45
46

Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF (moneymorning.com)

AdvocateLLC が 投稿

全 28 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]m301888 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It must be said that only the SEC knows for sure what's holding up approval. But regulations forbid the SEC, Nasdaq, or the Winklevoss twins from discussing it.

[–]evoorhees [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So regulation has prevented it, and regulation has prevented even its status from being discussed. Thanks SEC.

Here's a suggestion, if it takes more than a month to decide whether something is "permissible," then you don't have a good reason not to permit it.

[–]BigBlackHungGuy [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

One of the tasks before the SEC in evaluating the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust is how to classify Bitcoin as an asset. It's an important question, because it will determine how the ETF is regulated, how it's taxed, and the degree of protection for shareholders.

It's also a very difficult question to answer, as U.S. regulators already have come up with several different answers. The Internal Revenue Service declared Bitcoin "property" in 2014. The Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) classifies Bitcoin as a commodity. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) views Bitcoin as a currency. The SEC in the past has called Bitcoin a security, or money.

If I was a betting man, I would wager that these would be the reasons why it's in limbo. Enforcement.

[–]AdvocateLLC[S] [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

How can one argue that it's not at currency. It was designed to be a currency and works like a currency. It has no similarity to a property. It has not physical existence. All these challenges are simply because they are scare of Bitcoin. The change that Bitcoin represents means saying goodbye to the old ways of doing thing. Bitcoin will change finance, economy, and the world for the better.

[–]danarchist [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

If I buy a software program's source code that becomes my property right? It's not a physical thing either. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that this is not so cut and dry.

How is gold defined? As a commodity right? You can trade it for goods, but you can't pay taxes with it.

Ramen noodles and honey buns are currency for a larger portion of the population than btc - those who are in prison. Should they be reclassified?

[–]AdvocateLLC[S] [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I don't want to argue for the sake of arguing but I have not heard any acceptable from anyone that bitcoin should be considered a commodity. The two examples you used barter system and intellectual property are defined within their own parameters. Bitcoin doesn't fit into those. I think your examples are valid but have nothing to do with bitcoin and only convolutes the discussion.

[–]well_did_you [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

A currency is necessarily a money, which is necessarily a commodity;
not every commodity is a money, and not every money is a currency.

The Bitcoin system's BTC token is clearly a commodity, has the requisite properties to be considered a money, and—under some situations—exhibits the properties of a currency.

  • Waiting 30 minutes for acceptable confirmation of your coffee purchase is not redolent of a currency; at most, it's redolent of a money (like gold).

  • Waiting 30 minutes for acceptable confirmation of your ebay purchase is redolent of a currency, because you have to wait for the product to ship to you anyway, so it's as though the exchange were instantaneous.

Under some conditions, cash (e.g., a bunch of dollar bills) is a currency: Buying a coffee; under others, it's not: Buying a private jet.

Under some conditions, bank balances constitute a currency: Buying a private jet; under others, they don't: Buying a coffee.

Some technologies bridge the gap: Debit cards; then again, you probably cannot easily use your debit card to purchase drugs on the street corner.

To determine what something is, look at the properties that it exhibits.

[–]bytevc [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Like gold, Bitcoin is both money and a commodity.

[–]rocketsurgeon87 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Would you really want it to be considered a foreign currency? In the U.S. foreign currency holdings need to get reported on your us taxes. With account numbers and everything.

https://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Taxpayers-with-Foreign-Assets-May-Have-FBAR-and-FATCA-Filing-Requirements-in-June

[–]thegrandknight [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Precisely.

[–]Dude-Lebowski [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Bummer, man. How are numbers classified? Maybe they could use that.

[–]Anderol [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

"But that's not the biggest roadblock the SEC is dealing with right now…"

Ummmmmmmmmmmm where is the rest?

[–]um_ya [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Governments are incompetent.

[–]djsjjd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's what I thought. The story sounded like the introduction to a larger article that doesn't exist. Shitty editing.

[–]bitsteiner [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

As long as you can buy GBTC, that is not a problem. I agree, that the high premium adds speculative risks on top. But even without premium, it is highly speculative.

[–]NimbleBodhi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not sure why this is getting upvoted, it's a non-article, basically just a bunch of fluff about how nothing has happened with the ETF and nobody knows anything, just shit journalism.

[–]xcsler [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Hey, its the government. As far as I'm concerned this 3 year delay still puts them ahead of schedule.

[–]AdvocateLLC[S] [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

lol, quick someone send them a bribe. That's the only motivation for corrupt governments.

[–]AdvocateLLC[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think I can get an ETF for goats approved faster than this. What's taking you so long SEC? Just do it.

[–]btcchefredditor for 11 days [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Upvoting an article that is 90% direct copy paste from already posted /r/bitcoin content.

[–]FrancisPouliot [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

meta.

[–]NimbleBodhi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yea, it's a complete fluff piece with zero new information, yet people upvote it because the title mentions the words Winklebros and ETF.

[–]qm2abraham [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Its clearly getting the old Japanese Inspection by the SEC

[–]xiphy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_exchange-traded_product

The first gold ETF took 5 years from filings, so BTC still has time

[–]nopara73 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I asked the SEC what's going on, on Jan 12.
They replied me more than one month later, on Feb 22:

Dear Mr. Fiscor:

Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

While we appreciate your inquiry regarding Winklevoss ETF (COIN), please be advised that the SEC conducts its investigations and reviews on a confidential and nonpublic basis and therefore cannot provide you with an update regarding this investment at this time. However, we suggest you periodically check our website at www.sec.gov for any press releases or other public update published on this matter. Additionally, please note that you may access public filings for Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust (CIK#: 0001579346) on our EDGAR database located at http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html.

For an overview of the securities offering registration process, please visit our website at https://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#ipo

Please contact me should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Catherine Brooks
Attorney
Office of Investor Education and Advocacy
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(800) 732-0330
www.sec.gov
www.investor.gov
www.twitter.com/SEC_Investor_Ed

[–]OracleSevenredditor for 2 months [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It is delayed because the people in power in the gov't know that Bitcoin is a threat to them (even a remote threat), so why should they approve it? It will be delayed forever.