Topic: Privacy coins meeting regulations (Read 188 times)
governments can not decide on all privacy coins or change them, because they are decentralized currencies. the only thing governments can do is ban the trade in their land with privacy coins and exchanges must be comfortable with that if they come from the same country. only in this way can governments influence a decentralized cryptocurrencie.
Well if all governments will want to stop using privacy coins is their choice and we have to stop using them and they will do anything to close the privacy blockchain if the devs of coins not do what they will ask.
the governments are not going to fly with privacy coins without compliance so idk how they are going to work around that.
And again, the truth is that they won't be able to regulate this coins since they are built on the blockchain, the faster they understand this, the better for them, though some persons will say it is possible to regulate this coin via exchanges forgetting that it's not only on exchange one can keep his/her coins.I personally store my coins on hardware and paper wallet, that way no government would be able to trace any transaction I carry out, especially when I make use of privacy coin, so they are handicap at this point.
the governments are not going to fly with privacy coins without compliance so idk how they are going to work around that.
Yep, so many governments still worried about the privacy coins going to have released and published in here.
They can try to regulate them, mainly by imposing regulations on the exchanges. They can't do anything if individuals want to transact among themselves provided that the privacy coin in question is truly private and decentralized. But at the point where you want to convert your privacy coins to paper money, they can and most certainly will regulate. Regulations of this type can probably lose their meaning in the future when more and more goods and services start to be offered for crypto.
Probably they will stay out of regulations , but still run behind the scenes . There is alot of people that use them , im not one of them as i don't use privacy coins , because got nothing to hide . Atleast for now =D
Regulating privacy coin? This will be difficult to achieve. If this happens then they are no longer privacy coins. What I prefer is a documented profile of each cryptocurrency with the regulatory bodies. It will offer confidence to the investors and cryptocurrency community at laefe
LOL, privacy coin doesn't need regulation. In the first place, it is just between the sender and the receive of privacy coin.
Regulation will require some identity database, which will erase the value of 'Privacy' of the coin.
This is going too far i think, and the regulated privacy coin might be abandoned by peoples later.
Regulation will require some identity database, which will erase the value of 'Privacy' of the coin.
This is going too far i think, and the regulated privacy coin might be abandoned by peoples later.
that is a big load of nonsense. you can NOT regulate ANY cryptocurrency as long as the cryptocurrency is decentralized. it doesn't matter if they are anonymity oriented coins like Monero or non anonymity oriented like bitcoin. it doesn't matter how much they try and push for it, they will never be able to do it.
the only thing they can do is force exchanges and other centralized services like payment processors, web wallets, centralized merchants,... to enforce some silly rules nothing more.
the only thing they can do is force exchanges and other centralized services like payment processors, web wallets, centralized merchants,... to enforce some silly rules nothing more.
These technologies need to be regulated such that the transfer in and out from VASPs requires beneficiary information or originator information to be accessible to the VASP. If this information cannot be analyzed for deeper inspection as to the true origin (in the case when an intermediate address is used to hide the true origin of the funds), then the funds should be frozen.
They want far too much.
In the same way one is allowed to deposit or withdraw fiat to/from the bank (you know, that paper stuff nobody knows where you have it from or what are you planning to do with it), privacy coins should be allowed.
Of course, for bigger amounts (I don't know what are the banking limits), questions have to be asked/answered, in the same way as for fiat.
Of course, the businesses doing this will have to ask thorough KYC details from their customers.
But that's all. Going beyond this is against the right for property and it's discriminatory too.
I think that what will most likely happen is that regulated VASP's like exchanges will be told at some point that coins that anonymise transactions are not compliant with the regulations and can't be traded. Trading in privacy coins will move to some place beyond the reach of regulators. It just shows that the answers about cryptocurrency regulation are still being made up as we go along.
the governments are not going to fly with privacy coins without compliance so idk how they are going to work around that.
After following the FATF standards and reading different reactions of regulations I start questioning what privacy coins are going to do if they can't meet regulations.
Ciphertrace which is a cyber security firm that focuses on AML stated this response which I figured might happen:
"The ability to discern receiving addresses for funds transfers should apply to privacy-oriented cryptocurrencies such as Monero, Dash, Zcash and MimbleWimble. These technologies need to be regulated such that the transfer in and out from VASPs requires beneficiary information or originator information to be accessible to the VASP. If this information cannot be analyzed for deeper inspection as to the true origin (in the case when an intermediate address is used to hide the true origin of the funds), then the funds should be frozen."
thoughts?
https://ciphertrace.com/response-to-fatf-on-vasp-regulation/
Ciphertrace which is a cyber security firm that focuses on AML stated this response which I figured might happen:
"The ability to discern receiving addresses for funds transfers should apply to privacy-oriented cryptocurrencies such as Monero, Dash, Zcash and MimbleWimble. These technologies need to be regulated such that the transfer in and out from VASPs requires beneficiary information or originator information to be accessible to the VASP. If this information cannot be analyzed for deeper inspection as to the true origin (in the case when an intermediate address is used to hide the true origin of the funds), then the funds should be frozen."
thoughts?
https://ciphertrace.com/response-to-fatf-on-vasp-regulation/
Jump to: