Cryptocurrencies and the economy

[psionl0]

In the US the IRS can require that a taxpayer report on transfers even if those transfers are not reported by the other party. Failing to report can be a crime.

So, if you and I exchange $12,000 worth of Bitcoin for $12,000 worth of Dogecoin I could be be required to report that transaction to the IRS. Even though it is secret and even though you are under no obligation to report it.

Sure the IRS CAN do that.

Do you have any info that suggests that this is now law? That could have serious repercussions on other transactions if you were required to report private transactions over $10K to the IRS (eg buying a used car from a private party).

 

[Dr. Keith]

Sure the IRS CAN do that.

Do you have any info that suggests that this is now law? That could have serious repercussions on other transactions if you were required to report private transactions over $10K to the IRS (eg buying a used car from a private party).

It currently is not the law. The article was stating that this is something they are considering and you seemed to be saying that it was not what the article was about. Sorry if I misread your posts.

If they make that a rule it will make it very hard for crypto to maintain its value because the main benefit besides by illicit goods seems to be avoiding taxation. And there is only so much coke a person can snort.

 

[psionl0]

It currently is not the law. The article was stating that this is something they are considering and you seemed to be saying that it was not what the article was about.

That's because this is not what the article was about. It referred to the IRS targeting crypto exchanges and not private wallet to wallet transfers.

 

[Dr. Keith]

That's because this is not what the article was about. It referred to the IRS targeting crypto exchanges and not private wallet to wallet transfers.

I think we are teading different articles. The one I read started with this para:

As central banks explore digital currencies, governments are rallying for increased oversight of mercurial crypto assets. A major part of the regulatory quagmire over digital money concerns taxes. This year, the IRS has been strengthening its ability to track tax payers who own cryptocurrencies by probing digital currency exchanges and threatening to seize the assets of tax evaders. In the latest sign of a looming regulatory crack down on crypto, the Treasury Department has said it will require any transfer worth $10,000 or more to be reported to the IRS.

Doing thing A in preparation to do thing B. And you want to say the article is only about thing A, while thing B is the real punch in the gut? Okay, pretend thing B won’t happen.

 

[psionl0]

I think we are teading different articles. The one I read started with this para:

Doing thing A in preparation to do thing B. And you want to say the article is only about thing A, while thing B is the real punch in the gut? Okay, pretend thing B won’t happen.

You added words that weren't in the article:

In the latest sign of a looming regulatory crack down on crypto, the Treasury Department has said it will require any individual transfer worth $10,000 or more to another individual to be reported to the IRS by the individual.

The full context of the article makes it clear who the article is targeting:

As central banks explore digital currencies, governments are rallying for increased oversight of mercurial crypto assets. A major part of the regulatory quagmire over digital money concerns taxes. This year, the IRS has been strengthening its ability to track tax payers who own cryptocurrencies by probing digital currency exchanges and threatening to seize the assets of tax evaders. In the latest sign of a looming regulatory crack down on crypto, the Treasury Department has said it will require any transfer worth $10,000 or more to be reported to the IRS.

Clearly the $10K threshold applies to the exchanges.

The IRS might target individuals the same way at some unspecified point in the future but that is not even predicted by the article. At the end of the day, crypto-currencies are tradeable assets and anybody who profits from doing so is already required to declare those profits to the IRS.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Nope. The sentence is broader before your edits and would encompass exactly what I was talking about. Maybe the article is wrong, but I’m not the one editing it to get to my meaning.

 

[psionl0]

Nope. The sentence is broader before your edits and would encompass exactly what I was talking about. Maybe the article is wrong, but I’m not the one editing it to get to my meaning.

Yes you are. The article says absolutely nothing about individual to individual transfers.

 

[Monica 56]

I finally put my life saving into Bitcoin last Tuesday. I haven't checked lately, but I bet I've made some real dough since then. I may retire soon.

You may have a wait of a few years , because we are looking at charts which suggest further corrections are likely . Bottom could be sub 20 k before the market goes back to V type jumps .
The market hit 60k+ on euphoria and now we have corrected to the anxiety level .
The separate Stock Market crash later this year ( minimum 20% correction ) will drag BTC into the morass .

 

[Leftus]

Sure the IRS CAN do that.

Do you have any info that suggests that this is now law? That could have serious repercussions on other transactions if you were required to report private transactions over $10K to the IRS (eg buying a used car from a private party).

The financial instruction for the depositing party would submit a Currency Transaction Report.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Yes you are. The article says absolutely nothing about individual to individual transfers.

I'm not the one trying to change the language of the sentence:

In the latest sign of a looming regulatory crack down on crypto, the Treasury Department has said it will require any transfer worth $10,000 or more to be reported to the IRS.

There is nothing in that sentence that excludes individual to individual transfers. There is nothing in that sentence that limits the reporting to transactions on currency exchanges. The IRS has very broad powers. They are unlikely to limit them just for this type of currency.

 

[psionl0]

I'm not the one trying to change the language of the sentence:

There is nothing in that sentence that excludes individual to individual transfers. There is nothing in that sentence that limits the reporting to transactions on currency exchanges. The IRS has very broad powers. They are unlikely to limit them just for this type of currency.

Yep. The words "by probing digital currency exchanges" don't even exist in that article.

Or maybe you think that they started writing about digital currency exchanges and suddenly switched to personal wallet to wallet transfers without telling anybody.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Yep. The words "by probing digital currency exchanges" don't even exist in that article.

Or maybe you think that they started writing about digital currency exchanges and suddenly switched to personal wallet to wallet transfers without telling anybody.

Once they are interested in Crypto transactions why would they limit that interest to exchanges?

The current rules on transfers don't require reporting based on how the transfer is made or who the transfer is made between. If I give another citizen a gift of sufficient value I have to report that no matter the form of the gift, be it jelly beans, gold bars or crypto. They are simply saying that they are extending the existing laws to crypto and treating it like a real currency.

Either you agree that it is a real currency and therefore subject to local regulation or you agree that it is a ponzi scheme and has no real value and therefore not subject to regulation. You can't have it both ways.

 

[psionl0]

If I give another citizen a gift of sufficient value I have to report that no matter the form of the gift, be it jelly beans, gold bars or crypto.

If that is true for other types of assets then it should already be true for cryptos. That just makes the leap that the IRS is "going to" target private wallet to wallet transactions an even bigger deviation from the article. They can't target anonymous wallets but they can target the exchanges since they have to comply with KYC laws.

Either you agree that it is a real currency and therefore subject to local regulation or you agree that it is a ponzi scheme and has no real value and therefore not subject to regulation. You can't have it both ways.

You don't have to start getting stupid. A digital asset is still an asset whether it is a currency or not.

 

[gabeygoat]

You may have a wait of a few years , because we are looking at charts which suggest further corrections are likely . Bottom could be sub 20 k before the market goes back to V type jumps .
The market hit 60k+ on euphoria and now we have corrected to the anxiety level .
The separate Stock Market crash later this year ( minimum 20% correction ) will drag BTC into the morass .

I think would think a stock market crash would lead to more investment in Bitcoin or other pseudo stuff

 

[Puppycow]

Cryptocurrencies also seem to crucial in ransomware attacks. They allow the criminals to get paid anonymously without banks and such.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57423008