On June 21st 2019, the FATF presented the finalized version of governing provisions for the crypto industry. The document obligates bitcoin exchanges and other “virtual asset service providers” to comply with AML and CFT procedures similarly to traditional financial companies.
At the G20 summit in Osaka, member states endorsed those recommendations, thus formally starting the process of development of regulatory frameworks that agree with them.
While most proponents of cryptocurrencies were all for introducing proper regulation, it seemed that they should have been more careful with what they wished for. When the final recommendations have been released, it came as a shock to lots of people in the industry.
https://forklog.media/playing-gotcha-with-regulators-or-what-do-fatf-recommendations-mean-for-crypto-industry/
At the G20 summit in Osaka, member states endorsed those recommendations, thus formally starting the process of development of regulatory frameworks that agree with them.
While most proponents of cryptocurrencies were all for introducing proper regulation, it seemed that they should have been more careful with what they wished for. When the final recommendations have been released, it came as a shock to lots of people in the industry.
https://forklog.media/playing-gotcha-with-regulators-or-what-do-fatf-recommendations-mean-for-crypto-industry/
And there are many uncertain things still, because theoretically in accordance to the travel rule, if you send cryptocurrencies from your private wallet to another person (for value over $1000), both sending and receiving party should be verified.
With banks it is pretty easy (you open bank account giving your personal data, including ID) - but what about wallets? How can it be checked straight away that the receiving wallet does not belong to a person living in North Korea or Iran (countries banned under travel rule)?
There are many elements like that, which fit and work well for traditional banking system, but not really with blockchain.