Topic: Know Your Customer - page 2. (Read 5806 times)

but there are also many bitcoiners who don't like libracoin, because it's not entirely decentralized, but libra is carried by large companies, and I think the government is more in agreement with the centralized system as it is now, because they can control it. in essence, many bitcoiners do not want their identities known

Read the whole post again, I am sure you missed the point that I was trying to make there. What you have quoted is just the intro to my post and I was just trying to outline what I thought was the problem with KYC in crypto before I read more into the subject and grasped the gist of it. Re-read I am sure it's all there!

I don't know if the words partial anynomous is the right term, when I believe it's anonymous, it should be fully anonymous and if it's not, it should be not.
Bitcoin IMO is not anonymous because we are require KYC when we exchange this in exchanges.

Most exchanges now requires already KYC and those exchanges that are reputable are all requiring KYC, maybe depending on the limit of your transaction, like Binance, they allow you to trade even without KYC but with limitations and for me that is not safe in the even the site will be compromise and the 3rd party will handle the liquidation.

not all cryptos mate . there are cryptos that are not anonymous while most are just partial anymous like for example btc . its still possible for someone to track you and know your balance or your name by using an explorer   .

when it comes to kyc , you dont really need to do a kyc before you can trade because there are those decentalize exchangers that you can use and there are some centralized exchange that dont require a kyc  .

It used to boggle my mind why we should do KYC to trading on cryptocurrency exchanges given the fact that crypto came about out of the need for people yearning to stay anonymous from governmental financial tracking of transactions online. But then for exchanges to conform to regulations in countries where they operate it seems like they cannot do without KYC especially where the movement of large sums of money are involved.
KYC (Know Your Customer) refers to a process that banks and other financial institutions use to gather identifying data and contact information from current and potential customers. Its purpose is to prevent fraud, money laundering, and other illicit activity, as well as the misuse of financial accounts.

As for the benefits of KYC to crypto, KYC helps in reducing and eliminating money laundering and financial fraud, remember Silk road. Also, there are fears around the world especially in security circles that funds moved and exchanging hands anonymously can end up being used to finance terrorism and extremism activities.

BUT if one wishes for ways to circumvent KYC, you can diversify your portfolio of crypto holdings to different exchanges. That is, if you’re not comfortable to give away your KYC data to any exchange, the solution is for you to separate your funds into different exchanges. This is possible because most exchanges provide daily 2 BTC withdrawal for non-KYC users

Also as a rule of thumb, you don’t want to keep all your eggs in one basket. (Even if the basket is the BIGGEST baskets in the world  Binance) That’s another reason for you to separate your portfolio into different exchanges.

Now similar regulation is introduced in many countries. The libra can be the perfect kind of money, fully traceable, fully controlled. It will be possible to "disconnect" entire regions thanks to the libra.
If she can gain due influence in the money market.

Of course, we are approaching the universal regulation of cryptocurrency and this process will be accompanied by a partial loss of anonymity of its users. Judging by the fact that according to the FATF recommendations of June 21 of this year, only for transactions worth more than one thousand dollars, the owners of the cryptocurrency will have to be verified, then we have a chance to remain anonymous in transactions for small amounts, as well as in transactions for any amounts between by individuals.

Most of the countries are not allowed the transaction of btc and crypto .I think there is nothing illegal on any transaction or KYC if its not regulated by the government .Its everything depend on the law of thus country.

Apart from that, many crypto companies want to know some information about their customers in order to make plans and design their future strategies.
Demographics and preferences are some of those factors that push Know your Customer functionality to be a must for their operations.

That is the main purpose of KYC. I don't have also a problem that since it can be a regulatory of every project or exchange. They just want to avoid money laundering acts. But then, the security of the people in the scam projects have been risking here also. That is why there are people like me that don't want to pass any identity.

It is our responsibility to check the integrity of the site where we are submitting our personal information. Because we never know where will it end up with. So whatever might be the repercussions of what we are doing, it is our own fault.

i think if you make transaction with high number, they will report to the party concern like government.
kyc need to know who you are, so when you try send big number that its from bad thing, it wil fair to keep between crypto and government. kyc needed for this bad thing.
the point, if you are ordinary people, its just ok to send high number.

In general, these arguments are correct. Only the numbers will be slightly different. On June 21, the Intergovernmental Organization for Financial Action (FATF) adopted recommendations according to which everyone who sends or receives transactions worth more than one thousand dollars will be forced to pass a verification, and if the amount exceeds, it seems, $ 15,000, then all such Exchange transactions must be reported to the appropriate state authorities. In my opinion, the conditions are quite acceptable.

I very much doubt that ICO teams pass on confidential information collected as a result of KYC audits to governments, because this activity is not yet regulated and there is no such procedure. However, due to the abuses of KYC checks and a high level of fraud, trust in ICO projects has dramatically decreased. Recently, the FATF task force decided to conduct ICO checks only in the case of transactions in excess of one thousand dollars. I think such a decision is not bad and that it will apply to the activities of ICO.

I think that the ICO teams do not transfer the collected confidential information to anyone. This measure is most likely preventive. Information should be sent only at the request of interested authorized state bodies. However, no one really knows on the basis of which regulations and which countries the ICO teams collect this information. I think that the ICO teams themselves, which assemble it, cannot say the same. Presumably, this is the US SEC. However, what it says and whether KYC bounty hunters are subject to verification is a very big secret that no ICO team has yet wanted to disclose. They demand confidential information from participants of the ICO bounty campaigns, but on the basis of what document they do it, they never respond. Judging by the fact that conducting an audit of KYC in relation to participants of ICO bounty campaigns is contrary to the objectives and meaning of this audit, it is conducted illegally.

Most the time the KYC data that they collect from people is so that the government will be able to tax the customers according to their transactions, i know that in the USA, crypto transactions are taxed accordingly.

There's always pros and cons but we always needs to weight in and balance the benefits, without government interference the doubts and fear coming from larger investment society will be less interested those big businesses will always needs assurances, with some good ruling body they will get support just in case hacks or scammed happened to their investment,.

feel free when there is no substance from the government. because that means we are tax free. but without a government presence it certainly makes the development of bitcoin less good.

I am in a country where crypto regulation is not yet comprehensive, I don't pay taxes as well and I call this an incentive for being early in the space.
Some countries especially where the big investors are coming may have properly regulated crypto already, and our country will certainly follow.
For now, it's good to enjoy income that is tax free without the fear of facing the consequences of tax evasion.

In most of the countries including mine bitcoin is not legal nor illegal. People are using bitcoin privately as there is no certain substance on it by the government. Since government is also unclear about it whether to accept it or not, no one pay taxes on bitcoins. I think sooner or later every government will regulate crypto currencies.