Hmm. The article talks about the question of DeFi, where the sender might be a smart contract, making it difficult or impossible to identify any human beings to include in a report.
The issue would seem to be much broader than that, however. What about miner or validator rewards? Is it an implication of the bill that the receipt of digital assets as part of a miner or validator reward would also trigger a reporting requirement, if the block reward exceeds $10,000 in value?
Who would one be able to identify as the person responsible for sending the portion of the reward that is generated by cryptocurrency inflation? And what about miner fees? Would every user that pays miner fees need to be identified?
Even a simple transfer would require a sender to identify themselves both to their recipient and to the miner who mines the block. But how would the miner and the sender even have the physical ability to connect with each other to share this information, even if they wanted to?
It's one thing to make DeFi illegal, or to make participating in DeFi in a compliant manner impractical, it's an entirely different thing to make operating a miner illegal or impractical.
Somehow I doubt this would have been Congress's intent, but might it be the effect of the bill?
The issue would seem to be much broader than that, however. What about miner or validator rewards? Is it an implication of the bill that the receipt of digital assets as part of a miner or validator reward would also trigger a reporting requirement, if the block reward exceeds $10,000 in value?
Who would one be able to identify as the person responsible for sending the portion of the reward that is generated by cryptocurrency inflation? And what about miner fees? Would every user that pays miner fees need to be identified?
Even a simple transfer would require a sender to identify themselves both to their recipient and to the miner who mines the block. But how would the miner and the sender even have the physical ability to connect with each other to share this information, even if they wanted to?
It's one thing to make DeFi illegal, or to make participating in DeFi in a compliant manner impractical, it's an entirely different thing to make operating a miner illegal or impractical.
Somehow I doubt this would have been Congress's intent, but might it be the effect of the bill?