Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 115 posts

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#51

Post by [deleted] »

pradn wrote: post #39
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #27

It's completely reasonable to tax investment earnings. That said, these regulations are concerning to me as a developer interested in actually building on blockchain technology. At least from what I understand, just doing what's rapidly becoming run of the mill Web3 development is becoming extremely fraught territory for US citizens who want to comply with accounting and tax rules. It's an even bigger deterrent for s…

It seems to me that the US government is doing this at the right time. We're not in the early stages of cryptocurrency. We've had 10 years for lots of new ideas to mature, and we're on the verge of the most promising of all - Etherium transitioning from PoW to PoS. I'd say this is somewhat late given the Bitcoin/Etherium's popularity among small investors with much to lose, immense greenhouse gas emissions, and facil…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#52

Post by kinghajj »

RichardHeart wrote: post #13

With something that averages 200% a year growth, you really can just deposit your gains in your bank and pay your taxes with a smile.

Especially for us old-timers; gotta love that long-term capital gains tax rate! Set aside some of the gains into a high-yield savings account for making estimated tax payments, pay off some small debts, buy a couple nice things, and put the rest into a brokerage account to buy Vanguard ETFs.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#53

Post by Consultant32452 »

pessimizer wrote: post #34
Consultant32452 wrote: post #32

The powers that be will not give up their monopoly not he issuance of currency lightly. Classifying crypto as an asset rather than a currency was the first step. The hand will squeeze tighter and tighter.

They won't give it up at all, because there's absolutely no reason for them to. The reason they have this power is because they wield force legitimately, not because fiat is special.

Our nation's ideological self-segregation is proceeding nicely. I don't want to argue with you or change your mind, but I don't want to share a country with you either.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#54

Post by scsilver »

Daishiman wrote: post #47
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #27

It's completely reasonable to tax investment earnings. That said, these regulations are concerning to me as a developer interested in actually building on blockchain technology. At least from what I understand, just doing what's rapidly becoming run of the mill Web3 development is becoming extremely fraught territory for US citizens who want to comply with accounting and tax rules. It's an even bigger deterrent for s…

I keep hearing about all these amazing crypto products, yet outside of this very specific scene, where curiously only the VCs and devs involved wax poetic about it, you can never seem to find a real customer talking about their experience. You either acknowledge that cryptocurrencies look close enough to currencies or securities and regulate them as such, or you promote them for illegal and ambiguously legal reasons…

Decentralized securities havfe a different flavor than traditional securities, I like whos in charge, Gensler, to determine how they are going to regulate them if they are considered securities.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#55

Post by bingbong70 »

pessimizer wrote: post #34
Consultant32452 wrote: post #32

The powers that be will not give up their monopoly not he issuance of currency lightly. Classifying crypto as an asset rather than a currency was the first step. The hand will squeeze tighter and tighter.

They won't give it up at all, because there's absolutely no reason for them to. The reason they have this power is because they wield force legitimately, not because fiat is special.

A private organization (central bank) having a monopoly on printing and lending money to your government is acting "legitimately"?

Many that have studied this system would disagree.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#56

Post by nonameiguess »

chollida1 wrote: post #24
brightball wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, what I don't understand is how something like using ETH to buy another coin should be taxed? I totally get converting it back to dollars and calling that capital gains but trying to tax conversions from one to another seems nutty to me.

If I were to swap some Apple shares for Microsoft shares , without selling one for cash first, that would still be a taxable event. I know this because we did such a trade with another fund. Swapping one crypto for another is the same thing, the fact that fiat isn't involved doesn't change much in this scenario.

This isn't actually true as companies routinely acquire each other using mostly or only stock. However, the IRS does not consider exchange of stock for stock in mergers and acquisitions to be a taxable event.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#57

Post by blibble »

nerdponx wrote: post #33
blibble wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the common analogy would be an FX pair (like GBPUSD)

And how are forex transactions taxed? Why don't we just apply that policy to crypto?

in the UK it depends on the intent of the transaction

speculation is treated differently to full-time trading, which is in term treated differently to trying to make some money on the side

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#58

Post by stale2002 »

dclaw wrote: post #16
garmaine wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? If you trade Apple stock for Tesla, it’s a taxable event. There isn’t any requirement that USD be involved.

You do not trade 1 stock for another, you have to sell it, wait t+2 days for it to clear, then use those proceeds to buy the other stock. It's not the same in any manner.

So if I could find someone who was willing to trade shares with me, for other shares, then I could just not have to pay taxes?

Sounds like an awesome financial strategy! Sounds like someone could make a whole bunch of money doing this.

But they aren't. Nobody is doing this. Even though, there would be a huge amount of money to make, from doing it.

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#59

Post by dataflow »

Daishiman wrote: post #47
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #27

It's completely reasonable to tax investment earnings. That said, these regulations are concerning to me as a developer interested in actually building on blockchain technology. At least from what I understand, just doing what's rapidly becoming run of the mill Web3 development is becoming extremely fraught territory for US citizens who want to comply with accounting and tax rules. It's an even bigger deterrent for s…

I keep hearing about all these amazing crypto products, yet outside of this very specific scene, where curiously only the VCs and devs involved wax poetic about it, you can never seem to find a real customer talking about their experience. You either acknowledge that cryptocurrencies look close enough to currencies or securities and regulate them as such, or you promote them for illegal and ambiguously legal reasons…

> with all the inevitable pitfalls it will have

Exhibit A (which I routinely get downvoted for mentioning on HN, as nobody likes to hear it): Ransomware

Re: U.S. Treasury calls for stricter cryptocurrency compliance with IRS

#60

Post by BitwiseFool »

golover721 wrote: post #5

This seems like a positive for the legitimization of cryptocurrency. Of course if you were trying to use it to avoid paying taxes you may feel otherwise. Hopefully it leads better forms and adoption by exchanges to provide useful tax documents.

If "Legitimate" means having to comply with all these regulations and decisions from unelected bureaucrats, then I prefer fringe and bizarre.
Post reply on HN