The Rock CFO posted this on an italian thread:
Si ma con riserva. Ad esempio, nel caso specifico della Signora, avendo convertito in euro seppur non prelevando, è diventata in automatico una "convertitrice di valuta" (il termine non è farina del mio sacco) quindi, deve fare KYC/AML. In ogni caso, stiamo evolvendo il sistema in previsione della V direttiva AML, peraltro già anticipata dal MEF, dove, anche chi tratta solo crypto, dovrà fare KYC/AML.
Per questo, per chi vuole restare nell'anonimato, sconsigliamo di utilizzare qualsiasi exchange che operi in Europa.
English translation:
For example, in the specific case of the Lady, having converted to euros even if not withdrawing, it has become automatically a "currency converter" (the term is not my bag's flour) therefore, must do KYC / AML. In any case, we are evolving the system in anticipation of the V AML directive, which is already anticipated by the MEF, where even those who deal only with crypto will have to do KYC / AML.
For this reason, for those who want to remain anonymous, we advise against using any exchange that operates in Europe.
This means 2 things:
I)
Everytime he has been invoking the V european directive on AML (the 4th directive says nothing about crypto currencies), he did that with full knowledge that the directive wasn't in force in Italy because Italy hasn't adopted it yet. I told him this months ago. So, he was lying again. Under article 4, number 1 of the V AML Directive: "Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 10 January 2020".
It's a lie that Italian Law has changed since 2017. On duties of KYC, Legislative Decree No. 231/2007, as emended by Legislative Decree No. 90 of 25 May 2017, on AML and KYC duties, article 3, n.º 5, i), says that crypto exchanges are restrictively ("limitatamente") subject to this duties only on their operations of conversion from crypto to fiat.
They changed their TOS on Aprill 2018, when they moved back to Italy, after the approval of decreto legislativo 90/2017, but they kept the same rules on KYC, including the quoted FAQ. And that was accepted by the italian authorities, so their current TOS/FAQ respects italian Law.II)
If he says he is acting under the directive and not under their TOS/FAQ he is confessing what is obvious: he is acting in violation of their own TOS/FAQ. He can evolve his "system" according to the Directive, but since the directive isn't binding in Italy, he has first to change their TOS/FAQ and then he has to make me accept that change (this won't ever happen).Even if he managed to do this, he couldn't apply this change to his past acts, including the ones done to me since December 2017!
In any case, they will have to answer for those acts done in violation of his TOS/FAQ and italian law.
This isn't only a question of Law, it's also a question of basic morality.
He wrote on his own FAQ that verification isn't obligatory if the customer don't want to withdraw fiat but he just wrote on an open forum, in front of all their customers, that any customer who trades fiat is subject to a block of his money and blackmailed to send personal documents.
He is revealing that he doesn't have the slightest care for respecting his own published word on his TOS/FAQ, invoking arbitrarily a Directive that isn't applicable until converted to Italian Law.
And there is no anonymity. The complaint to the Arbitrator has the personal details backed by documents. And will receive more if he requests.