China’s bitcoin miners have long embodied a contradiction. Cryptocurrency trading is illegal in the country; initial coin offerings, used to fund new blockchain projects, are banned; and Chinese banks can hardly touch the stuff. And yet somehow the country has remained the epicenter of global cryptocurrency mining, home to more of the computing power used to mint new bitcoin than any other country.Now the Chinese government has proposed to ban mining.
The city of Plattsburgh, New York announced on Thursday that it is temporarily banning the commercial mining of cryptocurrency for 18 months.
The official reasoning for the moratorium is to "protect and enhance the City's natural, historic, cultural and electrical resources."
Plattsburgh residents have seen skyrocketing electrical bills — as much as $100 to $200 increases — as a result of commercial cryptomining operations that mine for cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, according to Plattsburgh Mayor Colin Read, who spoke with Motherboard. The city is taking action to protect its citizens from those rising electrical bills that the city of Plattsburgh says is caused by cryptomining operations.
Jolted by the global investment craze over bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, U.S. lawmakers are moving to consider new rules that could impose stricter federal oversight on the emerging asset class, several top lawmakers told Reuters.Bipartisan momentum is growing in the Senate and House of Representatives for action to address the risks posed by virtual currencies to investors and the financial system, they said.Even free-market Republican conservatives, normally wary of government red tape, said regulation could be needed if cryptocurrencies threaten the U.S. economy.“There’s no question about the fact that there is a need for a regulatory framework,” said Republican Senator Mike Rounds, a Senate Banking Committee member.Digital assets currently fall into a jurisdictional gray area between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and individual states.Much of the concern on Capitol Hill is focused on speculative trading and investing in cryptocurrencies, leading some lawmakers to push for digital assets to be regulated as securities and subject to the SEC’s investor protection rules.“The SEC is properly the lead on the issue,” said Republican Representative Bill Huizenga, chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets which will hold hearings on the issue in coming weeks.
Ukrainian legislators should separate the regulation of crypto mining from the legal status of cryptocurrencies. The new approach was proposed by the chairman of an important parliamentary committee who criticized law enforcement agencies for cracking down on crypto miners. Police confiscated mining equipment in a series of raids this week. Authorities claim that coins have been used to finance pro-Russian separatists.
Digital currencies such as bitcoin demand increased oversight and may require a new federal regulatory framework, the top U.S. markets regulators will tell lawmakers at a congressional hearing on Tuesday.Christopher Giancarlo, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and Jay Clayton, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), will provide testimony to the Senate Banking Committee amid growing global concerns over the risks virtual currencies pose to investors and the financial system.Giancarlo and Clayton will say a patchwork of rules for cryptocurrency exchanges may need to be reviewed in favor of a rationalized federal framework, according to prepared testimony published on Monday.
The Indian government is getting more serious about using blockchain technology into the growing digital economy of the country. But this does not mean it is going soft on cryptocurrencies.“Distributed ledger system or the block chain technology allows organization of any chain of records or transactions without the need of intermediaries,” said finance minister Arun Jaitely while presenting the Union Budget 2018-19 in Parliament on Thursday.“The Government does not consider crypto-currencies legal tender or coin and will take all measures to eliminate use of these crypto-assets in financing illegitimate activities or as part of the payment system. The government will explore use of block chain technology proactively for ushering in digital economy.”
If you use your Bank of America-, JP Morgan Chase- or Citigroup-issued credit card to buy cryptocurrency, then you'll have to find an alternative ASAP. According to Bloomberg, the banks have banned crypto purchase using their cards due to the virtual coins' volatile nature. BofA has already started declining credit transactions with known exchanges, though its debit cards aren't be affected by the ban. Citigroup also announced on Friday that it'll no longer process crypto purchases, while JP Morgan Chase's new rule will take effect today.JPMorgan spokesperson Mary Jane Rogers said the bank has decided to impose a restriction on crypto purchases, because it doesn't want to deal with the risks associated with it. In addition to the difficulties of keeping an eye on purchases -- something they're required to do -- associated with crypto-coins, there's also always the risk of somebody buying more than they can afford to pay. In addition, identity thieves could use stolen credit cards to buy cryptocurrency, and banks have little chance (if any) to get that money back.These banks aren't the only financial institutions backing away from anything associated with crypto. Capital One Financial and Discover also don't allow cryptocurrency purchases with their credit cards. Discover chief David Nelms even described people using virtual coins as "crooks... trying to get money out of China or wherever." A Coinbase staff member has also revealed in a Reddit post that major credit card networks and providers recently changed the terms of digital currency purchases. The new terms allow them to treat those purchases as a cash advance, which carries additional charges and have higher interest rates.
Bitcoin qualifies as money, a federal judge ruled on Monday, in a decision linked to a criminal case over hacking attacks against JPMorgan Chase & Co and other companies.
U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan rejected a bid by Anthony Murgio to dismiss two charges related to his alleged operation of Coin.mx, which prosecutors have called an unlicensed bitcoin exchange.
Murgio had argued that bitcoin did not qualify as "funds" under the federal law prohibiting the operation of unlicensed money transmitting businesses.
But the judge, like her colleague Jed Rakoff in an unrelated 2014 case, said the virtual currency met that definition.
The European Commission is proposing the creation of a database that will hold information on users of virtual currencies, which will record data on the user's real world identity, along with all associated wallet addresses.
A week after the attacks in Paris, home affairs ministers from European Union countries are due to gather in Brussels on Friday 20th November for a crisis meeting to discuss methods of strengthening the region’s response to terrorism.
One crucial item on the agenda is a planned crackdown on virtual currencies and anonymous payments made online and through pre-paid cards.
According to draft conclusions of the meeting, European interior and justice ministers will urge the European Commission (the EU executive arm) to propose measures to strengthen the controls of non-banking payment methods. These include electronic/anonymous payments, virtual currencies and the transfers of gold and precious metals by pre-paid cards.
The most common virtual currency, Bitcoin, is used as an online method of making money anonymously and quickly around the world without the need for third-party verification. In addition, anonymous electronic payments can be made via pre-paid debit cards bought as gift cards in stores.
The European Union’s Court of Justice (ECJ) has today ruled that Bitcoin is a currency, detailing exchanges that transfer traditional currencies into the crypto-coins for a fee are to be exempt from consumption taxes.
Under the EU rule against value added taxes (VAT) on transfers of “currency, bank notes and coins used as legal tender,” the new call presents an important boost for Bitcoin, erasing related costs for buying and using the virtual funds in Europe – one of the world’s leading trading zones.
Today’s decision concludes a long-standing discord in Europe over how best to regulate Bitcoin. The UK’s tax authorities took the position that it is a currency, while other countries, including Sweden and Germany, believe that Bitcoin is a commodity and transfers should therefore be subject to sales taxes. Poland levied a 23% VAT on all exchanges – maintaining that Bitcoin is an exchangeable product, not a currency.
The pathway to market for new products utilizing synthetic biology can be difficult to navigate, posing a challenge for companies in their efforts to commercialize new ideas, while the novelty posed by some of these products can make it difficult for regulatory agencies to evaluate risks, according to a new report from the Synthetic Biology Project.
The report, The DNA of the U.S. Regulatory System: Are We Getting It Right for Synthetic Biology?, explores current government oversight of synthetic biology in the United States by examining the regulatory pathways of different products and applications. The case studies in the report include synthetic organisms, synthetic chemicals, biopesticides, biomining products, and genetically modified plants, which are regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture.
This regulatory environment can be particularly challenging for startups in the biotechnology space. While larger companies may have the resources to navigate the various laws, it can be difficult for smaller companies to know which agency to approach and even which laws may apply to particular applications.
"Based on this report, it appears the U.S. regulatory system may need its own genetic engineering," says Dr. Todd Kuiken, senior program associate with the Synthetic Biology Project. "The system is not flexible enough to address rapidly evolving technologies like synthetic biology. This could make it difficult for agencies to properly evaluate the potential risks of these products, as well making it difficult for products to move to the market."
Here in the United States, it seemed like legal red tape would stall the launch of delivery drones for years, but the wait is over sooner than expected.
On July 17, the Federal Aviation Administration will allow unmanned aircraft to deliver medical supplies to a free clinic during research flights in West Virginia. That occasion will be the first legal drone delivery on U.S. soil, and represent another big step forward for the U.S. drone industry.
California, the state that prides itself as the birthplace of modern technology and whose policies such as the unenforceability of non-competes contributed substantially to the innovation ecosystem, recently proposed a law that requires innovators to get permission from the state, or be banned.
Last week CA's State Assembly announced AB 1326, a bill that would ban any unlicensed bitcoin or cryptocurrency business activity. It would "prohibit a person from engaging in this state in the business of virtual currency, as defined, in this state unless the person is licensed by the Commissioner of Business Oversight or is exempt from the licensure requirement." Banks, financial institutions, and governments would be exempted under the law, making it even harder for a startup to compete. Worse yet, the bill doesn't even define what "the business of virtual currency'" means, making it both overly vague and counter to the very nature of the trustless, permissionless innovation that bitcoin and blockchain technology enable. So right now, if you're building multisignature technology to better enable people to secure their bitcoin, or developing an open source peer-to-peer remittance app that connects users to send each other bitcoin, the state of CA could very well ban you from operating unless you've received a license.
So for the next wave of entrepreneurs building technology in the bitcoin or blockchain space, the state is poised to say that in order to start your company or release your technology, you must pay $5000 for a license and tens or hundreds of thousands in legal and compliance fees, not to mention requirements such as informing them of your educational background and 10 years of past addresses. That might be awkward for the 21 year old college dropouts working on a cryptocurrency startup. And of course there's no guarantee the state will actually grant the license, or shall we say, permission.
The United States government has taken a new, though preliminary, step to encourage commercial development of the moon.
According to documents obtained by Reuters, U.S. companies can stake claims to lunar territory through an existing licensing process for space launches.
The Federal Aviation Administration, in a previously undisclosed late-December letter to Bigelow Aerospace, said the agency intends to “leverage the FAA’s existing launch licensing authority to encourage private sector investments in space systems by ensuring that commercial activities can be conducted on a non-interference basis.”
In other words, experts said, Bigelow could set up one of its proposed inflatable habitats on the moon, and expect to have exclusive rights to that territory - as well as related areas that might be tapped for mining, exploration and other activities.
However, the FAA letter noted a concern flagged by the U.S. State Department that “the national regulatory framework, in its present form, is ill-equipped to enable the U.S. government to fulfill its obligations” under a 1967 United Nations treaty, which, in part, governs activities on the moon.
MasterCard has used a submission to a Senate inquiry to argue for Australian regulators to move against the pseudonymity of digital currencies such as Bitcoin.
"Any regulation adopted in Australia should address the anonymity that digital currency provides to each party in a transaction," the company's submission (PDF) states.
"Contrary to transactions made with a MasterCard product, the anonymity of digital currency transactions enables any party to facilitate the purchase of illegal goods or services; to launder money or finance terrorism; and to pursue other activity that introduces consumer and social harm without detection by regulatory or police authority."
Google has been test-driving self-driving cars since 2011. The updated Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA ) Model S electric car comes with rudimentary autopilot features by default, and CEO Elon Musk hopes to have fully automated vehicles by the year 2023.
Musk's careful forecast raises the question: If Google can drive a car without human intervention today, then why should we have to wait another nine years before these vehicles hit the mainstream?
The answer is part technical and part economical -- but above all else, the legal framework just isn't ready for driverless cars yet.
