Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33528.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: solex on May 15, 2013, 05:59:04 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:54:56 AM

Put that way, that's a good point however that means you have to define BTC as an actual currency and using an alternate currency is against the law in the US.

This article discusses the issue and it seems it is not illegal for US citizens to accept a payment in foreign currency (since 1977).
http://money.stackexchange.com/questions/3582/are-there-any-countries-where-citizens-are-free-to-use-any-currency

Coinage Act of 1965, Section 102 states: “All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations), regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues.” Only United States currencies (including Federal Reserve Notes) are currently legal tender in the US.

Keyword being LEGAL tender. Thanks for that BTW.

ChartBuddy

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1819

1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:54:56 AM

Put that way, that's a good point however that means you have to define BTC as an actual currency and using an alternate currency is against the law in the US.

This article discusses the issue and it seems it is not illegal for US citizens to accept a payment in foreign currency (since 1977).
http://money.stackexchange.com/questions/3582/are-there-any-countries-where-citizens-are-free-to-use-any-currency

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 15, 2013, 05:55:37 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:48:33 AM

Im not a law expert so grant me that. But in most developed countries, sending anonymous payments to anonymous users, tax free, and/or using an alternate currency within those borders is absolutely a violation of law. It is in the US for sure.

FinCEN just provided guidance stating that Bitcoins can be used to pay for purchases from merchants.

This is irregardless of the merchant remaining anonymous and/or the customer operating anonymously.

So, anonymous payments to anonymous users is most certainly not something FinCEN has indicated that it has any problem with. Now, of course, if that transaction incurs a tax obligation, simply because it was paid using Bitcoins does not remove any obligations, so taxes would still be do. But that doesn't make using Bitcoin illegal.

Care to clarify your statement?

If you're not paying taxes on those transactions, it's illegal. That's cut and dry. By US policy anyway. I will confine my statements to the US for now. Again, I think there is too much grey area and that's exactly why they are moving on this online tax bill. Which only hits major retailers now but is just the platform to go after everyone else.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rampion on May 15, 2013, 05:49:28 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

As the US goes, so goes the rest of the world.

The rest of western world. Which is not "the world".

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country. Now I

That's utter BS. Can you show me how is bitcoin violating the laws of Italy, Russia, China, Sweden, Iran, Japan... Just to have a few examples. Be concrete, if you are so sure.

And yes, in the US you have some negative precedent (the e-gold thing, liberty dollar, etc.) - but again, the US is not "the rest of the world".

This may very well have been overstated. Just my understanding but certainly not fact as it relates to the countries listed. Point taken. Wink

Stephen Gornick

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 1010

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:48:33 AM

Im not a law expert so grant me that. But in most developed countries, sending anonymous payments to anonymous users, tax free, and/or using an alternate currency within those borders is absolutely a violation of law. It is in the US for sure.

FinCEN just provided guidance stating that Bitcoins can be used to pay for purchases from merchants.

This is irregardless of the merchant remaining anonymous and/or the customer operating anonymously.

So, anonymous payments to anonymous users is most certainly not something FinCEN has indicated that it has any problem with. Now, of course, if that transaction incurs a tax obligation, simply because it was paid using Bitcoins does not remove any obligations, so taxes would still be do. But that doesn't make using Bitcoin illegal.

Care to clarify your statement?

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rampion on May 15, 2013, 05:52:00 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:48:33 AM

Quote from: mp420 on May 15, 2013, 05:41:29 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

And no, Dwolla is not illegal, where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

Bitcoin is not in violation of any laws in most countries. That is, as far as I know, it is perfectly legal to own, buy and sell Bitcoins in most of the world. Many things that can be, and are being, done with Bitcoins ARE in violation of laws, though.

Im not a law expert so grant me that. But in most developed countries, sending anonymous payments to anonymous users, tax free, and/or using an alternate currency within those borders is absolutely a violation of law. It is in the US for sure.

So you really do not understand how BTC works.

BTC is "pseudoanonymous" (not anonymous). Additionally, all the transactions are public. Legitimate business transactions can be very easily tracked, much easier than with cash.

And BTW: cash has very similar properties to BTC - and if you operate only in cash you can also be "tax free". Which obviously does not means that cash is illegal.

Put that way, that's a good point however that means you have to define BTC as an actual currency and using an alternate currency is against the law in the US.

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:48:33 AM

Quote from: mp420 on May 15, 2013, 05:41:29 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

And no, Dwolla is not illegal, where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

Bitcoin is not in violation of any laws in most countries. That is, as far as I know, it is perfectly legal to own, buy and sell Bitcoins in most of the world. Many things that can be, and are being, done with Bitcoins ARE in violation of laws, though.

Im not a law expert so grant me that. But in most developed countries, sending anonymous payments to anonymous users, tax free, and/or using an alternate currency within those borders is absolutely a violation of law. It is in the US for sure.

So you really do not understand how BTC works.

BTC is "pseudoanonymous" (not anonymous). Additionally, all the transactions are public. Legitimate business transactions can be very easily tracked, much easier than with cash.

And BTW: cash has very similar properties to BTC - and if you operate only in cash you can also be "tax free". Which obviously does not means that cash is illegal.

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

As the US goes, so goes the rest of the world.

The rest of western world. Which is not "the world".

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country. Now I

That's utter BS. Can you show me how is bitcoin violating the laws of Italy, Russia, China, Sweden, Iran, Japan... Just to have a few examples. Be concrete, if you are so sure.

And yes, in the US you have some negative precedent (the e-gold thing, liberty dollar, etc.) - but again, the US is not "the rest of the world".

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: solex on May 15, 2013, 05:41:45 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

...where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country. ...

No way. You are spreading FUD.
There is a distinction which needs to be understood. Bitcoin is not a class A drug, or a bottle of your own moonshine whiskey. It is not in violation of laws. Some people who use it might trade illegal items (such as moonshine), but this is true of any medium of exchange. It is what people do with a currency such as evade taxes which can break laws, not the currency itself.

Quote from: mp420 on May 15, 2013, 05:41:29 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

And no, Dwolla is not illegal, where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

Bitcoin is not in violation of any laws in most countries. That is, as far as I know, it is perfectly legal to own, buy and sell Bitcoins in most of the world. Many things that can be, and are being, done with Bitcoins ARE in violation of laws, though.

Im not a law expert so grant me that. But in most developed countries, sending anonymous payments to anonymous users, tax free, and/or using an alternate currency within those borders is absolutely a violation of law. It is in the US for sure.

When you trade one good for another, by law you owe taxes on that transaction. Even if I were to trade say $100 TV for a $100 car stereo on Craigslist, by law, I'm supposed to pay taxes on that transaction. That's called tax evasion here in the US, if you don't pay. That's a crime, thus against the law.

I think we have all this grey area because of the advent of the internet which is why it is no coincidence the online tax bill is making it swiftly through congress. They are setting up their chess pieces.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

...where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country. ...

No way. You are spreading FUD.
There is a distinction which needs to be understood. Bitcoin is not a class A drug, or a bottle of your own moonshine whiskey. It is not in violation of laws. Some people who use it might trade illegal items (such as moonshine), but this is true of any medium of exchange. It is what people do with a currency such as evade taxes which can break laws, not the currency itself.

mp420

hero member

Activity: 501

Merit: 500

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

And no, Dwolla is not illegal, where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

Bitcoin is not in violation of any laws in most countries. That is, as far as I know, it is perfectly legal to own, buy and sell Bitcoins in most of the world. Many things that can be, and are being, done with Bitcoins ARE in violation of laws, though.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: hubbabubbabaker on May 15, 2013, 05:35:57 AM

Why stop at the stratosphere?

Nice! Yes you are right. Why am I aiming so low. Shame on me. Grin

prof7bit

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 500

https://youengine.io/

Quote from: ChartBuddy on May 15, 2013, 05:02:23 AM

[depth vs. time chart]

Would it be possble to plot vol(price) instead of ∫vol(price)?
That way the walls and their size would be much more visible.

hubbabubbabaker

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Sometimes - history needs a push.

Why stop at the stratosphere?

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rampion on May 15, 2013, 05:28:32 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:20:21 AM

Quote from: Rampion on May 15, 2013, 05:15:13 AM

Anyhow, you can see how no coins rushed to the exchange after the Dwolla news. Fiat rushed out, but BTC did not rush in - which makes sense, if you use Dwolla there's no point in exchanging your un-seizable currency for seizable fiat.

There is if you don't like losing money as BTC prices fall and you want to buy low. Fiat is fine inside of Dwolla, for the moment. There is nothing illegal about Dwolla. They are in compliance of US regulations. (Or so it seems) But this series of recent comments is really two different conversations. One of those who want to stash BTC in wallets and go long. Totally fine and those who want to make money buying in low. Also fine. Apples and oranges really.

Additionally, the don't have to "seize" BTC's. All they have to do is block the flow of fiat in and out, and BTC's becomes worthless. How some people are waking up trying to hold on to these delusions is simply amazing. I call it denial. Bitcoin is only as strong as the fiat it can be converted into.

There is nothing illegal about Dwolla? There is nothing illegal about BTC neither.

If you do not see how this kind of news just make stronger Bitcoin in the long term, it has to be because you understand nothing about how BTC works.

You forget there's a lot of people who is not into BTC to get fiat profits. And you also forget USA is not "the world". FED fucking around with BTC? Yeah, that's expected. From the very first moment.

As the US goes, so goes the rest of the world. Sorry. And no, Dwolla is not illegal, where as Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country. Now I agree, this will make Bitcoin stronger which is why I want cheap coins. If I thought this was going to kill Bitcoin, I'd just walk away. No, this and the steps to come will bring Bitcoin into compliance of regulations and taxes. Then business will be free to accept it and mass adoption will take off like a wildfire, shooting BTC prices into the stratosphere.

EDIT: "You forget there's a lot of people who is not into BTC to get fiat profits." I didn't forget, I believe that base of users tops out around the $50-$60 mark. And they are in it for fiat, they just don't need it today. Those who have this dream of a world of BTC only and fiat will be dead...are even fewer than that. Probably the $10 mark and below.

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:20:21 AM

Quote from: Rampion on May 15, 2013, 05:15:13 AM

Anyhow, you can see how no coins rushed to the exchange after the Dwolla news. Fiat rushed out, but BTC did not rush in - which makes sense, if you use Dwolla there's no point in exchanging your un-seizable currency for seizable fiat.

There is if you don't like losing money as BTC prices fall and you want to buy low. Fiat is fine inside of Dwolla, for the moment. There is nothing illegal about Dwolla. They are in compliance of US regulations. (Or so it seems) But this series of recent comments is really two different conversations. One of those who want to stash BTC in wallets and go long. Totally fine and those who want to make money buying in low. Also fine. Apples and oranges really.

Additionally, the don't have to "seize" BTC's. All they have to do is block the flow of fiat in and out, and BTC's becomes worthless. How some people are waking up trying to hold on to these delusions is simply amazing. I call it denial. Bitcoin is only as strong as the fiat it can be converted into.

There is nothing illegal about Dwolla? There is nothing illegal about BTC neither.

If you do not see how this kind of news just make stronger Bitcoin in the long term, it has to be because you understand nothing about how BTC works.

You forget there's a lot of people who is not into BTC to get fiat profits. And you also forget USA is not "the world". FED fucking around with BTC? Yeah, that's expected. From the very first moment.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Le Happy Merchant on May 15, 2013, 05:23:25 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:00:30 AM

The moment it becomes impossible to get any money out of the system (back into fiat) that's the moment it becomes near worthless.

I don't think you understand how Bitcoin works.

If I am willing to sell $100 worth of goods for a Bitcoin, and I can safely assume that an equitable exchange is being offered by somebody else, then that sets the value. It isn't about getting dollars back out at the end.

Looking at it as a price-first-then-trade instead of trade-first-then-price valuation system is putting the cart before the horse, and has a negative impact on the actual utility of Bitcoins.

This assumes you have mass adoption, which Bitcoin does not. It has a black market for buying goods which hardly gives it tremendous value. There is a reason businesses, especially US businesses are not excepting Bitcoin. They know by the laws on the books already, that Bitcoin is illegal. No mass adoption, no value. So the only value you have, is what you can drum up in the black market.

The only reason the prices have reached +100...is because of speculative greed. Nothing more, nothing less.

Le Happy Merchant

hero member

Activity: 634

Merit: 500

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:00:30 AM

The moment it becomes impossible to get any money out of the system (back into fiat) that's the moment it becomes near worthless.

I don't think you understand how Bitcoin works.

If I am willing to sell $100 worth of goods for a Bitcoin, and I can safely assume that an equitable exchange is being offered by somebody else, then that sets the value. It isn't about getting dollars back out at the end.

Looking at it as a price-first-then-trade instead of trade-first-then-price valuation system is putting the cart before the horse, and has a negative impact on the actual utility of Bitcoins.

oda.krell

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1007

Okay. Here's a - comparably - positive observation.

The 4 hour charts don't properly show it, but take note for a second that tonight's low was at about 105 USD, and therefore still above the previous "convergence low" [1] on May 7th, which was at 102 USD.

Which is arguably a good sign: the (admittedly) bad news didn't rock the price as hard as the "natural" correction of an overbought state a week earlier.

I'm not ruling out we will test 110 again in the coming days, maybe even 100, but I'm feeling a bit relieved that the market at the moment seems *unsure* how to take in the news, as opposed to the market being *certain* that it is a crippling blow to btc as a whole, in which case we would have seen sub-100 prices immediately.

[1] I believe the post-bubble development can be grouped into the following 3 phases: (1) immediate correction, down to the 60-ish values, ending on April 16th (the phase actually unfolded in 2 steps), (2) sucker's rally and its rejection, ending on May 3rd below 100 (actually in 3 steps), (3) converging trends phase (until now), with the correction downtrend and the long-term uptrend cancelling each other out, leading to relative stability. Well, "stability" until yesterday.

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33528. (Read 26495280 times)