# Lifestyles & Discussion > Bitcoin / Cryptocurrencies >  More Hints About the Coming US Regulation of Bitcoin

## Origanalist

TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2014

Virtual currencies, like Bitcoin, must meet transparency requirements enshrined in federal banking laws in a way that "keeps us one step ahead of the bad guys," a senior Treasury Department official said Tuesday."Virtual currencies pose a variety of illicit finance risks. But perhaps the most significant one involves the potential for anonymity," said David Cohen, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence in a speech to Bloomberg News in New York. Users of virtual currencies are not subject to any record-keeping requirements, Cohen noted. As a result, the currencies could one day be used by terrorists or targets of an international sanctions regime, he noted. "These are adaptable actors who are drawn to ungoverned spaces and so may increasingly look to this technology as an attractive way to transfer value," Cohen said.

(Via MarketWatch)

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com...Journal.com%29

----------


## ClydeCoulter

There is so much hypocrisy and contradiction in just the paragraph that you posted.

Keys (that make you smh):
transparency requirements enshrined in federal banking
record-keeping
targets of an international sanctions 
ungoverned spaces
transfer value

----------


## Origanalist

> There is so much hypocrisy and contradiction in just the paragraph that you posted.
> 
> Keys (that make you smh):
> transparency requirements enshrined in federal banking
> record-keeping
> targets of an international sanctions 
> ungoverned spaces
> transfer value


As in all things government. It is, as they say, what it is.

----------


## phill4paul

> There is so much hypocrisy and contradiction in just the paragraph that you posted.
> 
> Keys (that make you smh):
> transparency requirements enshrined in federal banking
> record-keeping
> targets of an international sanctions 
> ungoverned spaces
> transfer value


  Let's not forget:

  bad guys
  terrorists  
  ( and the now hugely popular) targets of an international sanctions regime

----------


## evilfunnystuff

> Users of virtual currencies are not subject to any record-keeping requirements, Cohen noted. As a result, the currencies could one day be used by terrorists or targets of an international sanctions regime, he noted.


The same could be said of cash.

----------


## muh_roads

They better start banning cash.

*HSBC Helped Terrorists, Iran, Mexican Drug Cartels Launder Money* http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/07/16/hsbc-helped-terrorists-iran-mexican-drug-cartels-launder-money-senate-report-says/

----------


## Origanalist

> They better start banning cash.
> 
> *HSBC Helped Terrorists, Iran, Mexican Drug Cartels Launder Money* http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/07/16/hsbc-helped-terrorists-iran-mexican-drug-cartels-launder-money-senate-report-says/


I'm fairly sure it is planned.

----------


## muh_roads

> I'm fairly sure it is planned.


Most likely.  Similar to Lehman Brothers, somebody is the fall guy for not sucking the right dick.

----------


## Tod

> They better start banning cash.
> 
> *HSBC Helped Terrorists, Iran, Mexican Drug Cartels Launder Money*
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/07/16/hsbc-helped-terrorists-iran-mexican-drug-cartels-launder-money-senate-report-says/


Remember this story from Louisiana, 2011?




> *Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash For Secondhand Sales**from the the-other-side-of-the-bitcoin dept* One of the _good_ features of cash is the fact that it can be used  anonymously.  It's no surprise that the government hates that, but would  you ever expect the government to actually outlaw the use of cash?   Down in Louisiana, a recently passed law completely outlaws the use of cash in transactions for secondhand goods.  When I read the story, I thought it was so crazy that it had to be a misunderstanding.  I looked up the bill, and the _original version_ of the bill actually does *not*  have this clause.  Instead, it requires that anyone selling secondhand  goods make a detailed recording of any cash transaction.  But somewhere  along the way, that bill was amended, and the final version (embedded  below) does, in fact, appear to ban cash transactions: _ A secondhand dealer shall not enter into any cash transactions in payment for  the purchase of junk or used or secondhand property. Payment shall be made in the  form of check, electronic transfers, or money order issued to the seller of the junk or  used or secondhand property and made payable to the name and address of the seller.  All payments made by check, electronic transfers, or money order shall be reported  separately in the daily reports required by R.S. 37:1866._ I do wonder if that's even legal.  Our cash clearly says that "This note  is legal tender for all debts, public and private."  While businesses  may have the right to refuse cash, can a government outlaw the use of  cash?  That seems pretty extreme.


http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...nd-sales.shtml

----------


## PaulConventionWV

Regulations on bitcoin will probably be like regulations on the internet.  The internet has developed wildly despite the US government's wishes, and it hasn't successfully regulated it directly yet.  Bitcoin will probably prove even harder to regulate than the internet.  I don't think they want to end up looking like fools, so they'll talk big while they feverishly try to come up with a way to stop this affront to their power and authority.

----------

