I follow crypto, and Biden’s SEC has been inconsistent in its crypto policies. I think Gary Gensler thinks he’s a crypto expert, but gets a lot of it wrong. Still, though, even the US crypto exchanges asking for regulatory clarity have been playing loose with the rules a bit. The article mentions New York State’s beef with Coinbase, but that was in regards to its “Earn” products, which attempt to tie deposits with “rewards”, and convince people those rewards are the same thing as interest on their savings accounts. They aren’t really, even in Proof-of-Stake coins which are the closest thing.
But make no mistake, the only reason Trump now likes crypto is it allows foreign actors to contribute to his campaign while disguising the source of the funds. And since Trump has captured the RNC, any donation to his campaign is a donation directly to him and his legal fund. The Winklevii are US citizens, so they are not obligated to hide their contributions. They must realize that a good portion of that contribution goes directly into Trump’s pocket. That’s the only reasonable explanation for announcing this publically – in case Trump wins, they want their transaction formally recorded, and they will expect Trump to deliver.
The Winklevii sent BTC because they have a buttload of it, bought at a very low price. Their actual cost for that donation is basically the long-term capital gains tax (and maybe not even that if their accountants are creative).
And yes, Trump (or his campaign) have to convert that to fiat at an exchange. (Probably Gemini, owned by the Winklevii.) But the key thing is that with Crypto, they have no way of knowing where the donations are actually coming from. Someone in Saudi Arabia or Russia could be filling out donations forms through a VPN, and list their location as Branson, MO, and there would be no way for anyone to prove it wasn’t really from Branson. (Maybe if they were careless and reused BTC addresses. Some Monero shill will probably reply and make sure everyone knows how Monero is even better at money laundering…)
I mean just because you say some pithy thing at the end doesn’t make it wrong. Nobody should still think, in 2024, that Bitcoin is in any way anonymous. If you want privacy you don’t use Bitcoin.
I follow crypto, and Biden’s SEC has been inconsistent in its crypto policies. I think Gary Gensler thinks he’s a crypto expert, but gets a lot of it wrong. Still, though, even the US crypto exchanges asking for regulatory clarity have been playing loose with the rules a bit. The article mentions New York State’s beef with Coinbase, but that was in regards to its “Earn” products, which attempt to tie deposits with “rewards”, and convince people those rewards are the same thing as interest on their savings accounts. They aren’t really, even in Proof-of-Stake coins which are the closest thing.
But make no mistake, the only reason Trump now likes crypto is it allows foreign actors to contribute to his campaign while disguising the source of the funds. And since Trump has captured the RNC, any donation to his campaign is a donation directly to him and his legal fund. The Winklevii are US citizens, so they are not obligated to hide their contributions. They must realize that a good portion of that contribution goes directly into Trump’s pocket. That’s the only reasonable explanation for announcing this publically – in case Trump wins, they want their transaction formally recorded, and they will expect Trump to deliver.
Does Trump then sell BTC for USD on an exchange and then pay tax on it? Why didn’t the Winklevii just send USD?
I don’t get this use-case for BTC, overbanking the overbanked.
The Winklevii sent BTC because they have a buttload of it, bought at a very low price. Their actual cost for that donation is basically the long-term capital gains tax (and maybe not even that if their accountants are creative).
And yes, Trump (or his campaign) have to convert that to fiat at an exchange. (Probably Gemini, owned by the Winklevii.) But the key thing is that with Crypto, they have no way of knowing where the donations are actually coming from. Someone in Saudi Arabia or Russia could be filling out donations forms through a VPN, and list their location as Branson, MO, and there would be no way for anyone to prove it wasn’t really from Branson. (Maybe if they were careless and reused BTC addresses. Some Monero shill will probably reply and make sure everyone knows how Monero is even better at money laundering…)
I mean just because you say some pithy thing at the end doesn’t make it wrong. Nobody should still think, in 2024, that Bitcoin is in any way anonymous. If you want privacy you don’t use Bitcoin.
I guess that makes me a shill for Monero 🙄
Bitcoin is pseudonomynous. If you are careful it can be anonymous but that is not a guarantee.
Monero is anonymous, as anyone who uses it will remind you about, repeatly. Monero users are the vegans of crypto.
i thought monero’s mixer was show to be susceptible to poisoning.