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

South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 231 posts

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#111

Post by bilbosmegma »

thkim wrote: post #48

Bitcoin and cryptos ought to be banned for good. Cryptocurrencies are scam and outright bubble that will bring down the world economy. There is no currency without an authority to guarantee its value. Cryptos are pure bubble. If there is any good in this thing, it's ease of transaction, which is a question of underlying technology - it has nothing to do with lack of authority or decentralized scheme that cryptocurren…

Well it's a good thing the US won't do this. Considering the SEC just said ICOs are legit, and we now have Bitcoin futures.

But maybe you can go back in time and buy some and you won't be so salty.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#112

Post by paulmd »

eberkund wrote: post #96
pc86 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't owe $60k because the USG has $60k in per capita debt. Nobody's coming to me for that. The mental gymnastics you need to go through just to equate the two is exhausting. "Legally binding" and "advice" are mutually exclusive concepts. And it's 100% possible you can give great financial advice and be in debt. "Max out your 401k and a Roth IRA" is great advice in 99% of circumstances. Just because someone is payi…

I can see where @dmichulke is coming from, nobody is going to come to your door looking for that money in the fashion you describe but you are paying for it one way or another. Who knows, maybe if the debt levels weren't so high the US would be able to afford a healthcare system like the rest of the developed world.

> Who knows

Anyone who has applied a modicum of thought to the issue. The US already has more per-capita public funding going to healthcare than any other nation, we simply don't get a good return on it because that is perceived as "socialism".

And pursuing a highly conservative fiscal policy (far off the right side of the Overton window) is not going to change that, nor advance the cause of said "socialist" policies. It's flabbergasting that you would suggest that as any kind of a reasonable cause-and-effect.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#113

Post by abcdefghijklm »

planteen wrote: post #104
abcdefghijklm wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that stat means 64% of Americans don't rent. Homeowner is not the right term for most of that 64%, because most have a mortgage balance, which when subtracted from their Edit: The stat actually means 64% of homes are occupied by their owner. But "owner" is still misleading, as the article linked to above says: "However, homeowner equity has fallen steadily since World War II and is now less than 50% of the va…

I'm not saying that is a good situation or the picture is rosy. The real question here is one of semantics - do you include home equity in "life savings"? I would say yes. And using a HELOC for a crypto or lottery tickets are both bad things IMO.

I totally agree, just wanted to clarify that "homeowner" is a generous term in the US intended to make people feel like they own an entire home on the day they close the sale, instead of the reality that they usually own a mortgage balance along with a small chunk of that home.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#114

Post by paulmd »

ethanwillis wrote: post #71
dqpb wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For an “infrastructure” that burns dozens of terawatts of power per year I would at least expect fast transactions, and yet...

MFW it takes up to two weeks for an international wire transfer to clear. MFW banks are closed on Sundays.

Why do you need to send a wire transfer? A giro transfer clears within a few minutes, and a credit card charge is accepted within seconds. What's the use-case that is not acceptably covered by those options?

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#115

Post by ringaroundthetx »

thkim wrote: post #44
smaili wrote: post #8

> Australia’s central bank governor Philip Lowe warned on Wednesday the fascination with the assets felt like a “speculative mania.” Just curious, what is it about speculation that has govs so worried? It’s quite clear at this point Bitcoin has grown far too large and most are now speculating on its value as a store so what benefit is there to step in, attempt to regulate it, and risk its undoing? To me, I’m reminded…

When a bubble bursts, it's not just about some people, but it brings down the whole economy. I can't believe people have already forgotten what CDO has done to this economy. Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. Any responsible government ought to outright ban them all already.

> I can't believe people have already forgotten what CDO has done to this economy.

Good news, crypto is still two orders of magnitude smaller

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#116

Post by nopinsight »

thkim wrote: post #76
fragsworth wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. You need to explain this. Many of us just think it's a good replacement for gold and other precious metals. Is gold a "financial weapon of mass destruction"?

that's a valid question. three reasons why bitcoin & crypto is NOT like gold and very dangerous. 1) limited supply: drives up price enormously. almost endless. minimal supply, infinitely increasing demand. depending on how far this will go it can potentially suck up all liquidity in the world. 2) no authority, no price stabilization, meaning extreme volatility that adds fuel to vol & price rise, 3) ease of access: an…

I’m curious. How would it bring about global inflation since almost all of bitcoin is not really used for getting goods/services and people need to exchange real dollars/yen/etc to drive up its price? Doesn’t it actually suck out liquidity from other assets and drive down inflation of other assets?

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#117

Post by noarchy »

WJW wrote: post #106
mtgx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think most people owning cryptocurrencies are affluent tax evaders?

Yes? It's certainly not the people struggling to buy food if that's what you are implying.

They may be affluent, particularly when compared to people struggling to buy food. That doesn't make them tax evaders. Though it should be added that the tax situation regarding crypotcurrencies isn't clear in every country.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#118

Post by scottnyc »

rudiger wrote: post #101

At its core, the current cryptocurrency craze is simply an unprecedented wealth transfer to China from the rest of the world. Until the end of 2013, Bitcoin was predominantly traded for US dollars. However, after the crash of 2013, miners consolidated in China and Bitcoin mostly traded for Chinese yuan[1]. At the start of 2017, regulators in China cracked down on digital currency exchanges[2] and trading quickly move…

I agree that this might be a wealth transfer to China. Bitcoin inherently does not hold any value, it is a ledger. When someone buys bitcoin, someone else sells it and takes the cash out of the system.

Right now, a lot of mining is still taking place in China since energy is cheap. These miners sell their coins outside of China and bring cash back into the mainland to pay for the energy and hardware used for mining. So in it's most simplistic form, when you buy a bitcoin, you are adding to the earnings of Chinese energy companies and hardware companies (and some naturally goes to speculators and miner margins).

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#119

Post by vvillena »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #61
__warlord__ wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, in fact, goes against what Cryptocurrencies represent and what scares me the most is that people, in this case governments, are trying to regulate the new with the old. Remember, innovation always win.

> Remember, innovation always win. Concorde and supersonic commercial flight, 3D TV, video phones...I could go on but those are the few that came to mind off the top of my head.

All of those lost against better tech, because they were but gimmicks. Cheap and efficient flight is better than supersonic, exclusive flight. High resolution, high contrast, high colorspace TV is better than 3D TV (IMHO VR is also better than 3D TV). And advanced text messaging is more convenient than video calls.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#120

Post by nine_k »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #110
rudiger wrote: post #101

At its core, the current cryptocurrency craze is simply an unprecedented wealth transfer to China from the rest of the world. Until the end of 2013, Bitcoin was predominantly traded for US dollars. However, after the crash of 2013, miners consolidated in China and Bitcoin mostly traded for Chinese yuan[1]. At the start of 2017, regulators in China cracked down on digital currency exchanges[2] and trading quickly move…

I think you meant from china to the rest of the world. The opposite direction isn’t very difficult to achieve via FDI or a simple bank transfer.

I'd suppose both flows exist.

* Chinese energy producers and miners get cash into China from bitcoins they create and sell.

* Chinese (early) buyers of bitcoin sell their coins in the West for cash stored in Western banks, or turned into other Western assets.

I suppose the second stream is wider, but the first is not to be neglected, too.

Post reply on HN