HAL1000 Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/13/crypto-house-democrats-tax-fight-504341 Cryptocurrency became red-hot in the Senate after industry lobbyists were blindsided by part of the measure that would treat crypto more like stocks. Crypto-friendly House Democrats are plotting a long-shot bid to scale back digital currency tax rules tucked into President Joe Biden’s infrastructure plan, threatening to prolong a lobbying battle that snarled the legislation in the Senate. At issue in the fight are proposed requirements that would force cryptocurrency exchanges and other firms to report transaction information to the Internal Revenue Service, similar to rules in place for stock brokers. As drafted, industry lobbyists and sympathetic lawmakers say the plan threatens technological innovation and the viability of a growing sector of the U.S. economy. DannyRipple and emsemporium 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAL1000 Posted August 14, 2021 Author Share Posted August 14, 2021 Citing an unnamed official, Bloomberg said Treasury won’t go after crypto firms that don’t meet the tax code’s definitions of a “broker.” https://www.coindesk.com/treasury-prepares-crypto-carve-out-from-infrastructure-bills-tax-reporting-provision-report Citing an unnamed department official, Bloomberg said Friday that Treasury won’t go after crypto entities that don’t meet the tax code’s definitions of a “broker.” Guidance on the matter could come next week, the report said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarChest Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 Treasury won go after brokers, but the law will say that it can if it wants. So they could change their mind on a whim. Julian_Williams 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightJanitor Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, WarChest said: Treasury won go after brokers, but the law will say that it can if it wants. So they could change their mind on a whim. You mean like disclaiming every official statement they ever made as an unofficial statement and then stating in court at length that they never even made any official statements or official determinations (and then hiding behind "deliberative privilege" to cover up their internal discussions and policy papers/positions which show them to be totally full of shit?) What are you, paranoid? Edited August 16, 2021 by NightJanitor *Everybody* knows. aavkk and Ahchai 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarChest Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, NightJanitor said: You mean like disclaiming every official statement they ever made as an unofficial statement and then stating in court at length that they never even made any official statements or official determinations (and then hiding behind "deliberative privilege" to cover up their internal discussions and policy papers/positions which show them to be totally full of shit?) What are you, paranoid? Not paranoid, but Law is Law and policy is not Law. A change in administration or other reason can easily mean a change in policy. Exactly as you illustrate, I might add 🤭😀 Edited August 16, 2021 by WarChest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmoe Posted August 24, 2021 Share Posted August 24, 2021 (edited) Reply from Senator Cornyn. Edited August 24, 2021 by Shmoe JASCoder 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now