PDA

View Full Version : Not Just Semantics: Amazon Coin is not a Coin



row5_seat47
03-21-2013, 09:04 PM
Response to MarketWatch headline "With Amazon minting currency, Fed at risk Commentary: In future, good money could drive out the bad."
http://www.ecommercebytes.com/C/abblog/blog.pl?/pl/2013/3/1363914759.html

WesleeTU
03-21-2013, 09:49 PM
1 coin = 1 cent.

I think it really is just semantics. I like how they brought up bitcoins and liberty dollars.

Its just like arcade tokens. I way for you to spend your currency and then only be able to spend your tokens where they want you to.

AnotherDave
03-21-2013, 11:04 PM
Where there's a market, someone will come along and fill it. This one is long overdue, and Amazon is big enough to pull this one off.

What will be interesting is when the tax whiners discover they have no claim on Amazon Coin. There will be much moaning and gnashing of teeth.

.

Chump Change
03-22-2013, 12:34 AM
Where there's a market, someone will come along and fill it. This one is long overdue, and Amazon is big enough to pull this one off.

What will be interesting is when the tax whiners discover they have no claim on Amazon Coin. There will be much moaning and gnashing of teeth.

.

The tax goons will not rely on a tax on the coinage...just a tax on the transaction value...
To be Precise:
What is the value, in dollars, of the trade/exchange/whatever...?
That is the value that will be used to satisfy the tax burden.

Like all other transactions the IRS controls, if you can't prove the value of the trade, a value will be placed upon it by...LET'S SAY IT TOGETHER...the IRS.

Right now, if the tax goons want it, they are going to get it

AnotherDave
03-22-2013, 12:59 AM
The tax goons will not rely on a tax on the coinage...just a tax on the transaction value...
To be Precise:
What is the value, in dollars, of the trade/exchange/whatever...?
That is the value that will be used to satisfy the tax burden.

Like all other transactions the IRS controls, if you can't prove the value of the trade, a value will be placed upon it by...LET'S SAY IT TOGETHER...the IRS.

Right now, if the tax goons want it, they are going to get it

And their authority is over the equivalent value of the commodity, the exchange medium, or the persons making the exchange?

Can't be all three.

.

row5_seat47
03-22-2013, 05:47 AM
US Begins Regulating BitCoin, Will Apply "Money Laundering" Rules To Virtual Transactions

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-21/us-begins-regulating-bitcoin-will-consider-virtual-transactions-money-laundering

Chump Change
03-22-2013, 08:27 AM
And their authority is over the equivalent value of the commodity, the exchange medium, or the persons making the exchange?

Can't be all three.

.

To clarify, my mindset was on sales tax, that was a state issue...and yes, the state was pursuing that avenue.
The barter groups I was in, the IRS was most interested in taxing the EOY profits.

How that worked:
The exchange medium was tracked through a central group that would tally all barter fiat exchanged through the group, where it was spent and how much was spent...
The value of the commodities were tracked through the total value that was tallied up at the end of the year...
The persons making the exchange had to account for the total profit/loss and declare that on their yearly taxes.

Anyway, I gotta go...
Hope this clarified things a bit better...probably not but...I will call these last few Bitcoins posts of mine: Practice, for me:D

AnotherDave
03-22-2013, 10:12 AM
To clarify, my mindset was on sales tax, that was a state issue...and yes, the state was pursuing that avenue.
The barter groups I was in, the IRS was most interested in taxing the EOY profits.

How that worked:
The exchange medium was tracked through a central group that would tally all barter fiat exchanged through the group, where it was spent and how much was spent...
The value of the commodities were tracked through the total value that was tallied up at the end of the year...
The persons making the exchange had to account for the total profit/loss and declare that on their yearly taxes.

Anyway, I gotta go...
Hope this clarified things a bit better...probably not but...I will call these last few Bitcoins posts of mine: Practice, for me:D

It does clarify this one instance, thanks. The principle is set down in Cook v. Tait, 265 U.S. 47 (1924) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/265/47/.

From the headnote:


Congress has power to tax the income received by a native citizen of the United States domiciled abroad from property situated abroad. P. 265.

In other words, you, as a citizen of the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are liable for a tax personally. The exchange is not taxed, but the "value" of the exchange is used to determine the amount of the tax.

Playing with words? Certainly! But there it is. This is how they sneak around Article 1, Section 2, clause 3 -- it's not a tax on capitation, a tax upon real property, or a tax upon personal property -- it's a tax on a "person's" privilege to exist subject to the jurisdiction.

.