OK, I'm trying hard to understand how an individual who uses bitcoin as it is designed would be able to treat it as a capital asset (although I'm also interested in how multiple people can feel comfortable suggesting treating it as a capital asset based on how it is designed regardless of how an individual uses it [preferrably beyond clinging to a few loosely defined words like "financial institution" or referencing court decisions from presumably local {presumably non-federal, possibly even non-tax, though I didn't attempt to look up the case referenced by steverabincpa} jurisdictions]).
In addition to trying to give me a solid argument for why bitcoin would be a capital asset for individuals, can someone take a swing at the following?
Juan bought a car for $1500 in 2011. In 2013, he sold it for 5 BTC when BTC were trading at $100. My understanding is that personal assets aren't treated as capital, meaning there is no capital loss (long term or otherwise) to claim here (which would also be the case if he had actually sold the car for $500). However, there is no income to claim, either, because he did not receieve more than he paid for the personal asset.
Please correct me if I'm wrong on anything about personal assets (and point me at the appropriate documentation to back up the correction). Assuming I'm not, how would bitcoin be any different since it isn't defined as a regulated security?
Now, to complicate the scenario (in case someone wants to suggest that Juan should treat BTC as nonfunctional currency while Pablo can still treat it as capital because Pablo bought BTC as an investment), let's add this to the equation:
Juan also bought 10 BTC for a net $300 expense in 2011 as an investment. Juan has actual stock market assets as well and uses the FIFO lot tracking method (so he's already using form 8949 and schedule D), and he recently cashed out enough savings bonds from his childhood to have to file schedule B (which is what is used for section 988 [reportable non-day-trader currency exchange] income/losses). So for Juan, aside from the temptation to treat it as long term capital gain and pay less taxes, reporting it properly using either method isn't an issue. If juan sold 11 BTC for a net $11,000 credit after the aforementioned transactions (purchase BTC, sell car for BTC), how would he treat BTC on his return?
Frankly, from what I've read so far, I half expect someone here to tell me that Juan should treat 10 BTC sold as long term capital gains of $9,700 and 1 BTC sold as nonfunctional currency for an income of $500. However, I read a lot of section 988 (26 CFR & 26 USC), and while I am no tax advisor/attorney, I am fairly confident that such treatment would be considered "switching accounting methods," which would appear to be frowned upon / not allowed. Given that, let's assume that Juan doesn't want to try to contact the office of Timothy Geithner to get permission to change accounting methods (especially since Mr. Secretary has publicly said that he thinks bitcoin is a bubble, among other things). Again, please correct me if I'm wrong (and point me at the appropriate documentation to back up the correction).
Assuming I'm not, for those suggesting that BTC should be treated as a capital asset with short and long term gains and losses, can you point me toward a section of code that discusses income and cost basis for the exchange of securities? Or, to provide a more explicit example, suppose Juan wanted to trade his car in the first example for Yahoo! stock, and Pablo had actual certificates he was willing to exchange for the car. Would this be possible, how would it be reported, and where would this exist in the code.
ETA - Also see:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3925362 (re: "not a capital asset" from some IRS employee) and share thoughts accordingly.