#Supreme Court mineral taxation ruling | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

huobi-study-club · 3 years ago

Text

Huobi Observation: Why is venture capital investment increasing significantly in the Indian crypto market?

Huobi Observation

Data shows that the Indian crypto market has surged to nearly $40 billion from about $200 million a year ago. In addition, the Indian blockchain industry continues to gain traction with venture capitalists.

Venture Capital firms have poured in more than $176.9 million via 13 deals in India's cryptocurrency and blockchain industry this year. It has already reached 4 times compared to last year.

On 4 March 2020, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that the ban on banks offering cryptocurrency trading services by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 2018 was unconstitutional.

The Indian government has abandoned its earlier complete prohibition plan of bitcoin, proposing to classify cryptocurrencies as an alternative asset category.

At the same time, regulatory measures have been introduced in India, with the Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs amending the disclosure norms of the Companies Act to require Indian companies to disclose the details of cryptocurrency transactions.

According to Huobi Study Club, the market did not react greatly to the RBI's previous attitude on banning banks from providing cryptocurrency services, indicating that the market is not interested in the regulation in India.

The deeper reason may be that India is a vast country with a large population, however its administrative management is insufficient. Therefore, rather than taking a hard line on cryptocurrencies and attempting to ban them, India should establish a legal mechanism. A regulatory scheme and a possible taxation scheme would be more conducive to promote a stable industry than a ban or uncertainty.

The investment capital is pouring into the Indian market which indicates that traditional capital is less concerned about the possible risks from policy but more bullish about the prospects of the Indian market. On the one hand, India has a large population and advanced IT industry. With the increasing investment, the Indian crypto market will expand and radiate its influence throughout Asia in the future.

Huobi Newsflash

[Disconnected Venezuelan Bitcoin miners might resume operations in 48 hours]

[Venezuelan President: Venezuelan could offer loans based on cryptocurrencies or petrodollars]

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said, Venezuelan State Bank could probably consider offering loans based on foreign currency, cryptocurrencies or petrodollars.

[US debt ceiling hangs in the balance, investors’ enthusiasm for Treasury bills has abated]

August 13, despite the large amount of money floating around in the financial system, many investors have not actively participated in the last few Treasury bill issues. The indifference is from the uncertainty when the US Treasury used out its debt raising authorization date under the debt ceiling.

[Mexican billionaire says his bank will soon add support for Bitcoin]

According to Jinse Finance, Mexican businessman Ricardo Salinas Pliego has confirmed that his Banco Azteca will soon accept Bitcoin in a Thursday tweet.

[USD stablecoin USDC has destroyed over 300 million tokens in the last five days]

According to the latest data, USDC's total circulation on August 8 was $26,789,304,185, but had been reduced to $26,452,050,473 on August 13, meaning that 337,253,712 tokens had been destroyed in the last five days.

[President of Argentina: El Salvador adopts Bitcoin as fiat currency perhaps is a good path to take]

[Twitter CEO: every account on Twitter being able to link to a Lightning wallet]

Market Analysis

BTC continues to rise during the day, and is currently concerned about the breakthrough above 46,000.

According to data from Huobi Global, BTC continues to rise during the day, and is currently concerned about the breakthrough above 46,000. From the four-hour level, the k-line crosses EMA5, EMA10, EMA20, and EMA5 crosses EMA10 and EMA20 within a day, forming a golden cross, and the three EMAs show an upward trend. The K-line crossed the middle rail of the Bollinger Band in the afternoon and approached the upper rail. There was no obvious change in the opening of the Bollinger Band. DIF is continuously below DEA, and both are positive. The trading volume is relatively sluggish, DIF continues to be below DEA, and there is a trend of upward wear, both of which are positive. CCI is gradually approaching the 100 line, and the market may break upward. Judging from the daily level, BTC is currently a short-term positive line, and it basically reversed the decline yesterday. The pressure on the upper side is relatively high. It is necessary to pay attention to the subsequent breakthroughs.

According to data from the Huobi Global, ETH continues to rise during the day, converging with the trend of BTC, and the highest price in the evening is around 3200. From the four-hour level, the k-line crosses EMA5, EMA10, EMA20, and EMA5 crosses EMA10 and EMA20 within a day, forming a golden cross, and the three EMAs show an upward trend. The K-line is below the middle rail of the Bollinger Band and is close to the lower rail of the Bollinger Band. The opening of the Bollinger Band expands slightly. DIF continues to stay below DEA for the day, and both are positive. The trading volume is relatively sluggish, and the market may continue to fluctuate sideways. In terms of daily level, from the perspective of daily level, the current BTC is a short-term positive line, and the basic turn-off of yesterday’s decline, the pressure on the upper side is relatively high, we need to pay attention to the subsequent breakthroughs.

In terms of contracts, the data of Huobi Futures showed that the open interest of BTC futures remained stable,the volume decreased slightly, and the contract market was relatively inactive. The basis of futures contracts increased slightly.

The open interest of ETH futures contracts decreased slightly,the volume decreased slightly, and the contract market was relatively inactive. The basis of futures contracts increased slightly.

According to data from Huobi Study Club, DeFi TVL increased slightly and valued at $106.20 billion, the true locked value increased slightly and valued at $79.93 billion. Among them, the top programs have not changed much. Today's total DeFi trading volume decreased slightly and it is $3.95 billion.

#huobi global #crypto currency #huobi study club #bitcoin

0 notes

marcellusbitsandpieces · 4 years ago

Text

Bits and Pieces - United States Territories 7/19/20

Recently I came across some information about United States’ Territories. A few years ago when hurricanes hit islands in the Caribbean Sea, the question emerged of United States’ aid to land/people not of the United States. Many US citizens were surprised to learn that Puerto Rico is part of the United States as a territory.

So, what exactly is a U.S. territory? How many do we have? Where are they located?

By definition, a United States territory “is any extent or region under the sovereign jurisdiction of the federal government of the United States.” This means that land or area (reefs, atolls, etc.) which the United States claims (by treaty, conquest, etc.) to dominate and manage (explore, conserve, govern, etc.) is under the legal authority of the United States government and its laws.

It is generally accepted that the United States has authority over 14 territories around the world. There are an additional two under dispute. To be clear, the Hawaiian Islands shown below is a state, but is there as a point of reference for placement of the others.

The darkened areas around United States dominated land (country and territories) is known as its Exclusive Economic Zone (200 miles off shore or half the distance to a nearest shoreline that belongs to another sovereign nation). This is often the reason why a country has that land as a territory – for the mineral, energy and other resources surrounding it.

Only five of the accepted 14 territories belonging to the United States are considered inhabited. The remaining nine either have no population or only some temporary people.

Just as in the 50 states of the Union, any person born in a U.S. territory is also a United States citizen – except American Samoa (unless one of the parent’s is a citizen).

It is a convoluted story, but originally all people of US territories were not citizens. That changed in the early 20th century under a Supreme Court case known as “Insular Cases” which established rules for incorporated territories (as opposed to the unincorporated ones). This case came about because Arizona and New Mexico were incorporated territories at the time and about to become states.

Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa were unincorporated, but Congress, at this time, decided to consider them for statehood on “case-by-case” grounds later. Congress granted them citizenship rights to begin the process – except for American Samoa. That territory was deemed by the US Congress to not have the same intentions (of statehood) as the others.

Those born in American Samoa with neither parent as a US citizen is considered a “national.” A “US national” means that this person gives allegiance to the United States and has the diplomatic protection of the US, but has no US civil rights or privileges. When the US Congress believes that the people of American Samoa are intentional about their connection to the country, this could change.

At this time, many American Samoans are absolutely fine with this arrangement.

Some of the territories (Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico) are also a commonwealth. A commonwealth is an independent area with shared loyalties. The states of Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia are also commonwealths.

As seen in the map above, the majority of the US territories exist in the Pacific Ocean:

1. American Samoa – There are 12 islands with over 50,000 people.

2. Baker Island – It is a coral atoll (often a ring-shaped island) and a US National Wildlife Refuge.

3. Guam – This is a highly populated (over 150,000) island in Micronesia.

4. Howland Island – Unpopulated and mostly submerged, it lies between Australia and Hawaii.

5. Jarvis Island – Also an uninhabited US National Wildlife Refuge; it has no natural freshwater.

6. Johnson Atoll – Once a wildlife refuge, it was used in the ‘50s and ‘60s for nuclear testing and a storage/disposal area for chemical weapons until 2000. It’s still under US Air Force command.

7. Kingman Reef – Most of its 756 sq. miles is submerged and a US Natural Wildlife Reserve. US flying boats use its deep lagoon as a relief spot for flights from Hawaii to American Samoa.

8. Midway Islands – Though the site of a major WWII battle, this small island (2.4 miles) has no permanent occupants – only periodic caretakers at the National Wildlife Refuge.

9. Northern Mariana Islands – This is another hot spot for vacationers in the Pacific.

10. Palmyra Atoll – Once part of the Hawaiian Islands, the Palmyra Island broke off and became a US territory. However, descendants of a native Hawaiian heir claimed ownership-interest in the island and sued the State of Hawaii and the US territory. The case was dismissed and The Nature Conservatory (an environmental agency in the US) bought most of the island for conservation and research. The only population on the island are staff and scientists.

11. Wake Island – Except for military and civilian contractors on base, the island is uninhabited. The site of a major historic WWII battle, it was occupied by the Japanese until their surrender to the U.S. It now serves as a strategic refueling and stopover location.

The remaining US territories are found in the Caribbean Sea:

12. Puerto Rico – This beautiful island is the most populated territory at over 3 million. It is an historic tourist attraction that suffers hurricanes and also earthquakes.

13. U.S. Virgin Islands – This territory consists of 3 larger islands and 50 smaller ones. They are next to the British Virgin Islands just east of Puerto Rico.

14. Navassa Island – This island is closed to the public. In 2000 it was made a US National Wildlife Refuge because a US Geological Survey of species on the island showed an increase from 150 to 650.

The two territories under dispute between the United States and another country are:

1. Bajo Nuevo Bank (aka Petrel Islands) – Primarily two coral reefs southwest of Jamaica, it is claimed by both the US and Jamaica.

2. Serranilla Bank – Though mostly submerged southwest of Jamaica, it is claimed by both the US and Honduras. However, Columbia keeps a naval base on the area of Beacon Cay.

If you remember your history and the time of the 13 Colonies in America, they were ruled by Great Britain. The colonists had their own colonial governments and no voting rights in the House of Commons to determine such things as taxation. The ruler then was a king -- not an elected official, so voting didn’t determine the “head of government,” but did determine taxes and laws for British subjects. That controversial issue led to the Revolutionary War and the United States Constitution.

These inhabited territories are similar in that they also have their own local rules, cannot vote for US officials or laws, but could be held to account for some. They are at the mercy of the US government (all three branches) who manage/administrate their land.

With the exception of the original 13 states, the next 37 states were a territory or part of a territory before becoming a state. Michigan was part of the larger area named the Northwest Territories which divided into the territories, later states, of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin. The process is an interesting one, and not always a direct line to statehood.

0 notes

ferrerbonsoms · 5 years ago

Text

Cryptocurrencies and blockchain regulation in Canada

Introduction to the legal situation of cryptocurrencies in Canada

Canada is a country in North America with a constitutional monarchy form of government. Canada is one of the richest countries in the world as far as the average income per person. We are a legal firm specialized in Blockchain, cryptocurrencies, smart contracts and tokenization. Canada it is a decent place for the crypto industry Canada maintains a generally Bitcoin-friendly stance while also ensuring the cryptocurrency is not used for money laundering. The attitude of the Canadian government to cryptocurrencies has been twofold. First, caution in terms of protecting investors and the public. Second, encouragement in its support of new technology. Cryptocurrencies and digital exchanges are legal. In Canada, cryptocurrency trading is absolutely legal and available with a wide range of exchange ATMs. Canada’s cryptocurrency regulation is not supposed to tighten in terms of control and taxing of transactions made through virtual currencies. Cryptocurrency is a commodity in Canada The Canada Revenue Agency has characterized cryptocurrency as a commodity. They also stated that the use of cryptocurrency to pay for goods or services should be treated as a barter transaction. Cryptocurrencies are not considered legal tender in Canada Canada’s tax laws and rules, including the Income Tax Act, also apply to cryptocurrency transactions The income generated is considered as business income. The taxation also depends on whether the individual has a buying-selling business or is only concerned with investing. Cryptocurrencies are subject to the Income Tax Act. Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing regulation and cryptocurrencies in Canada On June 19, 2014, the Governor General of Canada gave his royal assent to Bill C-31, which includes amendments to Canada’s Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act. The new law treats virtual currencies as “money service businesses” for purposes of anti-money laundering provisions. The law is not yet in force, pending issuance of subsidiary regulations. Companies dealing in virtual currencies are required to register with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (Fintrac). They must also implement compliance programs, “keep and retain prescribed records” report suspicious or terrorist-related property transactions, and determine if any of their customers are “politically exposed persons.” Entities dealing in digital currencies are regulated under AML/CTF laws blockchain lawyer, top blockchain lawyers, blockchain, blockchain and lawyers, blockchain smart contracts and lawyers, lawyer blockchain, best blockchain lawyers, blockchain lawyer Spain, Blockhain lawyer Madrid, Blockchian Lawyer Barcelona, Blockchain Lawyer Sevilla, Blockchain Laywer Pamplona. Blockchain Attorney. Cryptocurrency regulation in Canada Canada allows the use of cryptocurrencies. The government Canada web page stated that: You can use digital currencies to buy goods and services on the Internet and in stores that accept digital currencies. You may also buy and sell digital currency on open exchanges, called digital currency or cryptocurrency exchanges. An open exchange is similar to a stock market. To use digital currencies, you need to create a digital currency wallet to store and transfer digital currencies. You can store your wallet yourself or have a wallet provider manage your digital currency for you. Cryptocurrencies are not a legal tender in Canada Digital currencies, such as Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies, are not legal tender in Canada. Only the Canadian dollar is considered official currency in Canada. The Currency Act defines legal tender According to section 8 of the Currency Act, legal tender is: -bank notes issued by the Bank of Canada under the Bank of Canada Act. (Currency Act, RSC 1985 c. C-52). -coins issued under the Royal Canadian Mint Act. Digital currencies are not supported by any government or central authority, such as the Bank of Canada. How tax rules apply to digital currency Tax rules apply to digital currency transactions, including those made with cryptocurrencies. Using digital currency does not exempt consumers from Canadian tax obligations.

For taxation purposes

Cryptocurrencies are treated as commodities, not as money. Under securities laws, many cryptocurrencies or “tokens” are classified as securities. In Canada, cryptocurrencies are primarily regulated under securities laws. This means digital currencies are subject to the Income Tax Act in Canada A) Buying goods or services using digital currency Digital currencies are subject to the Income Tax Act (ITA). Goods purchased using digital currency must be included in the seller’s income for tax purposes. GST/HST also applies on the fair market value of any goods or services you buy using digital currency. B) Buying and selling digital currency like a commodity Digital currency is characterized as a commodity under Canadian law. When you file your taxes you must report any gains or losses from selling or buying digital currencies. Digital currencies are considered a commodity and are subject to the barter rules of the Income Tax Act. Not reporting income from such transactions is illegal. The CRA has published a bulletin to “provide information that can help in determining whether transactions are income or capital in nature". C) Mining Cryptocurrencies Low temperatures, and low electricity cost in Canada make this country particularly interesting for miners. In July 2018, following an increasing number of applications for electricity from miners, Hydro-Quebec tripled the price of electricity for new crypto-currency miners. This price increase is temporary, because Hydro-Quebec is currently proposing a new selection process to the Régie de l’énergie for future crypto-mining operations.

Automated exchangers (Bitcoin ATMs) are legal in Canada

Automated exchangers are commonly referred to as Bitcoin ATMs. They are vending machines that allow you to insert cash in exchange for bitcoins, and in some cases bitcoins for cash. Unlike traditional ATMs, they are not connected to your bank, credit union or the Interac network. You may be charged a transaction fee for using a Bitcoin ATM. Shop around as exchange fees vary and you may be able to get lower rates elsewhere.

Securities law and cryptocurrencies in Canada

In Canada, securities laws are enacted on a provincial and territorial basis rather than federally. The securities rules throughout the provinces and territories have largely been harmonised. “Security” is broadly defined in Canadian securities legislation and covers various categories of transactions, including “an investment contract”. The test for determining whether a transaction constitutes an investment contract, and therefore a security, for the purposes of Canadian securities laws was established by the Supreme Court of Canada, referring to the case Pacific Coast Coin Exchange v. Ontario (Securities Commission). The Supreme Court of Canada identified the four central attributes of an investment contract: there must be an investment of money; with an intention or expectation of profit; in a common enterprise (being an enterprise “in which the fortunes of the investor are interwoven with and dependent upon the efforts and success of those seeking the investment, or of third parties”); and the success or failure of which is significantly affected by the efforts of those other than the investor. This is what is know as the “Pacific Coin test”. The Canadian Security Administrators (CSA) has published two staff notices: -On August 24, 2017, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) published CSA Staff Notice 46-307 Cryptocurrency Offerings. -Staff Notice 46-308 Securities Law implications for Offerings of Tokens. We can also mention the Joint CSA/IIROC Consultation Paper 21-402 Proposed Framework for CryptoAsset Trading Platforms. They stated that in the Staff Notice 46-307 that: “Many of these cryptocurrency offerings involve sales of securities. Securities laws in Canada will apply if the person or company selling the securities is conducting business from within Canada or if there are Canadian investors. Given the significant growth in this area and requests for guidance, we are publishing this Staff Notice to help financial technology (fintech) businesses understand what obligations may apply under securities laws.” Specifically and as described in more detail in the Staff Notice: Securities may only be sold after a receipt has been received from a securities regulatory authority for a comprehensive disclosure document called a "prospectus", or pursuant to a private placement in reliance on a prospectus exemption; Businesses and individuals in the business of trading in or advising on securities must be properly registered or rely on an exemption from registration; and A platform that facilitates trades in coins/tokens that are securities may be a marketplace and need to comply with marketplace requirements or obtain an exemption from such requirements. This Staff Notice will: Respond to requests from fintech businesses for guidance on the applicability of securities laws to cryptocurrency offerings and what staff will consider in assessing if an ICO/ITO is a distribution of securities; Discuss what steps fintech businesses can take if they are raising capital through ICOs/ITOs, so that they comply with securities laws; Highlight issues that fintech businesses looking to establish cryptocurrency investment funds should be prepared to discuss with staff; Discuss how the use of cryptocurrency exchanges may impact staff's review of ICOs/ITOs and cryptocurrency investment funds; and Explain how the CSA Regulatory Sandbox can help fintech businesses with cryptocurrency offerings comply with securities laws through a flexible process. According to the Staff 46-307 every ICO/ITO is unique and must be assessed on its own characteristics. “For example, if an individual purchases coins/tokens that allow him/her to play video games on a platform, it is possible that securities may not be involved. However, if an individual purchases coins/tokens whose value is tied to the future profits or success of a business, these will likely be considered securities”. The CSA have in many instances found that the coins/tokens in question constitute securities for the purposes of securities laws, including because they are investment contracts. In arriving at this conclusion, the CSA have considered the relevant case law, “which requires an assessment of the economic realities of a transaction and a purposive interpretation with the objective of investor protection in mind”. The Staff Notice 46-307 Cryptocurrency Offerings “which outlines how securities law requirements may apply to initial coin offerings (ICOs), initial token offerings (ITOs), cryptocurrency investment funds and the cryptocurrency exchanges trading these products.” According to the Staff Notice 46-308 When an offering of tokens may or may not involve an offering of securities As it is indicated in SN 46-307, every offering is unique and must be assessed on its own characteristics. An offering of tokens may involve the distribution of securities, including because: the offering involves the distribution of an investment contract; and/or the offering and/or the tokens issued are securities under one or more of the other enumerated branches of the definition of security or may be a security that is not covered by the non-exclusive list of enumerated categories of securities. Advisors should consider and apply the case law interpreting the term “investment contract”, including considering whether the offering involves: An investment of money In a common enterprise With the expectation of profit To come significantly from the efforts of others The SCA in this Staff 46-308 stated that: “However, we have found that most of the offerings of tokens purporting to be utility tokens that we have reviewed to date have involved the distribution of a security, namely an investment contract. The fact that a token has a utility is not, on its own, determinative as to whether an offering involves the distribution of a security”. In this Staff 46-308 the CSA has stated that the existence of some of the following cirumstances may cause a virtual currency to be considered an investment contract: 1.- the underlying blockchain technology or platform has not been fully developed. 2.- the token is immediately delivered to each purchaser. 3.- the purpose of the offering is to raise capital, which will be used to perform key actions that will support the value of the token or the issuer´s business. 4.- the issuer´s is offering benefits (like airdrops or bounties) to persons who promote the offering. 5-. the issuer´s management retains a significant number of unsold tokens. 6.- the issuer suggest that the token will be used as a currency or have a utility beyond its own platform. 7.- the token may reasonably expected to trade on a trading platform or in the secondary market, etc. 8.- the token are distributed for a monetary price. 9.- the token is fungible. 10.- number of tokens issuable are finite; or there is reasonable expectation that access to new token will be limited in the future. 11.- there are statements that the token will increase in value. Prospectus requirement or exemption to complete an ICO/ITO in Canada As a general rule a prospectus must be filed and approved with the relevant regulator before a person or entity can legally distribute securities. A prospectus is a comprehensive disclosure document which seeks to satisfy the public protection aim of securities laws by disclosing information about the securities and the issuer to prospective investors. Businesses looking to sell coins/tokens may do so under prospectus exemptions. Sales may be made to investors who qualify as "accredited investors" as defined under securities laws, in reliance on the accredited investor prospectus exemption. For retail investors who do not qualify as accredited investors, sales will typically need to be made in reliance on the offering memorandum (OM) prospectus exemption (Section 2.9 of NI 45-106.b). Accredited investor in Canada According to the 45-106 nº 1.1 an “accredited investor” means (a) except in Ontario, a Canadian financial institution, or a Schedule III bank, (b) except in Ontario, the Business Development Bank of Canada incorporated under the Business Development Bank of Canada Act (Canada), (c) except in Ontario, a subsidiary of any person referred to in paragraphs (a) or (b), if the person owns all of the voting securities of the subsidiary, except the voting securities required by law to be owned by directors of that subsidiary, (d) except in Ontario, a person registered under the securities legislation of a jurisdiction of Canada as an adviser or dealer, (e) an individual registered under the securities legislation of a jurisdiction of Canada as a representative of a person referred to in paragraph (d), (e.1) an individual formerly registered under the securities legislation of a jurisdiction of Canada, other than an individual formerly registered solely as a representative of a limited market dealer under one or both of the Securities Act (Ontario) or the Securities Act (Newfoundland and Labrador), (f) except in Ontario, the Government of Canada or a jurisdiction of Canada, or any crown corporation, agency or wholly owned entity of the Government of Canada or a jurisdiction of Canada, (g) except in Ontario, a municipality, public board or commission in Canada and a metropolitan community, school board, the Comité de gestion de la taxe scolaire de l’île de Montréal or an intermunicipal management board in Québec, (h) except in Ontario, any national, federal, state, provincial, territorial or municipal government of or in any foreign jurisdiction, or any agency of that government, (i) except in Ontario, a pension fund that is regulated by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (Canada), a pension commission or similar regulatory authority of a jurisdiction of Canada, (j) an individual who, either alone or with a spouse, beneficially owns financial assets having an aggregate realizable value that, before taxes but net of any related liabilities, exceeds $1 000 000, (j.1) an individual who beneficially owns financial assets having an aggregate realizable value that, before taxes but net of any related liabilities, exceeds $5 000 000, (k) an individual whose net income before taxes exceeded $200 000 in each of the 2 most recent calendar years or whose net income before taxes combined with that of a spouse exceeded $300 000 in each of the 2 most recent calendar years and who, in either case, reasonably expects to exceed that net income level in the current calendar year, (l) an individual who, either alone or with a spouse, has net assets of at least $5 000 000, (m) a person, other than an individual or investment fund, that has net assets of at least $5 000 000 as shown on its most recently prepared financial statements, (n) an investment fund that distributes or has distributed its securities only to (i) a person that is or was an accredited investor at the time of the distribution, (ii) a person that acquires or acquired securities in the circumstances referred to in sections 2.10 , or 2.19 , or (iii) a person described in paragraph (i) or (ii) that acquires or acquired securities under section 2.18 , (o) an investment fund that distributes or has distributed securities under a prospectus in a jurisdiction of Canada for which the regulator or, in Québec, the securities regulatory authority, has issued a receipt, (p) a trust company or trust corporation registered or authorized to carry on business under the Trust and Loan Companies Act (Canada) or under comparable legislation in a jurisdiction of Canada or a foreign jurisdiction, acting on behalf of a fully managed account managed by the trust company or trust corporation, as the case may be, (q) a person acting on behalf of a fully managed account managed by that person, if that person is registered or authorized to carry on business as an adviser or the equivalent under the securities legislation of a jurisdiction of Canada or a foreign jurisdiction, (r) a registered charity under the Income Tax Act (Canada) that, in regard to the trade, has obtained advice from an eligibility adviser or an adviser registered under the securities legislation of the jurisdiction of the registered charity to give advice on the securities being traded, (s) an entity organized in a foreign jurisdiction that is analogous to any of the entities referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d) or paragraph (i) in form and function, (t) a person in respect of which all of the owners of interests, direct, indirect or beneficial, except the voting securities required by law to be owned by directors, are persons that are accredited investors, (u) an investment fund that is advised by a person registered as an adviser or a person that is exempt from registration as an adviser, (v) a person that is recognized or designated by the securities regulatory authority or, except in Ontario and Québec, the regulator as an accredited investor; or (w) a trust established by an accredited investor for the benefit of the accredited investor’s family members of which a majority of the trustees are accredited investors and all of the beneficiaries are the accredited investor’s spouse, a former spouse of the accredited investor or a parent, grandparent, brother, sister, child or grandchild of that accredited investor, of that accredited investor’s spouse or of that accredited investor’s former spouse; For retail investors who do not qualify as accredited investors in Canada Sales will typically need to be made in reliance on the offering memorandum (OM) prospectus exemption (Section 2.9 of NI 45-106.b): (1) In British Columbia and Newfoundland and Labrador, the prospectus requirement does not apply to a distribution by an issuer of a security of its own issue to a purchaser if (a) the purchaser purchases the security as principal, and (b) at the same time or before the purchaser signs the agreement to purchase the security, the issuer (i) delivers an offering memorandum to the purchaser in compliance with subsections (5) to (13), and (ii) obtains a signed risk acknowledgement from the purchaser in compliance with subsection (15). (2) In Manitoba, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Prince Edward Island and Yukon, the prospectus requirement does not apply to a distribution by an issuer of a security of its own issue to a purchaser if (a) the purchaser purchases the security as principal, (b) the purchaser is an eligible investor or the acquisition cost to the purchaser does not exceed $10 000, (c) at the same time or before the purchaser signs the agreement to purchase the security, the issuer (i) delivers an offering memorandum to the purchaser in compliance with subsections (5) to (13), and (ii) obtains a signed risk acknowledgement from the purchaser in compliance with subsection (15), and (d) if the issuer is an investment fund, the investment fund is (i) a non-redeemable investment fund, or (ii) a mutual fund that is a reporting issuer. (2.1) In Alberta, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Québec and Saskatchewan, the prospectus requirement does not apply to a distribution by an issuer of a security of its own issue to a purchaser if (a) the purchaser purchases the security as principal, (b) the acquisition cost of all securities acquired by a purchaser who is an individual under this section in the preceding 12 months does not exceed the following amounts: (i) in the case of a purchaser that is not an eligible investor, $10 000; (ii) in the case of a purchaser that is an eligible investor, $30 000; (iii) in the case of a purchaser that is an eligible investor and that received advice from a portfolio manager, investment dealer or exempt market dealer that the investment is suitable, $100 000, (c) at the same time or before the purchaser signs the agreement to purchase the security, the issuer (i) delivers an offering memorandum to the purchaser in compliance with subsections (5) to (13), and (ii) obtains a signed risk acknowledgement from the purchaser in compliance with subsection (15), and (d) the security distributed by the issuer is not either of the following: (i) a specified derivative; (ii) a structured finance product. (2.2) The prospectus exemption described in subsection (2.1) is not available (a) in Alberta, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan, to an issuer that is an investment fund, unless the issuer is a non-redeemable investment fund or a mutual fund that is a reporting issuer, or (b) in New Brunswick, Ontario and Québec, to an issuer that is an investment fund. (2.3) The investment limits described in subparagraphs (2.1)(b)(ii) and (iii) do not apply if the purchaser is (a) an accredited investor, or (b) a person described in subsection 2.5(1) . blockchain lawyer, top blockchain lawyers, blockchain, blockchain and lawyers, blockchain smart contracts and lawyers, lawyer blockchain, best blockchain lawyers, blockchain lawyer Spain, Blockhain lawyer Madrid, Blockchian Lawyer Barcelona, Blockchain Lawyer Sevilla, Blockchain Laywer Pamplona. Blockchain attorney. CSA Regulatory Sandbox The CSA Regulatory Sandbox is an initiative of the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) to support fintech businesses seeking to offer innovative products, services and applications in Canada. The CSA Regulatory Sandbox allows firms to register and/or obtain exemptive relief from securities laws requirements, under a faster and more flexible process than through a standard application, in order to test their products, services and applications throughout the Canadian market on a time limited basis. The CSA Regulatory Sandbox is open to business models that are innovative from a Canadian market perspective. Applicants can range from start-ups to well established companies. Firms that want to apply should be ready to provide live environment testing, a business plan and a discussion of potential investor benefits (including how it will minimize investor risks). Firms that do not meet these criteria can still apply to register or obtain relief through the standard application process. Some of the firms that have been authorized in the CSA Regulatory Sandbox ZED Network Inc. May 21, 2019. Distribution of tokens TokenGX Inc. April 17, 2019. Exempt market dealer providing services in connection with crypto-asset offerings. Majestic Asset Management LLC. January 26, 2018. Investment fund manager for a cryptocurrency investment fund. Rivemont Investments Inc. January 26, 2018. Manager of the investment portfolio for a cryptocurrency investment fund. 3iQ Corp. January 19, 2018. Investment fund manager for a cryptocurrency investment fund. Token Funder Inc. October 17, 2017. Initial coin offering. They created a smart token asset management platform in order to facilitate capital rising. The Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) granted an exemption from the dealer registration requirement for a period of 12 months from the date of the decision (October 17, 2017). Ross Smith Asset Management ULC. September 22, 2017. Investment fund manager for a cryptocurrency investment fund. First Block Capital Inc. September 5, 2017. Investment fund manager for a cryptocurrency investment fund. Impak finance Inc. August 15, 2017. Initial coin offering Is the first Canadian company to complete a virtual currency offering with the approval of Canadian securities regulator. The new virtual currency is based on the waves blockchain platform. The “initial coin offering” of MPK was offered by way of a private placement in reliance on the prospectus exemption contained in section 2.9 (the “Offering Memorandum Exemption”) of Regulation 45-106 respecting Prospectus Exemptions (“Regulation 45-106”). Angel List, LLC and AngelList Advisors LLC. October 24, 2016. Online platform facilitating venture capital and angel investing in startups. National Instrument (NI) 45-102 Generally, securities sold pursuant to a prospectus exemption are subject to resale restrictions. The purpose and substance of the National Instrument (NI) 45-102 is to harmonize certain provincial and territorial resale restrictions imposed on subsequent trades of securities initially acquired under an exemption from the prospectus requirement. NI 45-102 also takes a harmonized approach to distributions from a control block and to trades in securities of a non-reporting issuer over a foreign exchange or issuer. Requirements for the registration and exemptions In addition to the prospectus requirement, an individual or entity engaged in the business of distribution of securities, or advising others with respect to securities, is required to register with Canadian securities regulators. The requirements for registration, and exemptions from registration, are set out in National Instrument 31-103 – Registration Requirements, Exemptions and Ongoing Registrant Obligations (“NI 31-103”). Once registered, the person or entity is subject to various reporting and compliance obligations. NI 31-103 covers various other categories of registration in addition to dealers and advisers, such as investment fund managers. blockchain lawyer, top blockchain lawyers, blockchain, blockchain and lawyers, blockchain smart contracts and lawyers, lawyer blockchain, best blockchain lawyers, blockchain lawyer Spain, Blockhain lawyer Madrid, Blockchian Lawyer Barcelona, Blockchain Lawyer Sevilla, Blockchain Laywer Pamplona. Blockchain attorney.

Some initiatives of the Government of Canada

The government of Canada is testing blockchain technology and public information As “Globalnews” states the Canadian government has launched a trial to explore the use of blockchain technology in making government research grant and funding information more transparent to the public. For the trial, the National Research Council (NRC) is using the Catena blockchain Suite. It is a Canadian-made product built on the Ethereum blockchain. It can publish funding and grant information in real time. The pertinent information is stored on the Ethereum blockchain. And posted on an online database that Canadians can peruse. The Bank of Canada tested Digital Depository Receipts (DDR) As a digital representation of Canadian currency in 2016 and 2017. DDR is a way to transfer central bank money on to a distributed ledger technology platform (DLT, or “blockchain”). This was tested in Project Jasper in the form of “CADcoin” where the Bank of Canada issued DDR, just like it would Canadian currency. blockchain lawyer, top blockchain lawyers, blockchain, blockchain and lawyers, blockchain smart contracts and lawyers, lawyer blockchain, best blockchain lawyers, blockchain lawyer Spain, Blockhain lawyer Madrid, Blockchian Lawyer Barcelona, Blockchain Lawyer Sevilla, Blockchain Laywer Pamplona. Blockchain attorney. Read the full article

0 notes

coin-news-blog · 5 years ago

Text

Why Portugal’s Tax-Free Crypto Trading Matters for Bitcoin

New Post has been published on https://coinmakers.tech/news/why-portugal-s-tax-free-crypto-trading-matters-for-bitcoin

Why Portugal’s Tax-Free Crypto Trading Matters for Bitcoin

Cryptocurrency enthusiasts and businesses in the industry have had to put up with regulatory uncertainty for quite some time. The strong desire to tap into their incomes and profits goes hand in hand with failure on behalf of authorities and regulators to fully understand the nature of decentralized digital assets. Not to mention how absurd the reluctance to legalize something they want to tax anyway. Cases in Portugal show that it’s hard to positively know what exactly traders, investors and companies owe the state. Luckily, the narrow scope of the local tax legislation means they have to pay less than in other countries.

Crypto Exchange Exempt From VAT, Trading Gains Spared From Tax

A report by the Portuguese business daily Jornal de Negócios, quoted recently by crypto outlets whose interpretation was then copied by mainstream media, released some details about the Portuguese tax system that turn the country into sort of a crypto tax haven, at least until powers in Brussels make up their mind about bitcoin taxation or Lisbon amends its tax code. According to the newspaper, the Portuguese Tax and Customs Authority, which had already determined that crypto trading income is not subject to taxation, has recently stated that cryptocurrency exchange and payments are exempt from VAT.

The latest clarification has been issued by Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (the Portuguese Tributary and Customs Authority) in response to a request from a Portuguese company planning to establish a crypto mining operation. The owners wanted to acquaint themselves with the legal provisions that govern the accounting procedures and tax obligations related to the activity. In its filing, the entity explains the process of minting digital coins and notes, and that there are two aspects that concern taxation – the miner’s reward in cryptocurrency and the exchange of that yield into fiat money. In its reply, the tax authority quotes local regulations and European law to conclude that the transactions related to mining, both the remuneration and the exchange, should be exempted from VAT.

An earlier statement by the agency addresses another aspect of crypto taxation. The document was issued almost three years ago in response to a request for guidance on how tax rules apply in relation to revenue received from the purchase and sale of cryptocurrencies. In its explanation, the regulator notes that cryptocurrencies can generate different types of taxable income. These include gains from buying and selling digital coins, commissions charged for the provision of services related to acquisition or use, and gains derived from the sale of products or services for cryptocurrency.

Portuguese tax agents elaborate that income generated by trading can fall in three different categories – capital gains (G), capital income (E) and corporate or professional income (B). Category G covers the sale of securities, financial derivatives, certificates whose holders can receive value from an underlying asset, and some other instruments. However, as legislators have chosen to adopt a closed definition, tax can be levied only on the items mentioned in the law, and cryptocurrencies are not in the list. Digital coins do not fall in category E, either, which pertains only to income generated from capital investments.

If applicable, category B prevails over the other two. Income in this category is taxed based on the exercise of an activity and not according to its source. Portugal’s tax code states that if this is an activity oriented toward profit making, the taxpayer is obliged to issue invoices whenever they sell a product or provide a service. The tax agency then draws the conclusion that the sale of cryptocurrency is not taxable under the current tax legislation unless it constitutes a taxpayer’s professional or business activity, in which case it will be taxed in category B.

The current state of the tax treatment of crypto trading conducted by private individuals was confirmed by a representative of the professional services network Deloitte. “Portugal does not tax the increase of value of any currency nor the gain on the sale of any currency. Obviously, any currency losses may not be offset against any gains either,” explained Luis Leon, tax partner at Deloitte Portugal. Noting that the matter has already been analyzed by the country’s tax authority, which issued a ruling with this position, Leon told news.Bitcoin.com:

Cryptocurrencies are no different from a Portuguese tax perspective. Accordingly, the appreciation of cryptocurrencies or any gains on the direct sale of cryptocurrencies are not taxed in Portugal.

In that context, Portugal is a positive example in Europe, where many other countries tax profits from crypto trading–either by imposing capital gains tax or as part of the income tax base in general. Other exceptions in the region include Slovenia, where capital gains of individual investors trading cryptocurrencies are not reported and taxed, and Belarus, which last year introduced tax breaks for crypto incomes and revenue from mining, issuing, and trading coins for a period of five years. Malta and Germany do not tax long-held crypto assets. And in Switzerland, cryptocurrency gains of individual traders are treated as tax-exempt capital gains, but an annual wealth tax is levied on the total amount of coins you hold as part of your net worth.

Which Taxes Apply to Cryptocurrencies

To better understand how taxation affects crypto incomes and profits, one needs to have a basic idea of the differences between the main types of applicable taxes. In most cases, both natural persons and corporate entities are obliged to pay a number of direct and indirect taxes. A direct tax such as the personal income tax is imposed upon a person or their property, while an indirect tax like VAT is levied on transactions.

Crypto incomes can fall under multiple categories depending on the legal status of the taxpayer and the nature of the transaction. In countries where the Value Added Tax system is implemented, the majority of the world’s jurisdictions, VAT is typically charged on the final value of a product or service sold to an end user. Currencies are neither products nor services, so by default no VAT should be imposed over their purchases or sales in exchange operations.

There’s an ongoing debate about the nature of decentralized digital coins. In some countries, different regulators have varying opinions on how to treat cryptocurrencies. In the U.S., for example, the Treasury referred to bitcoin as a convertible decentralized virtual currency in 2013. Two years later, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) classified it as a commodity. At the same time, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) taxes cryptos as property. Then, last year, bitcoin was mentioned in a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in light of the need of a “broader understanding” of what money is nowadays.

In Europe, at least for the moment, the treatment of cryptocurrencies for regulatory and tax purposes has largely been determined by a decision of the European Court of Justice. In October 2015, ECJ stated that bitcoin represents a means of payment and its exchange should therefore be exempted from VAT. According to the ruling in the Skatteverket v Hedqvist Case C-264/14, the exchange of bitcoin falls within the exemption in Article 135(1)(e) of EU’s VAT Directive, which covers transactions concerning currency, bank notes, and coins used as legal tender.

David Hedqvist is a Swedish national who planned to launch a crypto exchange platform that would profit from the margin between bid and ask prices. He sought clarity regarding the VAT treatment of this kind of revenue and received an opinion from the Swedish Revenue Law Commission (Skatterättsnämnden) stating that the services he intended to provide would be exempt from VAT under Article 135. However, the Swedish Tax Administration (Skatteverket) disagreed and appealed the matter to the country’s Supreme Administrative Court, which in turn referred the case to the ECJ.

The other category of taxes that can be applied to crypto-related income includes direct taxes. One of the most common of them, the corporate tax, is generally imposed on the income or capital of business entities, and companies working in the crypto industry are no exception. In most cases the tax is levied on a corporation’s net profits, but governments may also tax shareholders if they are paid dividends.

Investments in cryptocurrencies can be subject to capital gains tax. These gains are usually realized from the sale of stocks, bonds, precious metals like gold, antiques, real estate, and property. In some jurisdictions, crypto assets are part of that list as well. The capital gains tax, where it’s imposed, can come in different rates for individuals and corporations. Certain countries may charge only professional traders.

Germany is another interesting example in Europe. The Bundesrepublik does not tax long-term investments in cryptocurrency. If a private trader sells their bitcoin more than a year after its purchase, the profit is exempt from capital gains tax. The same applies to annual profits of less than €600. That means keeping digital coins in Germany will actually save you money. And regardless of how much profit you make when you sell the cryptocurrency after hodling for over a year, you don’t owe the state any tax on your gains.

Significance for Traders

Portugal’s decision not to tax direct gains on the appreciation or sale of cryptocurrency and ECJ’s ruling that VAT is not applicable to exchange transactions have considerable significance for traders. And it’s not only because crypto users are spared some taxes. Both actually tip the scales in favor of Bitcoin’s currency status in times when lawmakers and regulators are trying to wrap their heads around a phenomenon born as a result of financial evolution. With many analysts now pointing towards the next big crisis on the horizon, the importance of cryptocurrencies is likely to grow further, with more investors, traders, and ordinary users attracted to the space.

If you are looking to securely acquire bitcoin cash (BCH) and other leading cryptocurrencies, you can do that with a credit card at buy.Bitcoin.com. You can also freely trade your digital coins using our noncustodial, peer-to-peer trading platform. The local.Bitcoin.com marketplace already has thousands of users from around the world and is growing fast. Also, check out our newly launched premier trading platform exchange.Bitcoin.com. Registered users can access it right now and over 10,000 have signed up already.

Source: news.bitcoin

0 notes

takebackthedream · 8 years ago

Text

Donald Trump Is Waging a War on Workers by Robert Borosage

Donald Trump has ginned up a continuous din in his first four months as president, with each outrage or grotesquerie immediately followed by another.

Amid the furors, it is easy to lose track of the key standard by which Trump will be judged by his key voters: his oft-repeated campaign pledge that “the American worker will finally have a president who will protect them and fight for them.”

These pledges have continued since Trump became president. He told the Conservative Political Action Conference that “the forgotten men and women of America will be forgotten no longer.”

In the flood of reviews of Trump’s first 100 days, which focused heavily on his scandals and gaffes, few noted that he failed on this measure.

The working people who were crucial to Trump’s victory may not be impressed by more evidence that he’s a scoundrel. Most of them considered him a scoundrel when they voted for him. Their hope was that he might be their scoundrel, in contrast to the “corrupted politicians” and “failed political elite” that he railed against.

Trump understands this. That’s why so many of his stunts and boasts – the Carrier deal to keep 800 jobs here, posturing over the North American Free Trade Agreement, claiming credit for new jobs stemming from corporate decisions made long before he was elected – are designed to be seen and loved by working people.

But these stunts cover the reality: Trump is shafting the very working people who supported him. Consider these key measures.

Jobs

Trump constantly promises “lots of jobs,” and boasts of cracking down on companies moving jobs abroad. Trump officially buried the Trans Pacific Partnership, but that was dead anyway. He issued a “Buy America, Hire America” executive order, but that just called for a review, not action.

Beneath the noise, workers are getting betrayed. Trump has introduced no jobs bill. His much-ballyhooed plan to rebuild America was glaringly absent from his first budget, which actually cuts spending on infrastructure.

He has abandoned the End the Offshoring Act he promised in the first 100 days, which would use tariffs to discourage companies from moving abroad. Worse, he’s backed off pressuring China on the unprecedented trade deficits we suffer, and in so doing sacrifices American jobs for China’s supposed help with North Korea.

Rather than ripping up NAFTA, he now says he’ll renegotiate it, with his Commerce Secretary bizarrely suggesting that the TPP might serve as the “starting point.” His tax proposal would end taxation on profits reported abroad, giving companies even more incentive to ship jobs or create tax dodges abroad.

Worse, Trump has refused to use the power that he has. The federal government spends about $470 billion per year on contracts with firms that employ about one of five workers in the private sector. The president has the power to make his pledge of “Buy America, Hire America” a centerpiece of our procurement policy.

As research by Good Jobs Nation shows, 41 of the top 100 recipients of federal contracts engage in offshoring of jobs. Those companies received $176 billion in federal contracts in fiscal year 2016, which is over one-third of all federal contract spending. Trump could issue an executive order excluding firms that offshore jobs from qualifying to bid on federal contracts. That would have an immediate and profound effect on offshoring. Instead, Trump bloviates, but doesn’t act.

Wages

Trump promised workers good jobs with good wages, but he has acted repeatedly to drive down wages. He won’t ask the Republican House to vote on raising the minimum wage. He supports the right-wing push for a “right to work” law, designed to weaken unions. Neil Gorsuch, his Supreme Court Justice, will no doubt provide the fifth vote for gutting public sector unions.

Trump joined the Republican Congress to repeal Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplace” executive order, which was designed to protect federal contract employees from wage theft and workplace injuries. And the Trump administration has moved to delay – the first step to overturning – the Department of Labor’s overtime rule that would have guaranteed a 40-hour week and overtime pay for 4.2 million additional workers.

Health Care

The cruelty of Trumpcare has received significant attention. As Thomas Edsall details, Trump’s base face the most risk if this bill passes. The plan takes health insurance from millions of people, savages Medicaid, hikes premiums particularly on older workers, and undermines coverage of pre-existing conditions in order to provide the wealthy with a massive tax break —- $7 million a year for the 400 richest Americans with annual incomes over $300 million.

Low-wage whites are a majority of the Medicaid recipients in four states — Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan — that gave Trump his victory. Older workers with modest incomes who don’t get insurance from their employers will fare the worst under Trumpcare. Nate Cohn of the New York Times found that voters hit the hardest by this health care plan, and would get at least $5,000 less in tax credits, supported Trump by a margin of 59 to 36 percent.

Retirement

One of Trump’s first acts in office was to delay implementation of the fiduciary duty rule that requires investment advisors not cheat their clients with retirement accounts. The rule would have saved workers an estimated $17 billion per year in unnecessary fees and costs. Trump signed a repeal of the Department of Labor rule that assisted local governments in setting up public IRA programs to aid 55 million private sector workers without a retirement plan at work.

These assaults are only part of the story. Trump’s budget makes child care more expensive, and cuts after-school and summer programs. He’s joined with Republicans in Congress to repeal occupational protection rules for miners and construction workers.

He has called for cuts in everything from education to protection of clean air and clean water. He would cut the Department of Labor budget by 20 percent, dramatically reducing enforcement of worker rights, occupational health and safety laws, and protection against wage theft. The Economic Policy Institute’s report on Trump’s first 100 days provides a more detailed indictment.

This war on workers isn’t a bug, but a feature of a White House that has turned its economic plan over to Goldman Sachs alums and stocked its cabinet with “billionaires, bankers and bigots,” in the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Trump could have pushed to forge a bipartisan coalition to back his populist promises. Instead he chose to let the Republican majority in Congress, driven by the radical Freedom Caucus, define his priorities. In his first months in office, he has betrayed the voters who put him there.

The question is when they will finally understand what has happened. Trump keeps posturing as a populist. The outrage of the day – from Comey to the Kushner family business in China – captures media attention. Policy is complicated, but the story is clear. Trump is betraying his promise on jobs and shafting workers. Progressives should make certain this reality isn’t lost in the din.

This article first appeared at The Nation

0 notes

coin-news-blog · 5 years ago

Text

Why Portugal’s Tax-Free Crypto Trading Matters for Bitcoin

New Post has been published on https://coinmakers.tech/news/why-portugal-s-tax-free-crypto-trading-matters-for-bitcoin

Why Portugal’s Tax-Free Crypto Trading Matters for Bitcoin

Crypto Exchange Exempt From VAT, Trading Gains Spared From Tax

Cryptocurrencies are no different from a Portuguese tax perspective. Accordingly, the appreciation of cryptocurrencies or any gains on the direct sale of cryptocurrencies are not taxed in Portugal.

Which Taxes Apply to Cryptocurrencies

Significance for Traders

Source: news.bitcoin

0 notes