Simplest attack: just make it illegal and prevent people from converting bitcoins into cash. If it isn’t connected to the larger economy not many people will be interested in it.
Why bother, when they can just use existing laws? Classify bitcoin users as banks, then fine them for violating existing transaction-reporting laws. Tax violations. I’m sure there are dozens if not hundreds of regulations that someone can be charged with.
Not reporting income or profit. Not reporting what you paid to other people that should be counted as their income, and so on. The US seems especially hostile to this sort of thing, what with the number of post-9/11 financial regulations added. I daresay they won’t be happy that anyone can just become their own bank and not fill out any paperwork at all… let alone the relative impossibility of remotely freezing someone’s account or seizing their assets, without first involving every third party they might trade with.
I expect that some clever lawyering and accountancy will be necessary to protect bitcoin users from legal harassment in the future, and that the only thing protecting them now is the relatively low-key nature of the stuff. But it’s only a matter of time until the media begin the blitz to portray Bitcoin as a tool of terrorists, druggies, black-hat hackers, gunrunners, money launderers, and whoever else will scare their viewers via guilt-by-association. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention pornographers, and by extension, human traffickers and child molesters. That’ll be enough to get political support for a crackdown, I imagine.
Why bother, when they can just use existing laws? Classify bitcoin users as banks, then fine them for violating existing transaction-reporting laws.
IANAL but I think that a court might not look kindly on an argument that turns every person who is using something into a bank. The decentralized nature undermines that argument.
As to reporting, there’s no reason in principle that bitcoin users can’t report the money they owe for taxes and the like. More of a problem if you pay an anonymous individual for some service, but that’s less of an issue if you aren’t hiring them for an extended period of time.
But it’s only a matter of time until the media begin the blitz to portray Bitcoin as a tool of terrorists, druggies, black-hat hackers, gunrunners, money launderers, and whoever else will scare their viewers via guilt-by-association. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention pornographers, and by extension, human traffickers and child molesters. That’ll be enough to get political support for a crackdown, I imagine.
Unfortunately, if bitcoin ever becomes very popular, then it will be reasonable for the people who really don’t want a government eye on them to use it. Undermining authority works both ways: it might be nice for us but it can benefit those one doesn’t like also. At present, terrorists/guerrillas/freedom fighters/militants use complicated and cumbersome procedure to moving money around. Bitcoin could offer them a strong leg up. The most dangerous type of media-driven moral panics are the ones that have some element of truth.
At present, terrorists/guerrillas/freedom fighters/militants use complicated and cumbersome procedure to moving money around. Bitcoin could offer them a strong leg up.
For example, they could be using one of a dozen or so other sufficiently anonymous electronic currencies that are already available.
Pardon me, the word ‘could’ was missing, distorting my intended meaning. Edited.
I claim that the for the purposes of criminal activities the existing more popular electronic currencies are just as effective as bitcoin would be.
Now that you mention it I would claim that criminals use anonymous online currencies. Online currencies are notorious for money laundering. I have no idea what terrorists in particular currently do. Just what online resources they have available.
Simplest attack: just make it illegal and prevent people from converting bitcoins into cash. If it isn’t connected to the larger economy not many people will be interested in it.
Why bother, when they can just use existing laws? Classify bitcoin users as banks, then fine them for violating existing transaction-reporting laws. Tax violations. I’m sure there are dozens if not hundreds of regulations that someone can be charged with.
Not reporting income or profit. Not reporting what you paid to other people that should be counted as their income, and so on. The US seems especially hostile to this sort of thing, what with the number of post-9/11 financial regulations added. I daresay they won’t be happy that anyone can just become their own bank and not fill out any paperwork at all… let alone the relative impossibility of remotely freezing someone’s account or seizing their assets, without first involving every third party they might trade with.
I expect that some clever lawyering and accountancy will be necessary to protect bitcoin users from legal harassment in the future, and that the only thing protecting them now is the relatively low-key nature of the stuff. But it’s only a matter of time until the media begin the blitz to portray Bitcoin as a tool of terrorists, druggies, black-hat hackers, gunrunners, money launderers, and whoever else will scare their viewers via guilt-by-association. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention pornographers, and by extension, human traffickers and child molesters. That’ll be enough to get political support for a crackdown, I imagine.
IANAL but I think that a court might not look kindly on an argument that turns every person who is using something into a bank. The decentralized nature undermines that argument.
As to reporting, there’s no reason in principle that bitcoin users can’t report the money they owe for taxes and the like. More of a problem if you pay an anonymous individual for some service, but that’s less of an issue if you aren’t hiring them for an extended period of time.
Unfortunately, if bitcoin ever becomes very popular, then it will be reasonable for the people who really don’t want a government eye on them to use it. Undermining authority works both ways: it might be nice for us but it can benefit those one doesn’t like also. At present, terrorists/guerrillas/freedom fighters/militants use complicated and cumbersome procedure to moving money around. Bitcoin could offer them a strong leg up. The most dangerous type of media-driven moral panics are the ones that have some element of truth.
For example, they could be using one of a dozen or so other sufficiently anonymous electronic currencies that are already available.
If you have evidence of the existence of electronic currencies heavily and successfully used by criminals and terrorists, will you please share?
This is not actually what I claimed.
OK. What did you claim, then?
Pardon me, the word ‘could’ was missing, distorting my intended meaning. Edited.
I claim that the for the purposes of criminal activities the existing more popular electronic currencies are just as effective as bitcoin would be.
Now that you mention it I would claim that criminals use anonymous online currencies. Online currencies are notorious for money laundering. I have no idea what terrorists in particular currently do. Just what online resources they have available.