RE: A Utility Token is a Unicorn

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

A Utility Token is a Unicorn

in regulation •  6 years ago  (edited)

FinCEN released comprehensive guidance and DApps are money transmitters!

Here’s an attorney’s remarks.

But a blockchain is essentially a DApp for transmitting money. So this means Bitcoin is a money transmitter. Nonsense!

Essentially what FinCEN is pointing out they can regulate any humans persons or business entities connected to the centralized control of — or investment enterprise benefit from — the operation (not development of) of any software for money transmission (even if it runs on a P2P network).

So although Bitcoin is a money transmitter, they can’t regulate it because they can’t identify any centralized entities that have a controlling interest in Bitcoin. Ditto for DApps. If they can’t identify any controlling interest and have no way of interfering with the P2P network operation, then they effectively are powerless to regulate it. But if they can identify some legal entities who have a controlling interest, then they will regulate them.

P.S. As usual the links are also archived at archive.org in case the become dead links in the future.

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!