To Regulate or Not To Regulate?

in cryptocurrency •  7 years ago  (edited)

That is the question...

As time goes by and Bitcoin reaches more and more people the topic of regulation comes up more and more.

On the one side you have the Bitcoin purists that say it shouldn't be regulated in any way, and then on the other side you have those that say regulation would be good for bringing some stability and confidence to the entire space.

No matter which side of the fence you stand on, legitimate arguments can be made by both sides.

According to the CEO (Bobby Lee) of Chinese Bitcoin exchange BTCC, it's not even a question.

Bitcoin and cryptocurrency markets desperately need regulation according to Lee. 

Specifically he had this to say:

"I think regulation is much needed for this new asset class because otherwise it'll run amok from society."

What kind of "amok" might he be talking about?

Well there was the flash crash of Ethereum about a month ago that took the price from $300 down to $.10 in a matter of seconds that comes to mind...

Also just the volatility of the entire space in general is something that can be hard to stomach for most investors. 

The challenge?

I think many out there would agree that some regulation of the trading markets is needed, but the question is, what exactly is the best way to go about it?

Lee echoed that sentiment:

"The challenge for regulators is how to craft the rules around this new technology."
"I think it is taking lawmakers and regulators some time to wrap their minds around it, and to come up with appropriate rules and laws to govern companies, how we do business, to govern individuals, and how people conduct business online."

So they have to figure out how to regulate it for trading/investment purposes and they have to figure out how to regulate it for business transactional purposes.

Some regulation is already starting to happen.

Earlier this year the People's Bank of China set up a task force to carry out inspections and ensure bitcoin exchanges have implemented anti-money laundering systems. They have also issued warnings to exchanges of the consequences of not adopting these standards. 

Central banks are currently undecided how they want to classify Bitcoin, which is really the crux of the problem. Once they have decided what it is exactly they can move forward with how to regulate it.

Most have decided it is an asset and should be treated accordingly.

Others have decided it is in fact a currency, like Japan, and have legalized and regulated it as a form of money. 

According to Lee:

"Central banks need to start embracing the fact that bitcoin is a new digital currency that's being traded actively in China and around the world."

Not just an asset, but a currency. 

Once they start considering it as such they can go about crafting rules and regulations around it.

Conclusions:

I am on the side that says we absolutely need some regulations of the cryptocurrency trading markets. It might sound bad at first, but the amount of confidence that it would bring to the space would bring tons and tons of new money into the space.

Institutional type money.

Yes, some of the anonymity would go away, but the increase in prices would more than make up for it. Plus they would probably put safeguards in place in case of hacks.

Similar to the FDIC insurance at banks.

In my opinion the benefits would more than make up for any negatives and it would just be the next step in bringing cryptocurrency to the masses.

Regulating it as a form of digital currency is a topic for another day... :)

Stay informed my friends!

Sources:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/11/bitcoin-regulation-btcc-ceo-bobby-lee-says-rules-needed-for-new-asset-class.html

Image Sources:

https://news.bitcoin.com/government-will-fail-regulating-bitcoin/

https://www.benzinga.com/media/cnbc/13/12/4144506/bitcoin-not-just-a-china-thing-says-btc-china-ceo-bobby-lee

http://www.coindesk.com/japan-considers-regulating-bitcoin-as-currency/

https://news.bitcoin.com/a-french-bitcoiner-argues-its-too-early-to-regulate-bitcoin-in-new-york-court/

Follow me: @jrcornel

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

This is an extremely tough question. Without regulation designed to maintain stability, Bitcoin and others will be limited to a consumer base of speculators and traders. Regular people won't enter the market unless it is safeguarded and stable. But the attraction to Bitcoin and others is the freedom offered as a result of a relatively unregulated environment- the market dictates the direction.

With regulation comes less anonymity and opens the door for other ramifications that currently impact traditional currency markets.

Omg, those currencies...
joelfriedman68, we need more people like you on this channel.
Btw. you can find out about yourself at this terminal, I found you based on what the machine thinks I like about you, haha.

"Without regulation designed to maintain stability, Bitcoin and others will be limited to a consumer base of speculators and traders"

This is absolutely false.

Ok maybe I am the exception, but I am going to refrain from moving a significant amount of the income that I use to purchase goods and services into a currency whose value can be turned upside down overnight. Until I see consistent performance, I will just dip my toe in the market.

But I am new at this and my attitude may change as I gain more experience.

Yes. That is exactly the dilemma.

I think there's a compromise to be had. Bitcoin, as the major currency, gets some regulation which I agree it needs. But there's always room for really edgy, fully anonymous / "un-taxable" cryptos... The government will try and catch the people who use them, so it'll be a game of cat and mouse. I don't intend to get involved in such things - but I understand why hardcore crypto-anarchists would want to do so.

It's impossible to regulate people using cryptocoin software. It was designed specifically to make it impossible to control.

Exactly that. One can’t regulate algorithm. One can create a LAW to say what can be and what is forbidden. One can also create a LAW that will instruct the owner to send a portion of every transaction to the state. To do that would be another "hidden dictatorship" under the pretence of being democracy. That is totally undesirable by me...to hell with the money that would flow into it. I don’t need money. I need people willing to offer services for crypto...

the answer is
not just
NO
but

HELL NO

Absolutely agree! "regulation would be good for bringing some stability and confidence to the entire space." says Bobby Lee. Is that why regulation has brought so much stability and confidence to the US fiat dollar, or any fiat for that matter? I for one started investing into crypto because of the lack of regulation and the belief that all fiat money will eventually collapse. Also, "Yes, some of the anonymity would go away, but the increase in prices would more than make up for it." - sounds to me like trading your liberty for security. If you're willing to do that, you deserve neither. The anonymity IMO is crucial in the crypto market, one of the main reasons it took off to begin with.

I agree @everittdmickey with you.
If they regulate bitcoin, the goal and objectives of using decentralize crypto currencies is thrown away.

Let crypto alone #CryptoForever

if it's not mandated
it's prohibited
your masters have spoken

Within the next 5 years crypto is going to be regulated hard.

there are people becoming millionaires over night because of this, dont think that the government wont want their slice eventually

Well I think I speak for the majority in crypto when i say getting away from bureaucracy is what attracted us to crypto in the first place.

However, I do want someone to turn to when a crypto crime happens against me.

But not the Fed ... Never the Federal Gov...

I would prefer an organization of crypto users who set and regulate rules and when an investigation turns up criminal activity, it's turned over to the appropriate ( local to the crime ) authorities.

  • 2ndly, I want said agency to represent me as the victim, in some case supervisory capacity thru the conclusion.
  • Sort of like ICANN for domain names.

What this does is throttle exposure to uninformed & potentially bully Cops who don't know what Crypto is, or how it moves, etc. Those guys can't investigate anything within Crypto.

Usually they can't do more than take your statement, but given the data by a regulatory agency of civilians who's already documented the crime is more inline with why we are in Crypto.

IMO.

Regulation is good, enforced by the Fed Reserve, or other Fed Agency, ie: IRS, or even the State IS BS. Both of which ( state & Fed ) are bankrupt, you think they won't confiscate your assets, LOL - don't fool yourself.

IMO.

I agree we do need some sort of some regulations but I don't want it to be the Fed or the bankers.

To regulate! :D

It's a tricky question to answer. A lot of development is seen in the cryptospace since it's free and unregulated. People are allowed to dream up every possible product and use-case.

On the other hand, regulation would bring a lot of capital and adoption into the cryptospace. Is this something we want tho? The whole point of decentralized solutions is that the big actors do NOT get to control it.

Do we really want to hand the revolution back to the "regime"?
Caught between a rock and a hard place.

Thanks man! Your arguments are the most complete I've ever heard off!

First off, why do you think the internet was such a runaway success? I argue a big reason was because it was unregulated and untaxed for at least 20 years. It's odd that Silicon Valley fools don't understand this when they claim to be libertarians and then vote for democrats.

Second, if you wish to regulate cryptos, how? The centralized exchanges seem to be the only way to put some regulations into place. What about a decentralized exchange? I guess you could try to force the controlling "foundation" to abide by some type of regs. But, what if all the voters (miners, stakers, etc), whom are dispersed around the world, not just US vote against it?

Third, there are already regulations on US citizens, i.e. people are supposed to be paying taxes.

But, as to regulating the currency itself? I am not sure how that is accomplished. And, what is meant by "regulating" it in the first place?

Calling them an asset, instead of a currency, betrays how little the government agencies understand them, in my opinion. But they are getting there. I see the evolution towards being considered a currency as an inevitability, along with regulation.

My attraction to cryptos has less to do with anonymity and more with controlled supply. Governments eventually may be able to regulate cryptos, but they can't print them into oblivion as a financial weapon like they do to their fiat currencies.

Sitting and reading all this with an open mind gave me the giggles.

The fact remains that the tool bitcoin was made in a way to avoid regulation. It was made that way just for people who are pro-regulation to simply Fuck Off and find something else to regulate. "they can't have it all.

As for volatility "If investors really grow a brain and a pair" they would know what their bitcoin are worth and simple hold on to them.

Bitcoin doesn't have to obey the market price as one can sell his bitcoin to any one he choose to at any price whether higher or lower than what the market is trading at.

I really don't know if regulation will be a good idea.

In your article you are referring to the flash crash.
But imho even regulation will not solve this issue. This is just a problem that can arise if the market is not big enough.
If you have stock enough and decide to sell it, and other people have stop limits configured on your stock.. this will plumit the price down.
This happens in bigger exchanges as well.

The second thing is, if Bitcoin ever gets regulated other crypto's will rise which aren't regulated.. First one that comes in my mind is VERGE. (total anonymous crypto running on Tor)

I guess we will see in the near future.

However let's get past the segwit issue first :)

Yes, but they have safe guards set up to prevent it, such as the limit down rule on stock exchanges. After a price falls by a certain percentage in a certain period of time, trading is halted. Or the uptick rule where you can only short on an uptick in price... Things like that help to keep trading from running "amok".

Oh man

Bitcoin can not be regulated. Because it was created not to be..

"Central banks need to start embracing the fact that bitcoin is a new digital currency that's being traded actively in China and around the world." I completely agree with what Bobby said. They have to accept that bitcoin is already a more digital currency.

If people are trading it among themselves and not storing it online how can they regulate it?
I thought the whole purpose was that it cannot be regulated, who knows who has it?

my point exactly, the exchanges simply cannot be trusted.

When dumb money arrives greedy people always wanna make rules.

I say if those investors know what their bitcoin are worth to themselves they should hold and not let others suffer on the exchanges because of their fear. They're damn cowards

bitcoin was 3000 dollar now 2400 ? whats next ?

i wanted to write - to not
but .. damn it's already happening
still TO NOT! haha
but its good to stay open minded to changes sometimes cause you'll never know it may actually work on your favor

On the fence...

One cannot control what is not there. Seemingly, bitcoin and all cryptocurrencies cannot be regulated because of the nature of the beast; that is being decentralized. Trying to regulate crypto is like trying to hold air in the palm of your hand... it will just slip right through.

I thought the whole point of crypto was to get out of the system. Central banks are the system

Why would we put regulation into the hands of the very same corrupt mother fuckers that we're trying to defeat? What kind of regulation are we going to get with that? The kind that lets Goldman Satanic Sachs do anything it wants? That defeats the entire purpose of a crypto currency. So we have some volatility, we're still babies here with this thing. Crooks are gonna try to take it down, we just stand strong. It's only a matter of time for them.

Regulation hurts a free market.

Governments take your hands off the Bitcoin !

Bitcoin is highly volatile and as soon as it remains under the control of common man, it'll remain highly volatile and not a good investment for anyone. Because of it;s volatility, it's transactions charges has been increased greatly. I guess, after some regulations and control, the volatality can be controlled to some extent but then Bitcoin will lost the very purpose it has come into existence that is - Decentralization. Situation is very difficult, let's see what people would decide.

really great question your analysis is great thanks a lot for sharing and keep on posting ;)

How do you even regulate it? It's decentralized

Let's assume that a cryptocurrency crime incurred and you lost all of your assets. What is your next step?
To ask for legal advice and go to authorities in the country you live?
So at the end you will ask for help from your government you pay taxes. Or you will go to the internet to find a solution? Under which laws?
Do we need regulations or not? I believe yes.

All i can see in the near future is that they somehow ban or start monitoring the FIAT in/out on the most common exchanges like coinbase, kraken, bitstamp... most of them are already doing it, but only after some amount (not for all transactions).

I don't believe they will come up with a solution fast or they would come to it already.

add one more vote for no

But Lee does not see the move as a “crackdown” on bitcoin. ... The role of crypto currencies will definitely be an evolving one, according to Lee.

I understand your point of view. but I will prefer no regulation. Thanks for sharing.

love your arguments

A complete question thank you for posting

not taking any side yet...let me enjoy the debate in the comments first. @joelfriedman68, i kinda agree with you @yehey also has a valid point

This is for sure is one of the big headache for much of the leaders of the world.

I'm sorry @jrcornel did you say the FDIC?

Haha I knew that would spark at least one comment...

You're a sly one aren't you?

HAHAH :P

Yup ! bro regulation is need great article man followed you for more :)

Great read thanks, you can bet your bottom dollar they will regulate as soon as they can

HODOR?

whenever you have the mixing of FIAT than you will have regulation.
All this new injection of money is from FIAT Sources. it's sad but we have to compare Bitcoin to USD. Just the way it is.. those with USD are going to want regulation.

Interesting steem, I do agree with you where there should be some sort of regulation before it get out of control and this so called bubble will pop. Good read! 👍🏼

Did I miss something here? Bitcoin is already regulated. It's self-regulated. It's regulated by every member of the Bitcoin community. You now can have a Swiss Bank in your pocket. And you want to hand it over? For what, a little bit quicker adoption? The more things change...

I don't know how I feel. I don't want too many regulations but I want it safe. I do not want high taxes and rising prices because people are suddenly making more money.

hey @jrcornel thanks for this

losing control to centralized regulatory bodies would hurt value if it were possible to implement, by the time regulations are put forward dexs will have established dominance in cryptosphere

here is an article from http://www.maxkeiser.com by Charles Hugh Smith on regulations becoming obslete When the “Solutions” Become the Problems

Good article and a subject that needs a lot of attention imo. The thing is; WHO is going to regulate it - its [supposed to be] a decentralized system. We see it with fiat funny money we have today - governments that 'regulate' it can print it to infinity. One of the key aspects of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is that no singular organization owns and controls it. Take that away and we take away the very thing that makes it so strong as a real, new currency.
Many famous people have voiced their opinions on Bitcoin - I wrote an article on this subject this morning. For all those keen to read what the famous think of Bitcoin, please read my post here: https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@nzfxtrader/what-famous-people-are-saying-about-bitcoin

Upvoted, Cheers!

Why would we regulate? I don't understand... One of its unique traits exists because it cannot be regulated by a third party. If they try to go down this path it won't end well.

Crypto market is financial freedom, the only one we have, regulate is suicide.

Regulation is a way for the government to put the chains of bondage on the common man so the corporate elites can utilize these regulations to fill their own pockets with wealth. It puts an undue burden on people who are capable of common sense.

Capitalism is regulations in itself.
The food makes you shit for two days? Don't eat there again.
The brakes keep failing on a certain car model? Don't buy it

People need to learn how to think for themselves rather than having the babysitter we call government come in with their "rules" we call regulation because they are too damn dumb to think for themselves.

Regulations:
Dodd-Frank. How did that work out.
The Volcker Rule- Yeah ok
Operation Chokepoint-Government or Henchman?

Oh yeah...in regard to regulation...MY ANSWER is NO.

I definitely am among those who say that a regulation is needed. The example of the Ethereum candle from 300 to 10 USD is a perfect instance that shows what investors do not want to see. I do not know how this regulation should be but it is definitely necessary.

Today there's news in Austria, where I live, that you'll soon be able to buy bitcoin at the post office. Thus I think it gains traction and the regulations won't hit as hard, if there are already many at it.
I'm speaking only of bitcoin here, though.

The best debate within ones self on this topic yet. I feel there should be a t&c in terms of regulation so there is no direct regulation as that could affect everything on a whole new level.

Affecting something can be a good thing at times but if it is constantly affected then that'd make it shaky and that is always bad. I'm on the line with this for as far as I can put it down in words but up in my head I'm always for no regulation unless there's a third option. Cheers! Just my 5 cents worth.

Very well written post indeed, got me thinking of all sorts of possibilities.

#follow4follow

Nice post. Followed you. Please follow me.