheap coins now just buy BTC with free cash and wait a year or so

Bill Maher is a comic who says marxist ideas to make tens of millions of dollars a year, be loved and connected; snowden scarified everything for its beliefs but he may have broke the law doing so

Bill Maher questions authority. Edward Snowden breaks the law and gives up his life to question authority. I believe in people banding together to make change happen not vigilante crusades by single individuals that act unilaterally on my behalf. If you want to be a prison martyr go right ahead. Charlie Shrem decided against that idea when he made his plea deal and it was the right decision.

Well, this makes sense.

It's the basic principle of justice, actually.

Not sure how it is related to the posts you quoted, though.

Remember that kid in grade school who would get caught doing something then would immediately start naming all the other people who hadn't been caught to get them in trouble too?

Apparently most adults never emotionally mature beyond the grade school level, or at least enough of them don't that the feds can count on somebody complaining about the people exchanging BTC for USD in a Starbucks to give them an excuse to take action.

http://contrariancompliance.com/2014/09/19/us-money-transmission-laws-are-worthless-and-unconstitutional/

Wishful thinking.

You're eventually going to get caught and prosecuted for money laundering and unlicensed money transmitting. I hope you're not in the US.

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/bsa/title18b.html
[/quote]

Meh.  The Feds only care about the big guys.  Those they'll notice and regulate.  They won't bother with the guys exchanging BTC for USD in a Starbucks.

Sometimes when you question authority the answer is "no"

And your name is QuestionAuthority?

You're eventually going to get caught and prosecuted for money laundering and unlicensed money transmitting. I hope you're not in the US.

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/bsa/title18b.html