Thanks for the further clarification, this is really something we can put under the category of incredible nonsense that is born in the minds of some politicians.

I have warned in some of my comments before that the US has too much of a role in the world of cryptocurrencies with all that infrastructure and with its influence on the rest of the world. If such a law were passed, then it is only a matter of time before US allies would also be forced to act in the same direction, which means that the EU, Japan, Israel, the UK, India, and many other countries would do something similar.

This doesn't look good at all if it comes true, and when the mainstream media catches this, it will surely resonate strongly with the crypto world - regardless of the fact that it will take as long as 18 months to be fully implemented.

Still, there is at least one other instance where things can be fixed by what @BrianH post (House or reconciliation process), but can they just overturn the Senate's decision?

As for the discussion on the forum, people just don't understand what this is about - I haven't paid any attention to this so far. In addition, BD has recently been flooded with threads from only one user and this thread did not have much visibility.

To understand how this affects regular people, just think about how it's impossible to use Localbitcoins as a normal US person without being registered as a broker. And how many normies have faced enforcement just for using LBC without the "licence".

I worked with US freelancers, accepting payment in Bitcoin. The only way they could cash out was to use Bitcoin ATMs with upwards of 10% fees. I know there are better options now, but the US simply doesn't like people transacting outside of the system. If such a bill were to pass, everyone would be using Bitcoin at exorbitant tax rates and they'd only be able to "hold" "Bitcoin" on PayPal, Coinbase, etc.

You've ultimately got to start expecting more taxes on cryptocurrency transactions in future. I find it funny that ramping up reporting of cryptocurrency transactions, which every single bank in America has to do thoroughly for their own services, is "interpreted" as a bad thing. The people who benefit most from moving large amounts of money via cryptocurrency are now the richest people in society, who love to use these "grey" areas within financial regulations to hide money. Ultimately it is the poor and middle class who end up paying more than their fair share. I don't agree with it being tied to an infrastructure bill however, that is due to the perverse way laws in America are being made these days and the sheer laziness of politicians forcing masses of unrelated new regulations together in packages in order to bargain for unpopular things - you end up with the most mediocre and generally poor outcomes. The politicians are part of the problem and rarely work for their constituents these days.

I really hope this isn't the case. I'd like to think our democracy hasn't devolved this far just yet. There are also better ways to get these provisions through Congress than this, if this was their ultimate end goal. The language of the initial bill is utterly terrible, and pretty much reads like it was written by someone who knows nothing about crypto and thinks it is just the same as buying and selling stocks through a broker. They could have written something much more subtle but achieving the same end goal if that was their underlying desire.

I'm not giving up hope yet. At least on paper, we had 99 out of 100 Senators agreeing to the crypto amendment (although I've explained above how I suspect that wasn't really the case, and others did not object simply because they knew Shelby would). Any Democrat not voting for the bill would have been hung out to dry, regardless of their feelings on the crypto language.

In any case, we'll have to wait and see what happens in the House.

If you remember what happened when FB Libra was on the agenda in US politics, you could see what attitude US politics took and cut it at the root - while Congressman Sherman called Bitcoin just a little baby - which was obviously starting to be a growing threat. At that time, the former Treasury Secretary Mnuchin gave a speech in which he only reiterated that the US would defend its currency in all possible ways.

This is just a continuation of a policy that was obviously quietly being prepared during the Trump presidency - only it was not clear to the public, as was the case in China when in 2019 they clearly said that they would ban crypto mining which was preceded by the banning of everything else related to cryptocurrencies.

I agree that politics will never allow the people to be too independent of a system that favors the rich and successful - and they need people who work 8 hours a day, have mortgages, and are afraid of the system. I dare say that little has changed since the time of slavery, the common man is more or less just a modern slave who gets just enough to survive - the goal of politics is to keep it that way.

It's not going to "force" anything, the EU is already taking steps in that direction as I was saying in a previous comment:

EU wants to ban crypto anonymous transactions and wallets

The rest of the countries, maybe they have not started with legislative initiatives like that but that is what they want. They don't need much persuasion to take steps in that direction.

Another problem I see is that large institutional buyers, that could influence politicians, won't care that you can't do anonymous P2P transactions. The only thing they will care about is if it affects the price, but I think that influence will be short term only. Saylor, Musk etc, buy fully KYC. That we individuals can have a privacy space on the blockchain I think they don't really care.

no where in the bill does it mention that nodes, devs or miners will be brokers

and there is too much crying in this topic from people that cant understand anything beyond ELI-5 to understand what the wording actually does say

its almost as stupid as hinting that uber drivers are brokers because they take custody and move around assets(people and packages)
(now await the FUD to start of parcel companies needing to inspect all packages incase they contain private keys. because in these fantasists minds parcel companies and delivery guys should be brokers too(facepalm))

people really need to read proper terminology and stop crying because they dont understand the wording
no bill has ever been wrote in ELI-5. so it needs people to stop crying thats its not wrote eli-5. and put some effort into understanding legalese and actually learn what financial terminology is


its not about random people just seeing accounts/transactions(nodes)
its not about random people just collating accounts/transactions(miners)
its definetly not about random people making software for it(developers)

yes its not about mining pools because mining pools dont actually get deposits or do withdrawals.

its about regularly offering a service to take responsibility of someones funds(custodian)and for a fee administer it to someone else.. its the definition of a MSB
Money Service Business

think more.. western union. and less about your grandma putting money in your birthday card..

..
also lets say in some 5yo's nightmare where their nightmare came true. its not like users are suppose to by law just email the SEC with any transaction they spot over $10k

its actually a case still where businesses offering regular services of deposits and withdrawals on behalf of other people for a fee. where those businesses have to register as a MSB. take some financial qualification, and have a employee that is a compliance guy, create their own policy handbook of how their business will operate to remain compliant.
have that policy handbook approved as meeting the standards of regulation. get licenced
and such.... and then as part of it. report any large movements they handle

once people actually read what it takes to be a broker. they will realise that their nightmares about nodes. miners. devs are just dreams.. .. fantasies in their head. and not what is actually being proposed. because their role/job/hobby/life has nothing to do with that kind of 'handling' of funds

alot of people in this topic spreading fear dont even know what a MSB is and always evade the discussion about MSB's, and try to poke into the fear that every human has to report on each other..

if only they learn about what the requirements are to be an MSB..  they might learn what brokers really are and why their fears are so irrational. and missing the real discussion that should be happening about the bill.

develops node users and miners were never in the red zone of risk..
if people realise that sooner they could ask their senators for actual amendments that would impact those who are at risk even less.
EG. ensuring it only applies to US registered MSB serving only US residents. and not stretching to other country MSB serving US residents. or US MSB serving other countries residents
as not ensuring that can expand US jurisdiction too far outside its borders

..
its like people are crying if this is said
"any person running in the olympics has to have a mandatory drug test every 6 years"
the crying is about the "any person" where now its spreading fud that any runner has to have drug tests..
WRONG
they miss out the crucial parts .. they miss out understanding what it takes to actually qualify for the olympics.
they miss out that it involves only those on the olymplic running track

all because fud "any person" makes it sound bad for everyone (facepalm)

can people try to learn the legalese and actually learn things like MSB and brokers. and stop crying about two words taken out of context "any person"

.. then spend your time learning where this bill can actually impact people

It is clear that franky1 is a peculiar guy. I put him on ignore for a while. Not only does he seem to understand it better than all the members of Congress, but also all the forum members who have commented on the thread and the other crypto news sites, Youtube videos etc. that I've seen have commented on the bill. None have the vision that franky1 has, but he has it so clear that he calls us trolls:


We are all mistaken and do not understand such obvious things. Lol.

The bill is clearly being revoked by the crypto enthusiast in the USA because more than 46 million Americans now owns bitcoin and percentage is being grown at rapid pace but these demotivational and anti crypto bills in the name of trillion dollars infrastructure bills are clearly not good for most of us but if someone believes it then having prejudice mind of knowing everything then we can't say anything to them or make clarifications to them.These government puppets who only wants to make decisions for their bank rolls will also come to one point where inflation will end up all their bad moves because crypto is not going to be ignored now.