Chat with us, powered by LiveChat

Controversial Crypto Rule: Comment Period Extended For 60 Days

Crypto Rule
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

EDITOR NOTE: So much for privacy and safe-keeping in the cryptocurrency realm. FinCEN is proposing a new rule requiring all businesses transacting in cryptocurrencies to identify and keep records on all customers who make transactions using digital currencies. This pending rule awaiting a 60-day comment window will virtually extinguish the original purpose behind all cryptocurrency development. Furthermore, it will place a regulatory, operational, and cost burden on those companies that allow digital money transactions. As many crypto-supporters are quick to criticize, it also places these digital funds at risk, especially in light of the recent government hack. Not only will crypto-users face government identification and possible surveillance, some risk having their personal information and digital funds stolen. As we’ve said many times before--there’s a much simpler way to achieve financial privacy and investment in decentralized money. It’s called physical non-CUSIP gold and silver. Private money, privately stored, all possessing intrinsic value.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has extended the commenting period by 60 days for a controversial proposed rule that requires cryptocurrency businesses and banks to record and store customer identification details for self-hosted wallets. The agency proposed the Requirements for Certain Transactions Involving Convertible Virtual Currency or Digital Assets rule last month, and its commenting period ended Jan. 15. FinCEN extended the commenting period by 15 days for reporting requirements and another 45 days for a requirement on recordkeeping and counterparty reporting.

A Controversial Rule

The FinCEN rule requires crypto businesses and exchanges to maintain a record of transactions with self-hosted wallets for amounts over $3,000 and submit a currency transaction report (CTR) to the agency for amounts over $10,000.

From the time that it was first proposed, the rule generated criticism and pushback from the crypto community. Civil rights lawyers claimed that it infringed on personal liberty because it required disclosure of transaction details for self-hosted wallets, or wallets that are not connected to the internet and reside on an individual's computer or offline. On the other hand, crypto businesses claimed that it would increase the costs and effort required to maintain and track their transactions with private wallets.

That the rule was being rushed through its commenting period also did not help matters, leading to suspicions that the intent was to finalize it before the next administration took over. Legislators weighed in and asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who is widely believed to be responsible for the rule, to consider industry feedback before finalizing the rule.

A Variety of Comments  

In its initial iteration, the rule has already attracted over 7,500 comments from a wide variety of commenters, highlighting the problematic aspects, technical and legal, of such a rule's implementation. The submission by Dr. Neha Narula, director of the Digital Currency Initiative (DCI) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Patrick Murck, affiliate at the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University, highlighted how smart contracts can be used to escrow and subsequently transfer cryptocurrencies without a proper recipient.

"The proposed rule as written would prohibit MSBs (Money Services Businesses) from supporting this entire class of customer transactions. This would make transacting with CVCs and LTDAs less secure and greatly inhibit the innovation and growth of this exciting new technology," they wrote, adding that "disparate treatment" of digital and analog dollars will weaken future U.S. central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) in comparison to other nations' CBDC projects. "... the rule could further hem in the design and innovation of blockchain-based or cryptographic 'digital dollars' (whether issued by the Federal Reserve or private actors) at a time when development in these approaches is nascent, potentially putting the future dollar at a competitive disadvantage as compared to other sovereign money."

Others wrote about the implications of sharing sensitive customer data with FinCEN in light of recent hacks at government agencies. "A number of preliminary discussions with potential and actual customers indicate that they are seriously concerned about providing detailed information to FinCEN, citing recent security breaches at FinCEN as risks," wrote Kristin Boggiano, co-founder and president at CrossTower, a global digital asset infrastructure platform.

Originally posted on Investopedia

Bank Failure Scenario Cover Small Not Tilted



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

All articles are provided as a third party analysis and do not necessarily reflect the explicit views of GSI Exchange and should not be construed as financial advice.

Precious Metals and Currency Data Powered by nFusion Solutions