Bitcoin regulated in Taiwan by Anti-Money Laundering Law

The Governor of the Central Bank of Taiwan has offered bitcoin should be regulated under anti-money laundering laws
03 April 2018   1327

Yang Chin-long has declared to the lawmakers that the financiers are observing cryptocurrency prices closely. According to his suggestment, cryptocurrency in the country is to be controlled under the current anti-money laundering legislation.

Taiwan's Central Bank, 中華民國中央銀行, is supposed to start regulation of  cryptocurrencies (such as bitcoin) by the country’s existing anti-money laundering (AML) laws. Governor Yang was replying to officials’ anxiety about bitcoin’s lack of transparency when traded.

As Focus Taiwan reported, Yang (who headed the central bank in February) made a suggestion for the Ministry of Justice to include Bitcoin into the competence of Taiwan’s Money Laundering Control Act due to the digital money’s lack of regulation.

Then Mr. Yang efforted to convince authorities that his agency was indeed monitoring bitcoin, going so far as to constitute investor guides or warnings about the decentralized currency’s possible risks.

These recommendations are connected with the statement made some weeks ago by the Finance Minister Sheu Yu-jer. He declared Taiwan should tax bitcoin while treating it as a consumer item. Mr. Sheu said the taxation problem had been carefully studied by his division.

Governor Yang affirmed having advised to the Ministry of Justice how all bitcoin trading can turn under AML. These remarks seem to be in line with regional efforts towards cryptocurrency: Malaysia this month has accepted know your customer (KYC) rules among exchanges, and South Korea has been trying to disrupt anonymous accounts through its banks using analogous laws. Mr Yang also added that "major central bankers and international financial organizations are against legalization of trading in virtual currencies like Bitcoin.”

Bitcoin markets are not difficult to manipulate because “87.5 percent of the Bitcoin transactions have been owned by only 0.61 percent of the trading accounts in the world,” he declared, informing investors to pay more attention to possible risks.

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   135

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.