CFT

siddemo

The advantage for sovereign nations to have a CBDC is that you eliminate counterfeiting and I think that is why we will see CBDCs eventually. They will probably also implement KYC/AML/CFT for the currency and wallets which will make every transaction trackable, which is what we really don't have with paper fiat. But yes, if they don't peg their CBDC to gold or BTC, then they will just keep printing the digital currency and we'll have the exact same problems we have now. I like the counterfeiting aspect to the CBDC, but we will lose the anonymity of cash. Is there a way to have both anonymity and AML/CFT?

TheGreatMuffin

Thx. Do you mean this? > Anonymous crypto-asset accounts as well as other anonymising instruments, do not allow the traceability of crypto-asset transfers, whilst also making it difficult to identify linked transactions that may raise suspicion or to apply to adequate level of customer due diligence. In order to ensure effective application of AML/CFT requirements to crypto-assets, it is necessary to prohibit the provision and the custody of anonymous crypto-asset accounts or accounts allowing for the anonymisation or the increased obfuscation of transactions by crypto-asset service providers, including through anonymity-enhancing coins. The prohibition does not apply to providers of hardware and software or providers of self-hosted wallets insofar as they do not possess access to or control over those crypto-assets wallets. It seems that this would only apply to custodial tools, not to the common coinjoin wallets (Wasabi, Samourai, Joinmarket), no?

gr8ful4

#Time to talk about various state attacks including price suppression schemes. **This was first published in the Journal of Cybersecurity** https://academic.oup.com/cybersecurity/article/7/1/tyab004/6166133 [[**Back-up link**]](https://web.archive.org/web/20210312070922/https://academic.oup.com/cybersecurity/article/7/1/tyab004/6166133) In this paper the authors are broadly talking about risks stemming from routing around AML and weighing AML vs "privacy rights" (GDPR) from a state perspective. As many here know, AML/KYC has never been intended to stop money laundering (at least not within government and the big banks). It was always a measure of control to ensure that normal people like you and me have no easy way to off-shore their wealth. Now enter the crypto era where suddenly, according to the words of Obama "[Everybody is running around with a Swiss bank account in their pocket](https://youtube.com/watch?v=GFku1YugfS0)". Now that's an outrageous scenario, isn't it? Imagine free constituents taking care of their own financials without anybody else snooping on them. In the paper the authors haven been classifying the following three coins along certain criteria involving AML/KYC and GDPR compliance, which they define as "good". * Bitcoin (***good****, but likely not GDPR compliant*), * Zcash (***good***) and * Monero (***bad***, *because not AML/KYC compliant*). Now let's jump to the interesting part, where things get really exciting. **Monero** as classified in this paper is seen as a **risk to public safety** and hence deserves to be **state attacked**. Quite a few mechanisms are described in that article that many here suspected for a long time (e.g. **price suppression**, network attacks,...). To quote the paper: > "A set of tools to combat privacy-coins may include means of a different technological, regulatory, economic (fiscal) nature, also including state attacks on underlying privacy-blockchains. The letter tool, as possible regulatory access points of the blockchain space, was already mentioned by Finck [16], however, without further analysis in that domain. The AML/CFT measures should concentrate on the cryptocurrency of indicated networks, instead of targeting the people who are members of their communities. The tools can and should aim towards reducing the particular currencies’ value, consequently inducing a voluntary outflow of their users."

blue_waffles96

So, your claiming cross-border payments does not require foreign exchange/currency reserves? The number one reason for foreign currency reserves is used to settle international trade and payments. When a country imports goods or services, it needs to pay in foreign currencies. Reserves provide the necessary funds to fulfil these obligations without putting excessive pressure on the domestic currency's value. It is well known that central banks incur opportunity costs from holding the reserve assets (especially cash holdings) and from their storage, security costs, etc. Swift itself does only the transaction part of any payment, not the settlement itself. Swift is trying to speed up their transaction process by introducing new software and API, which they are saying can complete a transaction process in 30 minutes. AML/CFT regulations have nothing to do with the transaction itself. Any client or person needs to pass the necessary checks before making a payment or transaction. In this article : [article ](https://www.ft.com/content/631af8cc-47cc-11e8-8c77-ff51caedcde6), it states that often, transfers via Swift pass through multiple banks before reaching their final destination, making them time-consuming, costly, and lacking transparency on how much money will arrive at the other end. Swift themselves acknowledge that there are issues with its payments system. Again, they are quoted in the article above. So I don't know why you're claiming such issues don't exist and are because of regulations. The goal is for XRPL to handle the transactions, much faster and better than other solutions, and for XRP to handle the liquidity pool and rid banks of the opportunity costs that they incur for such payments and settlements. Currently, there is a discussion for a new feature called clawback [clawback ](https://sologenic.medium.com/the-xrpl-clawback-feature-a-game-changer-for-institutional-investors-59e4e7bc7698) . This will enable transactions to be reversed in many cases, including changes in regulations or fraud.

_king1

Lots of ignorance and hyperbole on this thread without any understanding of the basics. Let me clarify a few things. 1. India has been pushing at the G20 level to get international consensus on crypto regulation. A key aspect of this is uniform reporting laws from an AML/CFT lens. 2. The govt rolled out AML/CFT registration requirements last year but offshore VASPs didn’t give a fuck, continued servicing Indian clients. 3. Theres no ban. The govt issued show cause notices to a bunch of offshore VASPs, basically asking them to explain to the govt why they didn’t register- and comply with Indian laws. Basic ask. Any government would do this.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; India's Financial Intelligence Unit has called for the ban of 9 cryptocurrency exchange URLs due to non-compliance with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The affected exchanges include Binance, Kraken, Huobi, Kucoin, Bittrex, Gate.io, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, and MEXC Global. The ban is part of India's efforts to increase regulation in the crypto market, requiring firms to register with the FIU and adhere to AML and CFT frameworks. Despite 31 entities being registered, several have not complied, leading to the issuance of 'show cause notices' to the nine non-compliant firms. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has sanctioned Russian national Ekaterina Zhdanova for laundering millions in cryptocurrency for various individuals, including ransomware actors. Zhdanova used her expertise in cryptocurrency and blockchain networks to move money through various platforms to evade AML/CFT controls. She is also believed to have laundered over $2.3 million of suspected ransom payments made to one affiliate of the Ryuk ransomware operation. Zhdanova also assisted Russian oligarchs in evading sanctions and facilitated the transfer of over $100 million on behalf of a Russian oligarch. As a result of the OFAC sanctions, her US-based assets will be frozen and US persons and entities will be prohibited from engaging in any transactions with her. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Ferdo306

Cool tool, thx for sharing Chain analysis is going to be a billion dollar industry It's gonna be used by every financial institution for AML/CFT But there's always Monero ;)

pramadanov

Was a part of two CeX (one major, one amaller), doing the hated-by-all KYC and AML/CFT dirty work :) Dunno if this is "building" lol. Opened my own law practice now though and only diamond hands-ing my cryptoes sadly.

SouthJazz1010

ETF feels like "paper BTC" (even though it has another definition). It feels like these ETF can dilute the btc value etc. I read that oil price is decided in 30% by speculation in ETF, CFT etc rather than in the supply and demand for the actual crude oil. I'm wrong with my theory? https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/the-dangers-of-paper-bitcoin

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Elliptic turns 10 years old this year. In March 2013, the US Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) released a guidance document that set the stage for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regulation of the crypto space. Elliptic Navigator is the first-ever regulatory compliance solution using blockchain analytics. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Giga79

>Romero expressed that crypto companies can maintain financial privacy for their customers without relying on mixers and anonymity-enhancing technology. She continued by stating there is a distinction between financial privacy and anonymity. **Traditional finance (TradFi) ensures financial privacy by verifying the customer’s identity through Know Your Customer (KYC), Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) measures, without relying on anonymity-enhancing technology.** > >Romero encouraged the verification of digital identity, urging exchanges as well as decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms to verify the digital identity of users Well boys, it was nice while it lasted.

Dismal-Jellyfish

It is in the post but in case you missed it: TLDR: DeFi services often have a controlling organization behind them that provides a measure of centralized administration and governance. While she does not dismiss the potential for widespread truly-DeFi services one day, she claims they are not a major feature of the current landscape. This means that when they consider DeFi services today, they believe there are generally persons and firms associated with those services to which AML/CFT obligations may already apply. The key regulatory vulnerability identified by the risk assessment is noncompliance with existing U.S. AML/CFT obligations by DeFi services. The U.S. Department of the Treasury considers any DeFi service performing the functions of a covered financial institution to be subject to BSA obligations, including AML/CFT obligations, regardless of how decentralized the services may be. Additionally, U.S. persons, wherever located, are required to comply with U.S. economic sanctions regulations. She wants to focus on is to continue to strengthen U.S. AML/CFT supervision of virtual asset activities in tandem with considering additional guidance for the private sector on DeFi services’ AML/CFT obligations. Additionally, they will assess enhancements to the domestic AML/CFT regulatory regime as applied to DeFi services and monitor responsible innovation of AML/CFT and sanctions compliance tools. She offers a specific message to the private sector: “DeFi innovation” should not only occur in the technical, financial domain—there is an enormous need and potential for innovation in compliance mechanisms that could help all players in the digital ecosystem ensure they remain on the right side of the law and that they are not facilitating the funding of criminal or terrorist networks. "We need your perspective on how we can best encourage DeFi services to comply with existing AML/CFT and sanctions regulations, where we should clarify obligations, and how we can ensure that DeFi services falling outside the scope of current regulations are not open for exploitation by illicit actors."

juanadov

AML and CFT are big issues for banks.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The US Department of the Treasury has published its first-ever analysis of the potential hazards from decentralized finance (DeFi) services. The report finds that DeFi platforms that are non-compliant with anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CFT) regulations pose the most significant current illicit finance risk. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Calm-Cartographer677

The assessment found that “cybercriminals, ransomware attackers, scammers, and North Korean hackers” are using DeFi services to launder funds due to “non-compliance” with anti-money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) regulations. Money laundering is far easier with fiat, so that argument is a nonstarter.

masstransience

Unpopular opinion and this will get downvoted because emotional clickbait earns more moons than critical thinking. There is so much FUD going around on this sub. No one is reading a damn thing and just pointing fingers at the US; almost like bad actors shit posting to keep being able to steal people’s crypto. Idk, but the FUD has been constantly posted the last month. > The primary vulnerability that illicit actors exploit stems from non-compliance by DeFi services with AML/CFT and sanctions obligations. DeFi services engaged in covered activity under the Bank Secrecy Act have AML/CFT obligations regardless of whether the services claim that they currently are or plan to be decentralized. Other vulnerabilities include the potential for some DeFi services to be out of scope for existing AML/CFT obligations, weak or non-existent AML/CFT controls for DeFi services in other jurisdictions, and poor cybersecurity controls by DeFi services, which enable the theft of funds. The US, according to this report, has nothing against DeFi except that exchanges are not using anti-laundering tools available to stop criminals and in fact criminals are aware of this and using them illicitly for this purpose. N. Korea just stole 1B in crypto last year. That’s a lot of funding that goes into terrorism and more crypto theft, and bad actors spamming social media and Reddit crypto subs, not to mention actual wars, deaths, kidnappings and all the bad shit that makes the world suck. But hey, feel free to raise your hand when you make a billion dollars off crypto like North Korea and counteract all that shit. This sub is so busy navel gazing at its wallets that it can’t see any of the actual power struggles going on within crypto, and somehow rooting for hedgefunds and dictatorial and authoritarian regimes to take control of their crypto. /unpopular opinion

coinmarshal

>Actors like the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), cybercriminals, ransomware attackers, thieves, and scammers are using DeFi services to transfer and launder their illicit proceeds. >They are able to exploit vulnerabilities, including the fact that many DeFi services that have anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) obligations fail to implement them. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1391

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The US Treasury Department has warned that criminals are using decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols to launder money. It added that many DeFi apps fail to comply with anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) rules and are therefore being exploited by criminals. However, money laundering, proliferation financing, and terrorist financing most commonly occur using traditional assets, it said. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

juanadov

Team America: World Police How do you get a decentralised service to run AML or CFT? That sort of defeats the object.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The European Commission has adopted a new Delegated Regulation in relation to third countries which have strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT regimes that pose significant threats to the financial system of the Union. The objective is to identify jurisdictions which pose "significant threats" to financial system and hence the proper functioning of the internal market. Once identified, the Commission adopts delegated acts listing these jurisdictions. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

FldLima

Briefly In June 2021, Binance received an inquiry from U.S. senators regarding its operations and compliance policies. Binance responded to the inquiry, highlighting its commitment to regulatory compliance and cooperation with regulatory bodies. The response detailed Binance's efforts to strengthen its compliance program, including the appointment of former U.S. Treasury criminal investigator Greg Monahan as Global Money Laundering Reporting Officer (GMLRO) and the implementation of a comprehensive AML/CFT program. Binance also emphasized its commitment to ensuring the safety and security of its users' funds and information.

Backrus

Because no government will allow on/off-ramping without KYC due to AML/CFT. And if you KYC your on-chain wallet, then it's a bigger security risk than having money on CEX.

Rayl24

What is your business, legal or grey? Sounds like you have a business that accepts crypto that you then send to CDC to sell into fiat. Someone must have alerted the authorities which informed CDC. No one can help you, AML/CFT teams are notorious for not answering on progress so the customer service officer won't know till investigation are completed and you get kicked out or funds gets sent to the authorities.

milonuttigrain

The European Union’s New AML/CFT Framework also provided the same thing - while it is being investigated the firm cannot give the user information.

Shiratori-3

Fair point. AML: Anti-Money Laundering CFT: Combatting Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT is a common combined acronym) KYC: Know Your Client FATF: Financial Action Task Force (This is an intergovernmental group that makes recommendations re combatting money laundering etc.)

lntipbot

Hi u/AdS_CFT_, thanks for tipping u/ObjectiveJackfruit35 **500** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://xnf5cwpq73.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/info) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

bitsteiner

*“Digital identity verification is essential to the operation of CBDCs, particularly in cross-border transactions. “ “Tradable digital assets must be tied to a digital identity system, which in turn should be tied to an automatic KYC and AML/CFT verification system.“ “This is a foundational step to the potential use of CBDCs, and emerging developments in regulatory and compliance technology may benefit central banks’ experiments in the digital currency space.”* Even if all the countries implement all this (which will take years if not decades, because it requires new laws compliant with constitutions of different countries, bilateral ratifications, potential settlement in constitutional courts aso.), who is gonna sign up for this bureaucracy? They know they can never introduce CBDCs, because it would turn the monetary system upside down. That's why they make it more and more complicated in order to delay their introduction indefinitely but can pretend there is progress at the same time. CBDCs will be always in 10 years.

VoxImperii

Holy shit the guts on these bankster parasites. I’d have been boiling with anger after receiving those papers and I’d flat tell them to go fuck themselves. I understand KYC and AML/CFT and I cooperate gladly with my bank, but there’s a fucking line before they go all 1984.

mexc-global

Actually we have obtained 5 licenses so far in several countries. Global AML/CFT framework to be set up by this year, so as to enhance security and compliance.

korben2600

It's possible the funds originated from a bank that's now on the sanctioned entities list? Russian Bank -> Estonian Bank -> Binance It could very well be part of an AML/CFT investigation.

Spartan3123

>blatant failure to comply with the AML and CFT Its amazing how bootlickers can selectively ignore reality You realize they integrated the chain analysis sanctions oracle into their frontend, and probably had plans to integrated it into the next version of their tornado cash contract? ( I don't agree with this and the contract would have been forked if that happened )

formal-explorer-2718

> Then they should go after those who are laundering the money. They can't because the Tornado Cash network is obscuring their identity. Because of this, they are going after the Tornado Cash network instead. > It’s lame Ok, but it's the law: money transmitters must comply with AML/CFT regulations.

formal-explorer-2718

They are bothered by money laundering and a blatant failure to comply with the AML and CFT regulations that other money transmitters must comply with. It doesn't matter whether a money transmitter is implemented using a centralized server or a decentralized smart contract. If the money transmitter is used by entities sanctioned by the US, then the money transmitter itself can be sanctioned.

Small-Actuary-8677

>The Bitcoin network (complemented by additional layers such as the Lightning Network to ensure speed and capacity, assuming that these are effective) may have some properties **which would seem** to make it potentially suitable to be the holy grail of cross-border payments: ​ >In conclusion, **Bitcoin is unlikely to be the holy grail of cross-border payments**, primarily for three reasons. First, its underlying proof-of-work mechanism is inherently inefficient. Second, the supposed comparative advantages in cross-border payments are the result of regulatory gaps, which will however be closed as authorities realize that these gaps have significantly undermined the effectiveness of AML/CFT regulation and have supported Bitcoin as predominant global means of illicit payment. Third, Bitcoin is not even suitable as domestic payment system because it is inherently unstable in terms of its purchasing power. The title of this thread makes it seem like the ECB said something positive about Bitcoin, which is not the case at all.

Fabtacular1

Obviously the "may have" language implies a dissenting opinion, and that's exactly what the paper concludes: >In conclusion, Bitcoin is unlikely to be the holy grail of cross-border payments, primarily for three reasons. First, its underlying proof-of-work mechanism is inherently inefficient. Second, the supposed comparative advantages in cross-border payments are the result of regulatory gaps, which will however be closed as authorities realize that these gaps have significantly undermined the effectiveness of AML/CFT regulation and have supported Bitcoin as predominant global means of illicit payment. Third, Bitcoin is not even suitable as domestic payment system because it is inherently unstable in terms of its purchasing power. Just another example of people in this sub seeing and hearing what they want to see / hear, without applying the most basic levels of skepticism and critical thinking.

Invest07723

Article so you don't have to click 👇 Yesterday the European Central Bank (ECB) published a paper, “Towards the holy grail of cross-border payments“. It explores six potential avenues for addressing the current inefficiencies of cross border payments, half of which use blockchain. The blockchain options include using the Bitcoin network, stablecoins, and crossborder central bank digital currency (multi-CBDC) with an FX conversion layer. One of the biggest hurdles in addressing payment challenges is the friction of anti-money laundering (AML) processes. While the paper predicts that one of the six paths will uncover the holy grail of cross border payment, there’s a big caveat. It assumes there will be progress in addressing AML and CFT compliance inefficiencies. That’s not a trivial assumption. Regarding what is classed as meeting the ‘holy grail’, the paper says payments should be immediate, cheap, universal and settled in a secure medium such as central bank money. ECB considers Bitcoin as an option Turning to specific solutions, as a paper from a central bank, it’s almost audacious to consider Bitcoin as an option. And it notes that this avenue did not make into the G20 list of potential solutions. The paper doesn’t just explore the Bitcoin network but also the layer 2 solution for micropayments, the Lightning network.  The authors outline several avenues that address Bitcoin custody risks for end users. They view the existence of one extensive network and the absence of intermediaries as key advantages. However, they also highlight the drawbacks of Bitcoin, such as wasteful use of energy, and that much of the efficiencies can be attributed to unequal application of AML/CFT compliance. The paper concludes that Bitcoin is the least credible avenue of the six options. Stablecoins and M-CBDC The ECB also explores stablecoins which it sees as a viable solution with far less innovation than Bitcoin. However, it covers the usual central bank reservations about stablecoins, such as the run risk and impact on financial stability and the likelihood of a monopoly that will exploit its position. The discussion of multi-CBDC solutions is a little lighter than the other sections. At this stage, this route is seen as one of the more far-off options, given it requires many countries to issue CBDCs, which is likely to take time. Despite this being further in the future, multi-CBDC made it into the top two avenues to explore alongside interlinking domestic payment systems. Meanwhile, last week the BIS published a document exploring solutions for FX settlement risk, which overlapped the ECB’s paper. Apart from the multi-CBDC Project Jura, the BIS paper outlines several new private wholesale blockchain settlement networks that arguably are neither stablecoins nor CBDCs. They include the Regulated Liability Network, Baton’s Core FX system, and Fnality, the synthetic CBDC settlement network backed by 16 financial institutions. Additionally, the BIS recently released a paper that explores using multi-CBDC solutions to address cross border payment inefficiencies.

BiggsBeeLang

Bro you do realize physical or liquid it’s still an asset. Can you explain any of this? Why did JPmorgan make a privatized coin for its shareholders? Why is Bank of America educating people on the changes coming from crypto? Why are global economist warning if banks don’t get on the trend they will fall behind in the future? Please I have to know why you think banks are so good compared to crypto. Other than being biased. Please post some factual information that backs what you’re saying. Currently, cryptocurrencies are regulated in the US by a plethora of institutions - CFTC, SEC, and the IRS - making it difficult to create an overarching regulatory guideline even in the States alone. https://softjourn.com/insights/will-bitcoin-ever-be-regulated#:~:text=Believe%20it%20or%20not%2C%20Bitcoin,strict%20KYC%20and%20AML%20laws. The U.S. Federal Reserve has announced that it is assessing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The central bank has released the preconditions necessary for the launch of the digital dollar. Hedera is one of the platforms rumored to be potentially working on the CBDC. Hedera is backed by Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Boeing (NYSE:BA), and LG Electronics. https://hill.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=8350 Cryptocurrency exchanges are legal in the United States and fall under the regulatory scope of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In practice, this means that cryptocurrency exchange service providers must register with FinCEN, implement an AML/CFT program, maintain appropriate records, and submit reports to the authorities. https://complyadvantage.com/insights/crypto-regulations/cryptocurrency-regulations-united-states/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-senators-unveil-bill-regulate-cryptocurrency-2022-06-07/ You just stated crypto is backed my nothing that’s completely false.

BiggsBeeLang

Can you explain any of this? Why did JPmorgan make a privatized coin for its shareholders? Why is Bank of America educating people on the changes coming from crypto? Why are global economist warning if banks don’t get on the trend they will fall behind in the future? Please I have to know why you think banks are so good compared to crypto. Other than being biased. Please post some factual information that backs what you’re saying. Currently, cryptocurrencies are regulated in the US by a plethora of institutions - CFTC, SEC, and the IRS - making it difficult to create an overarching regulatory guideline even in the States alone. https://softjourn.com/insights/will-bitcoin-ever-be-regulated#:~:text=Believe%20it%20or%20not%2C%20Bitcoin,strict%20KYC%20and%20AML%20laws. The U.S. Federal Reserve has announced that it is assessing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The central bank has released the preconditions necessary for the launch of the digital dollar. Hedera is one of the platforms rumored to be potentially working on the CBDC. Hedera is backed by Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Boeing (NYSE:BA), and LG Electronics. https://hill.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=8350 Cryptocurrency exchanges are legal in the United States and fall under the regulatory scope of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In practice, this means that cryptocurrency exchange service providers must register with FinCEN, implement an AML/CFT program, maintain appropriate records, and submit reports to the authorities. https://complyadvantage.com/insights/crypto-regulations/cryptocurrency-regulations-united-states/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-senators-unveil-bill-regulate-cryptocurrency-2022-06-07/ Educate yourself.

BiggsBeeLang

Can you explain any of this? Why did JPmorgan make a privatized coin for its shareholders? Why is Bank of America educating people on the changes coming from crypto? Why are global economist warning if banks don’t get on the trend they will fall behind in the future? Please I have to know why you think banks are so good compared to crypto. Other than being biased. Please post some factual information that backs what you’re saying. Currently, cryptocurrencies are regulated in the US by a plethora of institutions - CFTC, SEC, and the IRS - making it difficult to create an overarching regulatory guideline even in the States alone. https://softjourn.com/insights/will-bitcoin-ever-be-regulated#:~:text=Believe%20it%20or%20not%2C%20Bitcoin,strict%20KYC%20and%20AML%20laws. The U.S. Federal Reserve has announced that it is assessing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The central bank has released the preconditions necessary for the launch of the digital dollar. Hedera is one of the platforms rumored to be potentially working on the CBDC. Hedera is backed by Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Boeing (NYSE:BA), and LG Electronics. https://hill.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=8350 Cryptocurrency exchanges are legal in the United States and fall under the regulatory scope of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In practice, this means that cryptocurrency exchange service providers must register with FinCEN, implement an AML/CFT program, maintain appropriate records, and submit reports to the authorities. https://complyadvantage.com/insights/crypto-regulations/cryptocurrency-regulations-united-states/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-senators-unveil-bill-regulate-cryptocurrency-2022-06-07/

BiggsBeeLang

You have no idea what you’re talking about. Sorry. Currently, cryptocurrencies are regulated in the US by a plethora of institutions - CFTC, SEC, and the IRS - making it difficult to create an overarching regulatory guideline even in the States alone. https://softjourn.com/insights/will-bitcoin-ever-be-regulated#:~:text=Believe%20it%20or%20not%2C%20Bitcoin,strict%20KYC%20and%20AML%20laws. The U.S. Federal Reserve has announced that it is assessing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The central bank has released the preconditions necessary for the launch of the digital dollar. Hedera is one of the platforms rumored to be potentially working on the CBDC. Hedera is backed by Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Boeing (NYSE:BA), and LG Electronics. https://hill.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=8350 Cryptocurrency exchanges are legal in the United States and fall under the regulatory scope of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In practice, this means that cryptocurrency exchange service providers must register with FinCEN, implement an AML/CFT program, maintain appropriate records, and submit reports to the authorities. https://complyadvantage.com/insights/crypto-regulations/cryptocurrency-regulations-united-states/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-senators-unveil-bill-regulate-cryptocurrency-2022-06-07/ Old people constantly prove they are unable to absorb new technology and ideas. When you post biased false information because it lines up with your idealism you only show your lack of understanding which is dangerous as you spread false claims.

BiggsBeeLang

Currently, cryptocurrencies are regulated in the US by a plethora of institutions - CFTC, SEC, and the IRS - making it difficult to create an overarching regulatory guideline even in the States alone. https://softjourn.com/insights/will-bitcoin-ever-be-regulated#:~:text=Believe%20it%20or%20not%2C%20Bitcoin,strict%20KYC%20and%20AML%20laws. The U.S. Federal Reserve has announced that it is assessing a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The central bank has released the preconditions necessary for the launch of the digital dollar. Hedera is one of the platforms rumored to be potentially working on the CBDC. Hedera is backed by Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), IBM (NYSE:IBM), Boeing (NYSE:BA), and LG Electronics. https://hill.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=8350 Cryptocurrency exchanges are legal in the United States and fall under the regulatory scope of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). In practice, this means that cryptocurrency exchange service providers must register with FinCEN, implement an AML/CFT program, maintain appropriate records, and submit reports to the authorities. https://complyadvantage.com/insights/crypto-regulations/cryptocurrency-regulations-united-states/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-senators-unveil-bill-regulate-cryptocurrency-2022-06-07/ Old people constantly prove they are unable to absorb new technology and ideas. When you post biased false information because it lines up with your idealism you only show your lack of understanding which is dangerous as you spread false claims.

lntipbot

Hi u/sixgod999, thanks for tipping u/AdS_CFT_ **500** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://xnf5cwpq73.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/info) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

Mysterious_Lynx1887

Reply from the MEP of my country (I had sent an email via the Coinbase form) "Hello,   Thank you for your e-mail and your interest on this important decision of the European Parliament (EP) to start negotiations with the Council on the revision of the Transfer of Funds Regulation (TFR).   I strongly believe that it is important to count on European citizens engagement with the work of the EP. As Member of the EP we are accountable for the decisions we make and I think that your contributions are most valuable for the outcome of our negotiations. Having said that, I want to underline that I share most of your concerns regarding the impact on innovation in financial services and crypto industry competitiveness. As European People´s Party (EPP) Group shadow rapporteur (negotiator) for this file, I was deeply committed to deliver on this, but the EP position is the result of compromises that are forged considering the majorities formed within political groups. In some cases, we contributed for these majorities and, in other cases, we opposed significant parts of the text that was approved by the responsible committees (ECON and LIBE).   The recast of the Regulation on information accompanying transfers of funds and certain crypto-assets (TFR) is a recast procedure and the Council already approved its position. It is important to have in mind that this decision is not EP exclusive and that the final legislation will be the result of negotiations between the Parliament and the Council. The Parliament, in an ECON-LIBE Joint Committee procedure, worked in an intense way and with tight deadlines to deliver on a position before the end of March. The EPP Group, from the beginning, expressed major concern on a negotiation of such technical and politically sensitive file without the proper timeframe to reflect on the proposals and consult with important stakeholders. We pointed out, several times, that the Parliament must not be limited in its internal processes by any external agenda. In the end, we believe that the negotiations outcome is not properly balanced mainly because we lacked time to work on better compromises. That is one of the reasons we voted against important compromise proposals.   Our main priorities were to guarantee that we insert crypto-assets in the scope of the Regulation in a way that is innovation-friendly and avoid unproportioned compliance burden for companies and citizens; to safeguard a proper level playing field between wire and crypto transfers; to tackle the concrete situation of unhosted wallets, without banning them, as it was proposed; to guarantee high standards of data protection; and to align this file with the European legislation on crypto-assets and anti-money laundering.   Unfortunately, although we managed to integrate these matters in the final text, we believe that the result is far from being satisfactory. I want to underline two major examples that motivated our vote against some compromises.   de minimis threshold of 1.000 EUR First one, the deletion of the de minimis threshold of 1.000 EUR to trigger the obligations provisioned in the Regulation for providers of crypto-assets transfers. We strongly believe this creates a unlevelled playing field for crypto and wire transfers and can represent a major obstacle – through enhanced compliance costs for companies and citizens – to innovation in financial services. We must be committed to promote our companies (namely SME´s and start-ups) competitiveness in order to generate growth, create jobs and generate tax revenue. This threshold guaranteed a reasonable limit and it´s deletion creates an extra cost for operators that can result in higher costs for citizens, when trying to invest in new, innovative solutions.   Unhosted wallets Second one, the approach on unhosted wallets. It is only natural that these wallets must be addressed in the Regulation, but the path to a ban is not the solution. Banning unhosted wallets is condemning part of the industry, is to create a wrong association to criminal activity of people that legitimately use these wallets and, in the end, is to block the transfers to or from regulated providers of crypto-assets transfers, minimizing the potential impact of the TFR. The final drafting is not a total ban, but can lead to a de facto ban, if regulated providers face major costs on the operational level of identification and verification.   We support innovation! In a time of economic recovery and digital transition, the European Union must stand with innovation, with technological development and with new financial solutions for companies, investors and individual citizens. Instead of limiting our space for decision, the EU must promote economic freedom and fair competition. Using this Regulation to create an anathema on crypto-assets and on its users, associating almost automatically investments on crypto to criminal activity, is the wrong way.   In the end, all political groups agreed on important matters related to data protection, to the link to AML/CFT, to the inclusion of restrictive measures in the main priorities, to the systematic coherence with the crypto-assets legal framework, among other specific (but important) issues.   I want to remind that the decision of the EP is not the final draft of this revised legislation. We are now starting negotiations with the EU Council to reach the final version of this legislation. We were a minority position in some compromises and we accept the democratic outcome, voting in favour of the mandate to start negotiations. The EPP Group will keep its commitment to these specific aspects of the EP position and will closely follow negotiations with the Council. In the end, we will have to vote the final version and we will have a new opportunity to stand with our views on the matter.   I hope this message can clarify you on the legislative process and I urge you to continue making the Parliament accountable on such important matters.   Best regards,   Lídia Pereira MEP PPE "

JPfknTrader

Here we go: *Given the high risk of money laundering and terrorist financing posed by crypto-asset service providers that do not adhere to the EU's legal standards, crypto-asset service providers and any other obliged entity should refrain from interacting with such non-compliant crypto-asset service providers. In particular,* ***crypto-asset service providers should not interact with other CASPs that are located in a country included on the EU's AML/CFT list of high risk third countries*** *or on Annex I or Annex II to the EU's list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, that lack sufficient customer identification and verification process, that offer services associated with a high risk of money laundering, that provide services despite not being registered under \[Regulation on Markets in crypto-assets\] on that have proven links to illegal activities. Given that unhosted wallets do not fulfil any of the above criteria, Crypto-asset service providers should be prohibited from facilitating transfers of crypto-assets to such unhosted wallets.* ***Crypto-asset service providers facilitating transfers to non-compliant crypto asset service providers or to unhosted wallets should be subject to administrative sanctions.***

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The Bank of Israel published a draft regulation on Anti-Money-Laundering and Combatting the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) risk management for the banks facilitating crypto-to-fiat transactions. The move hints at the Israeli government's preparations to legalize and regulate the relationship between banks and virtual currency service providers (VASPs). *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

markuswa

Since we all of the crowdsales on our platform have to be tokens created through us, we impose mandatory vesting periods to prevent scammers from draining funds. There are vesting periods for both the crowdsales and LP tokens. Also we are working in implementing thorough KYC,AML and CFT checks to ensure maximum security for our users 😄 let us know if there are any features you would like to see!

Jxntb733

They take into account changes to the illicit finance risk environment resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, ransomware, domestic violent extremism, corruption; the increased digitization of payments and financial services; and the enactment of significant new requirements to the U.S. anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) framework. They continue to generate significant revenue from the maritime sector, in violation of international and U.S. law. These networks are also increasingly exploiting the digital economy, including through the systematic mining and trading of virtual assets, and the hacking of virtual asset service providers.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Coinbase, together with 17 different crypto corporations, recently launched a ‘Journey Rule Common Answer Expertise’ (TRUST), a platform that may allow the group of well-established US corporations to attain compliance with anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) obligations. The platform is meant to allow cryptocurrency exchanges to securely ship data legally required by the Journey Rule. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

5liveR

Great news anyhow, especially since its CB has done a u-turn in a matter of weeks. But, what about this(?): >The possession of cryptocurrency in the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and transactions with it (as well as with the dollar) are not prohibited - **but only through the "organizer of the digital currency exchange system" (a bank with a universal license) or a p2p exchanger legalized in the Russian Federation**. The mode of operation of the legal segment involves the full identification of the client according to banking rules, work taking into account AML / CFT requirements, all information about transactions through the Transparent Blockchain system of Rosfinmonitoring will be available for state control in the same way as transactions with non-cash rubles or foreign currency on bank accounts.> Does this mean, they don't allow self-custody? It seems to me that this could be a way to build fences around and cattle herdle coins into something they could take custody of in some future.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Nine jurisdictions have now applied an absolute ban on cryptocurrencies, and 42 have adopted an implicit ban. Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Bangladesh, China, Iraq, Qatar, Oman, Tunisia, and very recently Kosovo have all banned cryptocurrency. 103 jurisdictions now apply Anti-Money Laundering or combating the funding of terrorism (AML/CFT) laws to crypto-currencies. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Wolverlog

Craft Network $CFT ready to pop off, real competition to Openseas

mimblezimble

>he transferred it to his bank account from binance Binance are themselves not a good fiat payment counterpart. They are under scrutiny in so many countries. I would not want to send/receive to/from a bank account with the name Binance on it. On the Binance peer-to-peer market your counterpart is never Binance themselves but one of their market makers with "merchant status". The name on their bank account is certainly not Binance. So, it is not dangerous to transact with a "merchant". >due to illegal activity Illegal activity by your friend or by Binance? What "illegal activity" was it about? At that stage it is merely an accusation of illegal activity. Only a court of law could judge whether what the accused did, is illegal or not. But then again, when it is about banking, KYC, AML, and CFT, the normal legal procedures are not particularly well followed. For example, there does not seem to be any presumption of innocence. What the banks (and the government) are doing in that realm, is in violation of thousands of years of legal traditions. That is actually the case for all newly-invented modern law. There is absolutely no presumption of innocence, for example, in cases of domestic violence either. The suspect is guilty until proven otherwise. In fact, the suspect is guilty simply because he is being accused. Modern law is increasingly turning into some kind of bad joke. When these modern states tried to force their bullshit onto the Afghan hill tribes, these tribes responded by blowing off their legs with $3 roadside bombs and kicking them out of the mountains of Afghanistan. So, there is still hope! ;-)

Deep_Independent_610

As an economist: the recommendations don't sound to odd to be honest. Having a currency with a volatity such as BTC does imply risk. No matter how great you think the future of CC is. Here are the relevant parts of the management summary: 12. El Salvador became the first country to adopt Bitcoin as a legal tender on September 7, 2021 . While the law maintains the U.S. dollar as the national unit of account, it mandates the acceptance of Bitcoin by agents, unless technical impediments exist. A new digital means of payments—the e-wallet Chivo operating in both U.S. dollars and Bitcoin—has been introduced and heavily supported by the government to promote financial inclusion (each qualifying citizen who downloaded the application received an endowment of US$30). The law also guarantees the automatic conversion from Bitcoin to U.S. dollars through a trust fund funded with US$150 million from the budget, and in practice the conversion is done in Chivo. 13. Efforts to improve financial inclusion and raise growth are welcome, but risks arising from Bitcoin as a legal tender, the new payments ecosystem and trading in Bitcoin should be addressed. Crypto-technologies and digital payment systems like Chivo have the potential to make payments more efficient, thereby enhancing financial inclusion and supporting growth. Given Bitcoin’s high price volatility, its use as a legal tender entails significant risks to consumer protection, financial integrity, and financial stability. Its use also gives rise to fiscal contingent liabilities. Because of those risks, Bitcoin should not be used as a legal tender. Staff recommends narrowing the scope of the Bitcoin law and urges strengthening the regulation and supervision of the new payment ecosystem. Like for other e-wallets, Chivo should be required to fully safeguard customers' funds, both in U.S. dollars and Bitcoin, by segregating and ring-fencing reserve assets. Stronger regulation and oversight of the new payment ecosystem should be immediately implemented for consumer protection, anti-money laundering and counter financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), and risk management. Banking regulation should incorporate prudential safeguards such as conservative capital and liquidity requirements related to Bitcoin exposure. Measures to limit fiscal contingent liabilities, such as winding down the trust fund or withdrawing public subsidies to Chivo, should also be promptly considered. Recently announced plans to use the proceeds of new sovereign bond issuances to invest in Bitcoin, and the implications of trading more broadly in Bitcoin, will require a very careful analysis of implications for, and potential risks to, financial stability.

Oneofmanyshades

CFT.

ekintuna

Actually, the current concept of privacy in blockchain is an extreme one. When we consider privacy chains many of them are only focusing on hiding all of the available data onchain and in transit. Which makes it difficult to adopt real world use cases. For things like ensuring AML and CFT compliance of transactions, a layer of confidentiality is required instead of complete privacy. The idea that it is possible to choose who you reveal your data to, while retaining ownership of it, is a must to onboard the next 1 billion people to integrate their lives on top of systems build on blockchain technologies. And when we consider things like government 3.0, to ensure legitimacy of information, integrity of democratic processes while voting and freedom of speech, technologies like Oasis which allow people the ability for true privacy - the possibility of hide and reveal data when desired has to be adapted. In this regard Oasis is the most advanced blockchain in the industry as we are building a regulatory compliant blockchain ecosystem that gives every individual the possibility to make this choice. And by doing so ensure all the users of Oasis have true freedom and privacy in Web3.

LetsTryThis7

TLDR > The Financial Action Task Force (FATF)’s long-awaited update to its guidance on virtual assets lays out a comprehensive set of guidelines to regulate the quickly evolving cryptocurrency space. With this update released, digital assets firms in the coming years are likely to encounter more clarity on anti-money-laundering and combatting the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regulations around the globe, even if some jurisdictions do opt for more restrictive policies than others.

wesleyD777

What did you expect? Did you expect the financial system / legal system to sit back idly whilst an uncontrollable method of value transfer took hold? Did you expect national treasuries and taxmen to look the other way whilst money changes hands in undeclared, untraceable transactions without trying to regulate on ramps and off ramps? ... and yes I know the big banks launder more money in a day than Crypto does in a month, but they can do that as they are established with legal departments the size of some small countries, crypto is still in the starting blocks and doesn't have lobbyists, paid for politicians and an old-boys network to smooth out the bumps in the road. It's nice to stick a finger to the man and wax rhetorical about creating an unregulated financial system outside of the control of governments, but it's incredibly naive. Without AML/CFT regulation and legislation crypto would be the domain of drug barrons, despots and terrorists and would not have amassed the growth that many assets have in the last 13 years since BTC launched. If you're happy to help those guys then go for it. Just because Satoshi was a genius doesn't mean he was a realist.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Chainalysis, the blockchain data platform says crypto adoption grew by 881% as of August 2021, over the previous 12 months. Most require crypto exchanges to be registered with either the securities or commodities trading regulator. These exchanges have to adhere to strict Know Your Customer (KYC), Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering of Terror Financing (CFT) rules. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

nikosnelson

These statistics do not even exist. No government agency is able to pull reliable crime statistics, let alone make a real comparison on these kind of topics. Its all just cherry picking and number manipulation at best, serving whatever agenda needs to be served. Did i already mention that they don't know what they don't know? The AML/CFT industry is huge, yet only drips of money is confiscated and only few criminals are arrested and prosecuted. Governments don't have a clue, which is why every tiny victory is published and milked in the media. Crypto is an easy target, far less complicated than the offshore sector, art industry, free havens, trade based money laundering schemes to name a few.