United States of America is one of the most comfortable countries in the world for conducting cryptocurrency business. Here incorporated into major hedge funds, stock exchanges and other companies associated with the cryptocurrency and for many goods and services can pay not only to Fiat or electronic money, but digital. In the United States are also common automated teller machines (ATMs) that enable the exchange of fiduciary money and cryptocurrency.
But the legal regulation of the digital currency in the US is not less difficult than in Europe. This is mainly due to the peculiarities of the legal system of the state (the presence of both Federal law and States ' rights) and lack of unified position among the regulators on the legal status of the cryptocurrency. So, digital currency is seen both as a money (or their equivalent), as property (property) and commodities.
At the Federal level, several cryptocurrency companies (e.g., exchange) should be registered as operators on money transfer (Money Transmitters) to the Network on struggle against financial crimes (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network). And at the state level the activities of such companies are subject to licensing requirements (in every state).
as of ownership of digital money are considered for tax purposes. Operations with bitcoin are subject to tax. For example, wages paid to employees in Bitcoin are subject to Federal income tax (Federal Income Tax Withholding) and payroll taxes (Payroll Taxes).
the fed and the Federal Advisory Council has called bitcoin a threat to the banking system, economic activity and financial stability. The chamber recommends that the United States pay attention to the protection of the rights of consumers using cryptocurrency
in 2012 the Federal Bureau of investigation, the U.S. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, hereinafter "FBI") released a report titled "Bitcoin Virtual currency unique features which represent individual difficulties deter illegal activity." In it, the FBI expressed its concern over the possibility of illegal activity in an anonymous payment system Bitcoin.
In may 2014 at the joint meeting, the fed's Federal Advisory Council (Federal Advisory Council) Bitcoin has been defined as "a threat to the banking system, economic activity and financial stability."
In April 2014, the Committee on small business held a hearing devoted to the study of the benefits and risks of Bitcoin as a means of payment for small businesses. Committee Chairman Sam graves also noted the importance of the hearing for such business.
In may 2014, the chamber of the United States (Government Accountability O ce) published a report in which specified public authorities, services and agencies associated with the cryptocurrency and encouraged to pay attention to the protection of the rights of consumers using cryptocurrency.
In August of 2014 the Bureau of financial consumer protection (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, hereinafter "the Bureau") noted the risks of virtual currencies such as Bitcoin. The Director of the Bureau stated that "virtual currencies may have potential benefits, but consumers need to be careful and ask the right questions."
In October, representatives of the Department, the Federal reserve research, statistics and monetary Affairs (Federal Reserve Board''s Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary A airs) prepared a research work deals mainly with the technical side of Bitcoin.
In may 2015 there is information that the new York stock exchange ( New York Stock e Exchange) will be every day to publish information about the value of Bitcoin against the dollar.
In the same month, the cryptocurrency exchange ItBit Trust received from Department of financial services of the state of new York (Department of Financial Services) Charter trust company of new York (New York State Trust Company Charter), became the first formally regulated bitcoin exchange. In October a Charter was obtained and the Gemini Trust Company.
In October 2015 congressional Research service (Congressional Research Service) released a report "Bitcoin: questions, answers and analysis of legal problems" dedicated to the pros and cons of using Bitcoin, and the legal regulation of digital currency and other issues.
Also in October, 2015 community Coin Center analyzed the legislation of individual States and explored the prospects of creating special laws for the settlement of cryptocurrency transactions. The results of the study were reflected in the draft State Digital Currency Principles and Framework. It covers the basic principles of state legislation regarding cryptocurrencies, and provides unified information for anyone who wishes to engage in the business of cryptocurrency and want to learn more about regulation in this sector in different States.
In December 2016 was published a press release from the office of the Comptroller of the currency (O ce of the Comptroller of the Currency), according to which the regulator plans to issue FINTECH companies national (Federal) banking license a limited purpose. In order to obtain such a license, companies and startups should be involved in fiduciary activities or to carry out at least one of the three core functions of banks: loans, check payment and reception of deposits.
legal regulation of the cryptocurrency market in the United States
Cryptocurrency activity is subject to licensing, if such a requirement is established by the law of the States.< p>the state of California was the first of all the States of the United States at the legislative level to allow the use of cryptocurrency. The law allowing any Corporation, Association, or individual in California to participate in the circulation of money other than legal means of payment of the United States came into force in early 2015. However, the conduct of cryptocurrency business in the state is not regulated.
in the state of new York, the conduct of such business was regulated in August 2015, when the forces of the financial services Department of new York (New York State Department of Financial services, hereinafter-the "Department") was introduced BitLicense-license to conduct cryptocurrency business (Virtual Currency Business Activity). The license was criticized by many major cryptocurrency companies who subsequently left the state (including Poloniex, ShapeShi, and Kraken), and a lawsuit was filed with the new York County Supreme Court in which the plaintiff claimed the Department had no right to introduce Bitlcense. A year after its introduction, only Circle (Bitcoin wallet) and Ripple (FINTECH startup) received the license. About 26 other companies are waiting to confirm their applications. In the state of Washington, the digital currency - the object of money transfer (Money Transmission) in the sense of the law "on the unification of monetary services" (Uniform Money services Act).
this means that companies can make cryptocurrency transfers to a Washington resident only after obtaining the Washington license of a money transfer operator (Washington Money Transmitter License). This requirement applies both to exchanges that provide services for the exchange of Fiat money for cryptocurrencies and Vice versa, and to those that exchange only digital money. Companies that provide cryptocurrency wallets to users and perform operations on the exchange or transfer of digital currency between them are also subject to this regulation. Companies that provide cryptocurrency wallets should carry out a security audit of a computer system in order to obtain a license. Persons carrying out transactions in cryptocurrency directly to other persons should not receive a license.
the Same requirement to some other cryptocurrency companies provided right new Hampshire. Exchanges and companies providing cryptocurrency wallets are regarded as money transfer operators (Money Transmitters), and their activities are subject to appropriate licensing. Similar requirements for some cryptocurrency companies are in most States.
the judicial precedent holds a Special place in the US legal system. If at the Federal level there is a tendency to unify the attitude to cryptocurrency, then at the state level, the judges disagree. Back in 2013, a judge of the district court of the Eastern district of Texas made a decision (Memorandum Opinion), in which in fact recognized Bitcoin as a currency and defined financial legislation as applicable to transactions with cryptocurrencies. At the same time, the judge of the District court of the southern district of new York Alison Nathan in the trial of the use and transfer of unlicensed cryptocurrency defendant Antonio Murgio of Coin.mx has confirmed that "dictionaries, courts, and legal history charters confirm — Bitcoin is money."
the Miami District court Judge, by contrast, ruled that Bitcoin is not a currency, which led to the dismissal of charges in the case concerning the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime. At the Federal level, the network for combating financial crimes (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network) has the competence to regulate cryptocurrency activities (except for taxation issues). Back in March 2013, the regulator published a guide in which it identified companies to be registered as money transfer operators (Money Transmitters) in the Network to combat financial crimes (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network). These include companies that provide services for the transfer, sale or exchange of digital currency.
in 2014, two additional manuals were published in which cryptocurrency companies that are not subject to registration were named, among them were companies that are engaged in cryptocurrency mining and the development of appropriate software.
the Companies registered as money transfer operators (Money Transmitters) are obliged to execute the legislation in the field of counteraction to legalization (laundering) of the income, obtained by criminal means (Anti Money Laundering), and comply with the policy of "Know your customer" (Know Your Customer). Therefore, the cryptocurrency company must establish the identity of the user for subsequent operations with him. At the same time, if the company suspects the user of participation in illegal activities, it is obliged to inform the relevant authorities.
at the same time, in February 2014, fed Chairman Janet Yellen said at a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee (U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban a airs) that the fed has no authority to control and regulate Bitcoin, as the cryptocurrency does not intersect with the banking sector in any way.
in September 2015, the Us government Commission, the head of stock futures (Commodity Futures Trading Commission), first equated Bitcoin to commodities.
the Issues of taxation are within the purview of the internal revenue Service USA Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter "the IRS"). In March 2014, the tax Service published a guide in which it defined cryptocurrency as property (property), transactions with which should be taxed (including mining). This statement created a resonance in the society, as a result of which the us White house website through the platform "We the People" even filed an electronic petition to the US President that such a decision of the Tax service will adversely affect the development of Bitcoin. The petition was signed by 864 people.
- wages paid to employees in cryptocurrency are objects of Federal income tax (Federal Income Tax Withholding) and taxes on wages (Payroll Taxes); payments for the services of the counterparty under a civil contract in the digital currency are also subject to taxes;
- the Nature of profit or loss from the sale or exchange of cryptocurrency depends on whether The whether the virtual currency is the main asset of the taxpayer< /li>
- information on payments in cryptocurrency should be submitted to the relevant authorities. Income received by an individual in cryptocurrency and other objects of taxation should be declared in dollars