1/ Why is consequential tax policy being made in a rushed infrastructure bill? Here's the answer. IRS already has authority to require reporting and it had plans in place to issue new rules on crypto. But someone wanted to count the revenue from that in the infrastructure bill.
74
406
76
1,276
2/ Don't think they expected the crypto community to object, much ess succeed in getting senators to introduce an amendment to limit the definition of "broker" to, you know, people who actually broker.
5
32
0
327
3/ Now I think they're concerned their original plans are in jeopardy. They shouldn't be. The crypto industry has been pleading with the IRS for clear reporting rules for years. barmstrong.medium.com/coinba…
1
22
2
304
4/ The Warner amendment looks to be trying to save Treasury's bacon, but it's a technical disaster. It's what you get when you rush a complicated and nuanced policy question this way. We may be seriously damaging the future of American innovation for an accounting gimmick.

12:21 PM · Aug 6, 2021

13
75
6
492
5/ Here's the source of the quotes above FYI. I will stress, though, the headline is wrong. The Warner amendment is NOT a compromise. It would make the tax provision WORSE than if we had no amendments at all. wsj.com/articles/cryptocurre…
8
53
7
371
And it should go without saying... CALL YOUR SENATORS! Tell them to vote NO on the Warner-Portman amendment and YES on the Wyden-Lummis-Toomey amendment.
29
151
21
696
Replying to @jerrybrito
This is bearish.
1
0
0
1
You called?
0
0
0
0
Replying to @jerrybrito
Even if the bill passes, can we fight it on the future?
0
0
0
0
Replying to @jerrybrito
They actually nailed it on the technicals. Nobody wants to hear it but there's a whole group of people who have been shouting this from the rooftops for years. - pow is crucial, more than just security - protocol must not change - legal distribution a must - no baked in anonymity
2
0
0
1
To clarify I'm not a fan of big gov, taxes or innovation stifling regulation... I'm just saying this is much less surprising to me, and the technical language is accurate in ways that are commonly misunderstood like nodes = miners for ex.
0
0
0
0
Replying to @jerrybrito @3DNuts
#Bitcoin fixes this.
0
0
0
1
Replying to @jerrybrito
What a world we live in…. 🤦‍♂️
0
0
0
0
Replying to @jerrybrito
It came from Treasury. Divide the crypto community by excluding PoW but not PoS from a definition--gimmick or evil genius?
0
0
0
0