Bitcoin and Blockchain adopted in Most of US States

Brookings Institution reports that majority of US states have accepted some regulatory attitude towards cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and the blockchain techs
19 April 2018   1671

The report authors have determined two waves of new crypto-related regulations in the last several years.

Majority of the US states then took their position on Bitcoin and Blockchain (Colorado, Wyoming). Steps to legalize bitcoin as a payment mean have been taken by Arizona: it is to become the first US state to start accepting taxes in crypto. Georgia may also afford its residents with the option to pay taxes in bitcoin. 

The report, named “Blockchain and US State Governments: An Initial Assessment”, shares US jurisdictions according to their attitude towards cryptocurrencies and the levels of engagement with the blockchain. The authors have classified states into some groups – Unaware, Reactionary, Appreciative, Organized, Actively Engaged, and Recognizing Innovation Potential.

The first group includes the states which have not made any actions to adopt relevant regulations, such as Arkansas and South Dakota. States that have taken a negative stand against cryptocurrencies or have marked them as potentially risky are considered “reactionary”. These include Indiana, Iowa, and Texas. North Dakota is among the “appreciative” states, as its government has already initiated a regulation process but has not adopted any new bills yet. 

“Organized” states like Washington and New Hampshire have already accepted new laws to the crypto ecosphere.  A group “Active Engagement” consists of 7 states which have gone beyond cryptocurrencies and tried the governmental use of blockchain. A good example is Vermont where blockchain-stored data is accepted by the court system. 

Some other states “envision a broader role for blockchain in their economies”. For example, Delaware, Arizona, where signatures, transactions, and contracts on a blockchain are legally valid, also falls in the category of states “recognizing the innovation potential” of crypto engineering. 
 

Israeli BTC Investors to Face Catch 22

They need to pay taxes from Bitcoin investing in order to avoid their property arrest, but banks don't take their money due to AML issues
06 August 2019   171

Bitcoin investors in Israel are faced with the impossibility of paying taxes, as local banks refuse to accept funds received from the sale of cryptocurrencies because of the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing. About this writes the local edition of Haaretz on August 6.

Bitcoin is not recognized as a currency in Israel, therefore, individuals must pay 25% of the income from cryptocurrency trading to the treasury, and legal entities - 47%.

Investor Ron Gross told the publication that he acquired bitcoins in 2011 and reported his income to the tax office. In 2017, the bank that served Gross began to refuse to accept funds received from the sale of bitcoins. The investor met with representatives of the bank to demonstrate to them a 70-page history of bitcoin transactions as confirmation of the origin of the funds, but failed to convince them.

The tax authority is aware of the problem, but they say the ball isn’t in their courts. I’ve tried working with almost all the banks, but the minute they hear the word ‘Bitcoin’ they freeze up.
 

Ron Gross

Bitcoin investor from Israel

 

Since Gross was unable to pay taxes on time, his bank account, home, and even scooters were arrested. According to the investor, the tax authorities know about the problem, but can do nothing.

According to Haaretz, the tax office is aware of $ 86 million in unpaid taxes on income from cryptocurrency trading. It is possible that the real amount may be significantly higher.

Roy Arav, another Bitcoin investor, kept the proceeds from trading Bitcoin in an account with Israeli bank Discount under the control of the Bit2C exchange. The bank refuses to transfer money to Arava’s personal account under the pretext that its politicians forbid it to transfer funds related to virtual assets to client accounts due to the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing.

Arav also could not pay taxes and was forced to sue the bank. According to the investor, the authorities entered his position and granted him a deferral of time for the consideration of the claim.