Gladstein: Draft to classify not re-using Bitcoin addresses as mixingnjump.me/nevent1qqstf99gr6n408rdqqt4su3yw2agdw6ydjy69apae7pkpsgrpk7yevspzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsz9mhwden5te0dehhxarj9enx6apwwa5h5tnzd9aqz9thwden5te0v4jx2m3wdehhxarj9ekxzmnyqy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hst0vkjz
715 sats \ 9 comments \ @sefiro 29 May bitcoin
I recently learned that legislation has been drafted on Capitol Hill to classify not re-using Bitcoin addresses as "mixing"
There are also efforts to force "unhosted wallet providers" to collect user info for taxes
As well as to give power to Treasury to sanction any address (even Americans)
And a whole lot more bad stuff
[…]
write
preview
related posts
208 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 29 May
I think this is the relevant part of the rule:
at 72709 (“(A) Pooling or aggregating CVC from multiple persons, wallets, addresses, or accounts; (B) Using programmatic or algorithmic code to coordinate, manage, or manipulate the structure of a transaction; (C) Splitting CVC for transmittal and transmitting the CVC through a series of independent transactions; (D) Creating and using single-use wallets, addresses, or accounts, and sending CVC through such wallets, addresses, or accounts through a series of independent transactions; (E) Exchanging between types of CVC or other digital assets; or (F) Facilitating user-initiated delays in transactional activity.”)
Here's a link to the rule:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-10-23/pdf/2023-23449.pdf
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 30 May
There are more bitcoin addresses than there are galaxies in the whole universe, but still, the US government think it's powerful enough to regulate them. God luck with that!
reply
1007 sats \ 0 replies \ @travis 30 May
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @clark 29 May
Is this partially the fault of account-style cryptos? Address reuse is the default almost everywhere else.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 30 May
Address re-use is actually pretty common everywhere.
reply
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheBTCManual 30 May
Lol so lightning channels are mixing too?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SpaceHodler 30 May
I guess one way this could be implemented is by requiring CEXes to only allow withdrawals to one address as the user's own address (which they already kind-of limit withdrawals to, to make it easier to comply with the travel rule).
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 30 May
Ultimately, the goal is to ban self-custody and push everyone towards the ETF.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 30 May
They want to keep track of who is using which address. They want you to reuse the same address so they know who you are.
reply