Thanks. Is there a non-scribd link where a PDF or similar can be downloaded?
TL;DR too complex to truly understand, but i noticed a couple of things:
1. $600 exception for payment (no tax on appreciation for tx less than $600).
2. Mining is not taxed until you sell btc for $ (or other coin, I suppose).
I think the capital gains tax exemption for small purchases was expected. That would remove one of the biggest obstacles to using Bitcoin
as money.
I am worried about any possible attempt, by accident or otherwise, to redefine Bitcoin as something
substantively different than a currency, for regulatory purposes. Worst of all, anything that winds up twisting Bitcoin into a security.
Bitcoin has zero equity. Thats an important feature. It is also why it is perfectly fair to buy 10k BTC for 2 pizzas, or 1 BTC for $67k.
Bitcoin has no memory of what you paid for it.(I may elaborate on this sometime, here or elsewhere. Cryptic here, in a way. I am deeply concerned about any attempt to redefine Bitcoin in this fashion, especially in the U.S. or other influential jurisdictions. It would be easy to slip by the public, because most of the public stupidly thinks of Bitcoin as sort of like a stock. STOP THAT!)
If you skimmed the bill, did you see the legal definitions that would apply to Bitcoin?
This is a "view from above", so no coins are mentioned by name.
There are only "digital assets", "payment stablecoins" and "ancillary assets" (those are maybe tradable derivatives, like WBTC, for example).
Of interest, the bill specifically says that payment stablecoins CANNOT be backed by other "digital assets".
They also refer to "virtual currencies" and stipulate that those are NOT legal tender (of course, at this stage).
they also stipulate that "virtual currencies" have no backing by any financial assets (with the exception of "digital assets").
Specifically modifies language of 401K and 401a, allowing those to buy "digital assets". Wowza!
Specifically says that validators (miners), sellers of software and hardware, software developers are NOT brokers.
DAOs would be business entities, not disregarded entities.
Start of mark-to-market treatment of "digital assets", not forever intangibles anymore (not sure if this is good or bad).
NO cancellation of bank accounts for 'reputational risk'. "An appropriate Federal banking agency shall not restrict or discourage a depository institution from entering into or maintaining a banking relationship with a specific customer or group of customers based on reputation risk, including through the examinations and ratings of the depository institution."
This is nice as people lost accounts at some banks under the auspices of "reputational risk".
