Bitcoin ATMs Spread Internationally While US Operators Face Handcuffs

According to a website that tracks new Bitcoin ATM installations around the world, there are nearly 6100 Bitcoin ATMs.

Bitcoin ATM Industry Takes It On The Chin

CoinATMRadar reports that, as expected, most of these machines will not conduct two-way transactions.

Basically, you can buy but not sell pretty much anywhere at this point. In many places, you can do both. There is an increased security risk with machines that buy.

Solutions like LibertyX are a reasonably good, Western Union like way to acquire Bitcoin when BTMs become unavailable.

Despite an notable concentration of crypto wealth in American hands, American Bitcoin ATM operators are increasingly wary of their regulatory environment.

In most cases there’s little harm done when someone buys a little Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash.

All the same, liberals such as Kamala Harris or Donald Trump are less than excited about the people’s opportunity to exit fiat currency altogether.

IRS Increases Surveillance of Bitcoin Believers

The government’s top tax enforcement official, John Fort, told Bloomberg Law this week that he and his agents are looking to go after Bitcoin ATM operators and American’s looking to get into Bitcoin the fast way.

Some states already have legislation that promotes an anti-money laundering environment among cryptocurrency users.

For example, according to Sean Pezeshk of Tennessee’s BitKing LLC, you can buy or sell up to $500 with no form of identification.

BitKing operates a number of crypto ATMs in the Memphis area.

The company made headlines when it suffered a theft, which incurred no financial losses outside of the machine’s repair.

Larger amounts require some documents. It is notable that many US banks will give an account without photo identification on hand.

Can America Withstand a ‘Blockchain Brain Drain’?

Since Facebook announced that it was entering our industry, those in blockchain land have noticed a severe and constant increase in anti-blockchain sentiment, legislation, and posturing at the highest levels of government.

Take, for example, this quote from California Senator Kamala Harris, on April 11th 2019:

“I’m concerned about how much Facebook values trust and transparency.”

Facebook, one of the most regulated technology companies in Silicon Valley, dedicates literally millions of dollars per year to data compliance.

The US government services less than 300 million people, compared to Facebook’s billion-plus.

Nevertheless, politicians like Harris, whose background is in legal work for government, would like almost seek criminal sanctions on Facebook for making the occasional mistake.

What Harris and other liberals fail to understand about cryptocurrency is that the entire system is based on free will.

If people have reason not to trust Facebook and its Libra currency, wouldn’t the appropriate solution be a warning label of some kind, rather than an outright ban, in essence freezing the flow of interstate commerce?

The US Constitution’s commerce clause gives legislators the power to “regulate” the flow of money, goods and services. From a legal standpoint, it’s rare that the government actually gives itself permission to “ban,” well, anything at the federal level.

Constitutional scholars frequently conclude that these are “state’s rights” issues, meaning, in this case, that Harris should be writing to her state assemblyman, rather than hauling upstanding billionaires including Mark Zuckerberg to Washington, DC.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BitStarz News. BitStarz News employees may also have an active investment in any profiled products and/or companies.

Comments (No)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.