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

Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

art-is-crime.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 65 posts

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#21

Post by muffinthem »

gizmo wrote: post #7

I haven't read the entirety of the page, but I think I got the main points. The artist claims he's in the clear because he paid taxes on his income he made by selling NFT artpieces created by him. However, he gives no indication (as far as I can tell) that he has any kind of information on his customers. Does he have invoices? Did he collect name, address, and phone number for each customer? Did he make a reasonable…

Getting customer invoices per transaction is fundamentally not possible with the blockchain and peer-to-peer payment networks. What you suggest is that every individual and corporate entity who has sold a NFT should also be treated as criminal and have their assets seized, because they are not able to provide purchaser invoices per sale?

His records and sales are public on the site and easily traceable, far more transparently given than most corporate and celebrity NFT sales that have happened without issue in the last two years.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#22

Post by rez8 »

gizmo wrote: post #7

I haven't read the entirety of the page, but I think I got the main points. The artist claims he's in the clear because he paid taxes on his income he made by selling NFT artpieces created by him. However, he gives no indication (as far as I can tell) that he has any kind of information on his customers. Does he have invoices? Did he collect name, address, and phone number for each customer? Did he make a reasonable…

This is a braindead take.

A bar that takes cash cannot prove they're not money laundering, therefor it doesn't matter if the government seizes their assets. That is essentially what your argument says.

It's obvious you're not on board with NFTs, and that's fine. What isn't fine is making blanket assumptions that everyone who sells art in the space is a fraud or a scammer. It's a very stupid opinion, with no basis in knowledge of the space, the ability to track transactions, due process, etc.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#24

Post by closewith »

iskander wrote: post #18

Whatever your opinions on generative art sold as NFTs, the lack of regulatory clarity seems pretty stifling. The author asked for guidance: >I called the VID (Latvian State Revenue Service) and asked in detail what I should do. I was told that I should first register as a self-employed person with the profession of an artist. And I have to convert my income into fiat and pay tax on the income in fiat because cryptocu…

It seems that the criminal complaint is related to money laundering (ie concealing the true source and/or beneficial owner of the funds) rather than tax evasion. If that is the case, then tax compliance is expected (as the point of money laundering is to produce a clean post-tax cash flow).

I have no opinion as to the legitimacy of the criminal accusations, but having correctly paid tax liabilities would not be a defence.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#25

Post by gizmo »

etrautmann wrote: post #17
gizmo wrote: post #7

I haven't read the entirety of the page, but I think I got the main points. The artist claims he's in the clear because he paid taxes on his income he made by selling NFT artpieces created by him. However, he gives no indication (as far as I can tell) that he has any kind of information on his customers. Does he have invoices? Did he collect name, address, and phone number for each customer? Did he make a reasonable…

I'm not sure your argument makes sense - Does conducting your business in a serious way as an artist involve finance-levels of know-your-customer regulatory compliance? Most business, aside from finance, do not know much about who's buying whatever product they're selling. Individual artists shouldn't be on the hook to do background checks on art buyers.

As a business you have to issue invoices and you also have a responsibility to stop obviously criminal behavior.

A car dealership can’t sell somebody a Lamborghini if they want to pay with crumpled $20 notes. An art dealer can’t buy a Mondrian that the seller claims they found in their granny’s attic.

I don’t understand how this is controversial.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#26

Post by _8j50 »

iskander wrote: post #18

Whatever your opinions on generative art sold as NFTs, the lack of regulatory clarity seems pretty stifling. The author asked for guidance: >I called the VID (Latvian State Revenue Service) and asked in detail what I should do. I was told that I should first register as a self-employed person with the profession of an artist. And I have to convert my income into fiat and pay tax on the income in fiat because cryptocu…

He could possibly sue for them forcing him to devalue his crypto. It is a security like stocks really. The fact that they recognize it has no relevancy unless he attempted to use it as currency in their country which it he did then they are mostly right it is taxable income and they had every right to demand payment in local currency and even force the payment. If he simply posessed crypto as income but relied on other fiat income or arrangement to make ends meet then I think he can contend their actions.

Point being, if you have income and you call it income then your government can tax you and they can demand payment in their local currency. Forget crypto, they can force you to convert dollars to euros as well.

As for NFTs I don't think they need regulation, a person sells another person the golden gate bridge as a concept, so long as they pay sales tax who cares. No false advertisement there.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#27

Post by gizmo »

rez8 wrote: post #22
gizmo wrote: post #7

I haven't read the entirety of the page, but I think I got the main points. The artist claims he's in the clear because he paid taxes on his income he made by selling NFT artpieces created by him. However, he gives no indication (as far as I can tell) that he has any kind of information on his customers. Does he have invoices? Did he collect name, address, and phone number for each customer? Did he make a reasonable…

This is a braindead take. A bar that takes cash cannot prove they're not money laundering, therefor it doesn't matter if the government seizes their assets. That is essentially what your argument says. It's obvious you're not on board with NFTs, and that's fine. What isn't fine is making blanket assumptions that everyone who sells art in the space is a fraud or a scammer. It's a very stupid opinion, with no basis in…

A bar can prove that fairly easily. Show expenses, show receipts. Show auditors that the place is packed every weekend.

This isn’t about honest businesspeople having to meet some impossible burden of proof. This is about selling 10 million worth of product and not bothering to figure out where the money came from.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#28

Post by closewith »

etrautmann wrote: post #17
gizmo wrote: post #7

I haven't read the entirety of the page, but I think I got the main points. The artist claims he's in the clear because he paid taxes on his income he made by selling NFT artpieces created by him. However, he gives no indication (as far as I can tell) that he has any kind of information on his customers. Does he have invoices? Did he collect name, address, and phone number for each customer? Did he make a reasonable…

I'm not sure your argument makes sense - Does conducting your business in a serious way as an artist involve finance-levels of know-your-customer regulatory compliance? Most business, aside from finance, do not know much about who's buying whatever product they're selling. Individual artists shouldn't be on the hook to do background checks on art buyers.

With respect, since the introduction of AML5, art dealers and auction houses are subject to KYC/AML requirements (as so-called "high value dealers"). If the transactions exceeded €10,000, the company would be obliged to be compliant or, as many do, hire a dealer who is compliant to act on their behalf.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#29

Post by muffinthem »

closewith wrote: post #28
etrautmann wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure your argument makes sense - Does conducting your business in a serious way as an artist involve finance-levels of know-your-customer regulatory compliance? Most business, aside from finance, do not know much about who's buying whatever product they're selling. Individual artists shouldn't be on the hook to do background checks on art buyers.

With respect, since the introduction of AML5, art dealers and auction houses are subject to KYC/AML requirements (as so-called "high value dealers"). If the transactions exceeded €10,000, the company would be obliged to be compliant or, as many do, hire a dealer who is compliant to act on their behalf.

This is not fundamentally possible in peer to peer permissionless blockchains. The law as it is currently defined is not compatible with the technology and will need to be revised if the law wishes to consider NFT as high value art sale.

Re: Art is crime [NFT artist funds seized]

#30

Post by muffinthem »

gizmo wrote: post #27
rez8 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a braindead take. A bar that takes cash cannot prove they're not money laundering, therefor it doesn't matter if the government seizes their assets. That is essentially what your argument says. It's obvious you're not on board with NFTs, and that's fine. What isn't fine is making blanket assumptions that everyone who sells art in the space is a fraud or a scammer. It's a very stupid opinion, with no basis in…

A bar can prove that fairly easily. Show expenses, show receipts. Show auditors that the place is packed every weekend. This isn’t about honest businesspeople having to meet some impossible burden of proof. This is about selling 10 million worth of product and not bothering to figure out where the money came from.

The author is showing expenses and receipts of purchases. They are extremely clear and in some cases easier to track to owners than dollar bills. A bar selling alcohol for dollar bills would have a far thinner paper trail than what this author is providing.
Post reply on HN