Kraken Exchange is going away from Japan

San Francisco-based exchange Kraken declared that it would stop servicing to Japan residents: it will stop accepting deposits by the middle of this month
07 May 2018   1416

Trade for existing customers in Japan will be suspended in mid-June, and these customers must withdraw their funds by the end of this month. Kraken entered the market in October 2014. Last month it said: “IIT is impractical to continue service for Japan residents.”  

The 13th biggest stock exchange in the world did not go into details about why it is leaving Japan, but income does not seem to be a problem. The price of Bitcoin now vacillates around 9,000 dollars, which is less than half of the historical maximum achieved in December. But the daily trading volume in Bitcoin, which is necessary for the exchange, has not gained a corresponding decrease.

The market supposes that the costs connected with compliance with the new rules in Japan are the main reason for the abandonment of Kraken. The Japanese crypto  community was stressed by a shock in January, when Coincheck incured a record hack, losing NEM coins at $ 530 million. On April 16 Monex Group purchased Coincheck for 33 million dollars. Later Coincheck declared that for the fiscal year to March operating gains were $ 491 million. And that’s letting the fact that it compensated users 47.3 billion yen ($ 432 million) for hacking NEM.

Because Japanese regulators started to seriously conduct this industry, commercial cryptocurrency exchanges in the country launched a self-regulatory body to restore the traders` trust. Though Coincheck’s profit displays that the exchange of cryptocurrencies can be highly profitable. 

Suspending services for Japan residents will allow us to better focus on our resources to improve in other geographical areas. After we have had a chance to better catch to our rapid growth, we will consider the possibility of resuming service for Japan residents
US-based Cryptocurrency Exchange

The protection of retail investors is the highest priority for regulators, when new forms of assets begin to work. Despite this Asian regulators need to find a balance before more exchanges lose patience and flee to other regions.

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   180

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.