[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception. Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam Terrorists shut down Park Avenue. Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala. The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear? France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England. George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed. Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus. In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past? Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues [FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests) What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic? War in Ukraine Turns on Russia what happened during total solar eclipse Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage Earth is Scorched with Heat Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman Vibe Shift A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound. Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks Questioning the Big Bang James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go Early humans had sex with chimps O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp. Biblical Contradictions (Alleged) Catholic Church Praising Lucifer Raising the Knife One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make.. Status: Not Logged In; Sign In United States News See other United States News Articles Title: H R 3364 - Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act [includes crypto-currency] Source: Congress.gov URL Source: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3364 Published: Aug 13, 2017 Author: nolu chan Post Date: 2017-08-13 23:40:00 by nolu chan Keywords: None Views: 5262 Comments: 23 H R 3364 - Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act [includes crypto-currency] What became law while you were looking elsewhere. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3364 https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr3364/BILLS-115hr3364enr.pdf H.R.3364 - Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act 15th Congress (2017-2018) Sponsor: Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39] (Introduced 07/24/2017) Committees: House - Foreign Affairs; Intelligence (Permanent); Judiciary; Oversight and Government Reform; Armed Services; Financial Services; Rules; Ways and Means; Transportation and Infrastructure Latest Action: 08/02/2017 Became Public Law No: 115-44. This bill has the status: Became Law Passed the House 419-3 (Amash, Duncan, Massie) Recorded vote Passed the Senate 98-2 (Paul, Sanders) Recorded vote SUBTITLE C may be of interest to users of crypto currency. Subtitle C—Combating Terrorism and Illicit Financing PART 1—NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR COMBATING TERRORIST AND OTHER ILLICIT FINANCING Sec. 261. Development of national strategy. Sec. 262. Contents of national strategy. PART 2—ENHANCING ANTITERRORISM TOOLS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Sec. 271. Improving antiterror finance monitoring of funds transfers. Sec. 272. Sense of Congress on international cooperation regarding terrorist financing intelligence. Sec. 273. Examining the counter-terror financing role of the Department of the Treasury in embassies. Sec. 274. Inclusion of Secretary of the Treasury on the National Security Council. Sec. 275. Inclusion of all funds. See particularly, Subtitle C, Section 262, ¶¶ 6-10, and Section 275. (6) THE ROLE OF THE PRIVATE FINANCIAL SECTOR IN PREVENTION OF ILLICIT FINANCE.—A discussion of ways to enhance partnerships between the private financial sector and Federal departments and agencies with regard to the prevention and detection of illicit finance, including— (A) efforts to facilitate compliance with laws aimed at stopping such illicit finance while maintaining the effectiveness of such efforts; and (B) providing guidance to strengthen internal controls and to adopt on an industry-wide basis more effective policies. (7) ENHANCEMENT OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION.— A discussion of ways to combat illicit finance by enhancing— (A) cooperative efforts between and among Federal, State, and local officials, including State regulators, State and local prosecutors, and other law enforcement officials; and (B) cooperative efforts with and between governments of countries and with and between multinational institutions with expertise in fighting illicit finance, including the Financial Action Task Force and the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units. (8) TREND ANALYSIS OF EMERGING ILLICIT FINANCE THREATS.—A discussion of and data regarding trends in illicit finance, including evolving forms of value transfer such as so-called cryptocurrencies, other methods that are computer, telecommunications, or Internet-based, cyber crime, or any other threats that the Secretary may choose to identify. (9) BUDGET PRIORITIES.—A multiyear budget plan that identifies sufficient resources needed to successfully execute the full range of missions called for in this section. (10) TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENTS.—An analysis of current and developing ways to leverage technology to improve the effectiveness of efforts to stop the financing of terrorism and other forms of illicit finance, including better integration of open-source data. [...] SEC. 275. INCLUSION OF ALL FUNDS. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5326 of title 31, United States Code, is amended— (1) in the heading of such section, by striking “coin and currency”; (2) in subsection (a)— (A) by striking “subtitle and” and inserting “subtitle or to”; and (B) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking “United States coins or currency (or such other monetary instruments as the Secretary may describe in such order)” and inserting “funds (as the Secretary may describe in such order),”; and (3) in subsection (b)— (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking “coins or currency (or monetary instruments)” and inserting “funds”; and (B) in paragraph (2), by striking “coins or currency (or such other monetary instruments as the Secretary may describe in the regulation or order)” and inserting “funds (as the Secretary may describe in the regulation or order)”. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 10. #4. To: nolu chan (#0) It seems there is nothing here particularly devastating to crypytocurrency. It's not even explicitly referenced, and certainly not declared illegal. It's simply an expansion of the definition, by changing coins and currency to "funds". I still maintain, Nolu, that the reach of laws is only so far as enforcement is possible. Where enforcement is not possible, laws are of no consequence, and that is true no matter what any court, even the USSC, may say to the contrary. That's not an attempt at a legal statement on my part, it's simply an observation of practicality. Whatever laws might be made prohibiting one form of cryptocurrency, digital innovation can simply evolve to circumvent them. While it is possible to find cash in a suitcase, or funds in a bank account, dogs cannot sniff out cryptocurrency on the internet. It can be hidden and disguised a billion different ways. That's true not because I want it to be true, it's simply reality. And technology is progressing to the point where cryptocurrency is becoming a reality. Just the other day I was paid a small amount of bitcoin. It wasn't the first choice of payment method, but my client in India told me regulations there made more conventional payments either expensive or troublesome (I'm not sure which but didn't press the issue), and a secondary service we tried didn't work for me due to an inability to complete an ID verification that was demanded (due to technical troubles, and their support center has yet to get back to me). So what worked? Bitcoin worked. Bitcoin came through with no hassles, for both my client and me. And the cost of the xfer was no where near what any banking service would charge -- though to buy bitcoin with USD does cost about 10-20% above spot. In the same way that the internet killed off the Blockbuster movie rental chain, is killing traditional newspapers and magazines, and reforming the retail world, a day of reckoning is coming for the banking industry, and the political landscape as well. Because of the exponential progress of technology, the next 50 years will be mind boggling. Much of it will be good, some of it bad. Pinguinite  posted on  2017-08-14   2:38:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #10. To: Pinguinite (#4) It seems there is nothing here particularly devastating to crypytocurrency. It's not even explicitly referenced, and certainly not declared illegal. This is certainly an oversight error. Under "Subtitle C—Combating Terrorism and Illicit Financing," section 262, paragraph 8, one finds, boldfaced in the thread article above, (8) TREND ANALYSIS OF EMERGING ILLICIT FINANCE THREATS.—A discussion of and data regarding trends in illicit finance, including evolving forms of value transfer such as so-called cryptocurrencies, other methods that are computer, telecommunications, or Internet-based, cyber crime, or any other threats that the Secretary may choose to identify. That is not a reference but an explicit inclusion of cryptocurrencies as an emerging illicit finance threat. It's simply an expansion of the definition, by changing coins and currency to "funds". No, it is including cryptocurrency as an illicit finance threat and changing transaction reporting requirements to include any form of funds, and not just coins or currency or monetary instruments. There can be no doubt of the intent to include, and the actual inclusion, of cryptocurrencies within the law. http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2015/title-31/subtitle-iv/chapter-53/subchapter-ii/sec.-5326/ http://statecodesfiles.justia.com/us/2015/title-31/subtitle-iv/chapter-53/subchapter-ii/sec.-5326/sec.-5326.pdf Below is the effect of just the amendments to 31 U.S.C. 5326 regarding records and reporting. The deletions are indicated by strikeout and the additions are in boldface blue font. 2015 US Code Title 31 - Money and Finance (Sections 101 - 9705) Subtitle IV - Money (Sections 5101 - 5367) Chapter 53 - Monetary Transactions (Sections 5301 - 5367) Subchapter II - Records and Reports on Monetary Instruments Transactions (Sections 5311 - 5332) Sec. 5326 - Records of certain domestic coin and currency transactions 31 U.S.C. § 5326 (2015) §5326. Records of certain domestic coin and currency transactions (a) In General.—If the Secretary of the Treasury finds, upon the Secretary's own initiative or at the request of an appropriate Federal or State law enforcement official, that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that additional recordkeeping and reporting requirements are necessary to carry out the purposes of this subtitle and subtitle or to prevent evasions thereof, the Secretary may issue an order requiring any domestic financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business or group of domestic financial institutions or nonfinancial trades or businesses in a geographic area— (1) to obtain such information as the Secretary may describe in such order concerning— (A) any transaction in which such financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business is involved for the payment, receipt, or transfer of United States coins or currency (or such other monetary instruments funds as the Secretary may describe in such order), the total amounts or denominations of which are equal to or greater than an amount which the Secretary may prescribe; and (B) any other person participating in such transaction; (2) to maintain a record of such information for such period of time as the Secretary may require; and (3) to file a report with respect to any transaction described in paragraph (1)(A) in the manner and to the extent specified in the order. (b) Authority To Order Depository Institutions To Obtain Reports From Customers.— (1) In general.—The Secretary of the Treasury may, by regulation or order, require any depository institution (as defined in section 3(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act)— (A) to request any financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business (other than a depository institution) which engages in any reportable transaction with the depository institution to provide the depository institution with a copy of any report filed by the financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business under this subtitle with respect to any prior transaction (between such financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business and any other person) which involved any portion of the coins or currency (or monetary instruments) funds which are involved in the reportable transaction with the depository institution; and (B) if no copy of any report described in subparagraph (A) is received by the depository institution in connection with any reportable transaction to which such subparagraph applies, to submit (in addition to any report required under this subtitle with respect to the reportable transaction) a written notice to the Secretary that the financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business failed to provide any copy of such report. (2) Reportable transaction defined.—For purposes of this subsection, the term "reportable transaction" means any transaction involving coins or currency (or such other monetary instruments as the Secretary may describe in the regulation or order) funds (as the Secretary may describe in such regulation or order) the total amounts or denominations of which are equal to or greater than an amount which the Secretary may prescribe. (c) Nondisclosure of Orders.—No financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business or officer, director, employee or agent of a financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business subject to an order under this section may disclose the existence of, or terms of, the order to any person except as prescribed by the Secretary. (d) Maximum Effective Period for Order.—No order issued under subsection (a) shall be effective for more than 180 days unless renewed pursuant to the requirements of subsection (a). (Added Pub. L. 100–690, title VI, §6185(c), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4355; amended Pub. L. 102–550, title XV, §§1514, 1562, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4058, 4072; Pub. L. 107–56, title III, §§353(d), 365(c)(2)(B), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 323, 335.) REFERENCES IN TEXT Section 3(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is classified to section 1813(c) of Title 12, Banks and Banking. AMENDMENTS 2001—Subsec.(a). Pub. L. 107–56, §365(c)(2)(B), inserted "or nonfinancial trade or business" after "financial institution" and "or nonfinancial trades or businesses" for "financial institutions" in introductory provisions. Subsec. (a)(1)(A). Pub. L. 107–56, §365(c)(2)(B)(i), inserted "or nonfinancial trade or business" after "financial institution". Subsec. (b)(1)(A). Pub. L. 107–56, §365(c)(2)(B)(i), inserted "or nonfinancial trade or business" after "financial institution" wherever appearing. Subsec. (b)(1)(B). Pub. L. 107–56, §365(c)(2)(B)(i), inserted "or nonfinancial trade or business" after "financial institution". Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 107–56, §365(c)(2)(B)(i), inserted "or nonfinancial trade or business" after "financial institution" in two places. Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 107–56, §353(d), substituted "more than 180 days" for "more than 60 days". 1992—Subsecs. (b) to (d). Pub. L. 102–550 added subsecs. (b) and (c) and redesignated former subsec. (b) as (d). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I still maintain, Nolu, that the reach of laws is only so far as enforcement is possible. Where enforcement is not possible, laws are of no consequence, and that is true no matter what any court, even the USSC, may say to the contrary. The law on illicit financing now explicitly reaches cryptocurrencies. All transactions of funds, including cryptocurrencies, are subject to record and reporting requirements. This is just an opening salvo. This is included within a bill for combatting terrorism, much as was done with the USA PATRIOT Act. When the government decides to crush something, the arms of the law are long indeed. Ask Kim Dotcom how his former business is doing. Marcel Lazar Lehel+, a/k/a Guccifer is in prison. Neither was in the United States. Ross Ulbricht, a/k/a Dead Pirate Roberts, is doing life without possibility of parole. Who will open the next Silk Road on the dark web? An example accurate but bogus argument regarding the legal system is that if every criminal defendant refused to plea bargain and demanded trial by jury, the system would collapse. It is so obvious, one wonders why it is not done. All that is needed is enough volunteers to join Dead Pirate Roberts. Currently, Kodi on Android boxes is being assailed. The government need not prosecute every individual. It has gone after and shut down various distributors. Cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, are reliant on the internet for operation. The government can do as it pleases with the internet. The government can make cryptocurrency so unreliable, and such a pain to use, that it will be unsustainable as a popular currency. At the same time, if desired, the government can introduce an easy to use digital currency, such as credit and debit cards. Whatever laws might be made prohibiting one form of cryptocurrency, digital innovation can simply evolve to circumvent them. While it is possible to find cash in a suitcase, or funds in a bank account, dogs cannot sniff out cryptocurrency on the internet. It can be hidden and disguised a billion different ways. That's true not because I want it to be true, it's simply reality. The transactions on the government controlled internet are not hidden. Underestimate the raw power of the government at your own peril. And technology is progressing to the point where cryptocurrency is becoming a reality. The government will always be able to have better technology than purveyors of bitcoin. If they turn the NSA and Cybercommand loose on Bitcoin, it would not be pretty. nolu chan  posted on  2017-08-14   11:59:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 10. #20. To: nolu chan (#10) This is certainly an oversight error. Under "Subtitle C—Combating Terrorism and Illicit Financing," section 262, >paragraph 8, one finds, boldfaced in the thread article above, (8) TREND ANALYSIS OF EMERGING ILLICIT FINANCE THREATS.—A discussion of and data regarding trends in illicit finance, including evolving forms of value transfer such as so-called cryptocurrencies, other methods that are computer, telecommunications, or Internet-based, cyber crime, or any other threats that the Secretary may choose to identify. That is not a reference but an explicit inclusion of cryptocurrencies as an emerging illicit finance threat. I stand corrected. I think I did note that in passing, but also noted the passage is rather odd in that it does not prohibit anything. I'm used to reading statutes that obligate, prohibit or perhaps permit certain entities to do certain things. And so this passage is odd in that it begins with "A discussion". I proceeded to read further expecting to see a subsequent reference, but found none, and posted errantly. When the government decides to crush something, the arms of the law are long indeed. Ask Kim Dotcom how his former business is doing. Marcel Lazar Lehel+, a/k/a Guccifer is in prison. Neither was in the United States. Ross Ulbricht, a/k/a Dead Pirate Roberts, is doing life without possibility of parole. Who will open the next Silk Road on the dark web? Well, that would explain drugs such as heroin, LSD, cocaine, crack & marijuana cannot be purchased US. They are illegal. (!) Smuggling has existed since the first prohibitive edict was declared by some ancient king, and history has proven that market forces trump such laws. And if the US government can't even shut down drug smuggling that involves hard cash and physical contraband, how do they expect to shut down a cryptocurrency? It doesn't surprise me in the least that the US gov would take a hostile view of cryptocurrency. They rightly view it as a threat to the power of government to monitor, control and tax. But that doesn't mean it's something government has a moral right to do. Cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, are reliant on the internet for operation. The government can do as it pleases with the internet. The government can make cryptocurrency so unreliable, and such a pain to use, that it will be unsustainable as a popular currency. I guess here we disagree on a fundamental question of fact, on whether or not the gov can "do as it pleases with the internet". You say it can, I say it cannot. Private coders and hackers will always have the lead on gov hired professionals. At best (for you) it could turn into a cat and mouse game where the gov puts up one wall and the private developers code around it, then get hit by another wall and so one. But as the technology growth curve accelerates upward, I am confident that it's a game the mice will eventually win. At the same time, if desired, the government can introduce an easy to use digital currency, such as credit and debit cards. Of course they could. And they probably will, and in fact likely out of lack of any choice. And as use of digital money becomes popular and people become more accustomed to using their smart phones to make purchases, the use of bitcoin alongside official digital currency will be a much smaller leap than it is today. And given the nature of block-chain based currency, I think outlawing it will be very problematic, not only practically but perhaps legally as well. But time will tell, and perhaps we'll live long enough to see. Pinguinite  posted on  2017-08-16 23:39:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   End Trace Mode for Comment # 10. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com