Com-Guard.com, Inc. Will Officially Start Selling Its New DataCrypt™ Bitcoin Node Device on Amazon
It has been quite a busy August for the guys at Utrum as their Development Team made major strides in several important areas including Utrum Blockchain in terms of Wallet Functionality and Design as well as Utrum Rewards and “HODL” Features. The Utrum Platform (Alpha build) also recorded some major improvements in the areas of Data Aggregation and Api Functionality, Architecture and Framework, Database Design and UI Design.
Still in August, two new back-end developers, [Anshu Kumar](https://www.linkedin.com/in/anskumar/) and Divyang Hirpara, joined the team. They are now hard at work tying together the back and front ends of Utrum Platform Alpha. Anshu and Divyang come with over 11 years of combined experience in backend development, Ruby, and database design. As the team grows so does the excitement, with progress being ramp’d up on all fronts, blockchain, wallet and Alpha.
Hey I’m 16 looking to buy l bitcoin. My parents wont help me with getting through id on coinmama. Can someone help me get bitcoin. I’m down to skype or something. I just need someone to help me verify a account. That’s all I’m asking. I’m be paying for everything. Thank you
If the IRS would just use an ounce of common sense, I think they would see how straightforward this tax approach is to cryptocurrency.
Here is what the law should be: Once you have cashed out more USD than you have invested, you pay capital gains tax on all the profit that has been cashed out.
Example: You invest 5k in crypto, and now it’s worth 12k. You then cash out 4k to USD. You don’t pay any taxes, because this is still less than your original investment. You then cash out an additional 2k to USD. Now, you have cashed out 1k more than your original investment, so you pay capital gains tax on that 1k. Simple, right? What do all of you think?
The Reserve Bank of India has filed an affidavit with the country’s supreme court in response to one of the petitions against its crypto banking ban. The central bank reportedly argues that it has acted within its power and that none of the petitioners have shown reasonable grounds for the supreme court to intervene.
Last week, the Supreme Court of India was scheduled to hear all of the petitions against the crypto banking ban by the country’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of India. However, the case was postponed the second week in a row from the original hearing date of Sept. 11. According to industry participants, the court is now scheduled to hear the case on Sept. 25.
In response to a petition filed by the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), the central bank filed an affidavit with the supreme court on Sept. 8, Inc42 reported on Sept. 21. “Inc42 has the copy of the petition filed by IAMAI as well as the response filed by RBI on September 8, 2018.”
In its affidavit, the central bank argues that the IAMAI petition, along with other petitions challenging its ban, “is not maintainable either in law or on facts and, hence, liable to be dismissed as such,” the publication noted.
Since the RBI issued its April 6 circular banning banks from providing services to crypto businesses, a number of petitions have been filed against the ban. They allege that the central bank’s action “violates Articles 19 (1) (g) and 14 of the Indian Constitution,” which “will lead to the closure” of affected firms, the news outlet explained. However, the RBI detailed in its affidavit:
The impugned circular and the impugned statement neither violate the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 or the right to trade and business guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution…The petitioner cannot seek to exercise the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court to avail a right which they do not have.
RBI’s response further reads, “There is no statutory right, much less an infringed one, available to the petitioner to open and maintain bank accounts to trade, invest or deal in virtual currencies.” In addition, the central bank claims that IAMAI and others “haven’t got any reasonable or tenable ground for interference by this court.”
The central bank argues that its April 6 circular is in line with its three previous statements regarding cryptocurrencies – one in 2013 and two in 2017.
Calling the circular an essential step, the RBI claims that cryptocurrencies “are associated with multiple risks such as lack of customer protection, high volatility, vulnerability of wallets and exchange houses to cyber-attacks, money laundering, etc,” the news outlet conveyed.
“Unlike a currency which is defined as something that can be a medium of exchange, a store of value and a unit of account,” the central bank asserted that cryptocurrencies, “given their volatility, lack of intrinsic value and low adoption, satisfy none of these criteria.” Emphasizing that “Their value is merely derived from the parties to a transaction willing to pay a particular amount” for them, the RBI maintained:
The impugned circular and the impugned statement have been issued in a manner that is consistent with the powers conferred on the RBI by the law and the same are legal and valid.
What do you think of RBI’s response to the petitions against its ban? Let us know in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock and the RBI.
Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.
The post RBI Argues Supreme Court Should Not Interfere With Its Crypto Decision appeared first on Bitcoin News.