Thread by @msantoriESQ

WAP

Weak
Administrative
Procedure

Others have objected on procedural grounds. I want to explain why the proposed rule is itself shameful:

It outlaws sending money to the poor.

blog.kraken.com/post/7286/finc…

Kraken blogged. I share further thoughts in this thread👇 1/

2/ The story of this rulemaking actually starts in 2013, when Jennifer Shasky Calvery (then FinCEN Director) first suggested publicly that a VCTR – a virtual currency transaction report – would be valuable in fighting financial crime.

3/ It was about as well-received by the community as you might imagine. But even then, the proposal was just “A CTR for bitcoin” - not the VCTR you see before you today. What is a CTR and why is the VCTR totally different?

Read on.

4/ CTRs require financial institutions to collect ID info on large cash and coin (paper and metal) transactions, then report it to FinCEN. But CTRs have only ever required information about the FI’s customer.

5/ CTRs have never required "counterparty" information. This made sense. Giving cash is, by and large, the last effective way to get money quickly and efficiently to people who don't have home addresses.

6/ Late on Friday, FinCEN proposed a new rule that would shut down this final life-saving conduit: A VCTR rule that requires FI customers to report the name and mailing address of any recipient of virtual currency.

7/ If the customer can't provide one - or if the ricipient doesn't have one - the FI must terminate the transaction.

8/ The consequence of this rule is clear:

Rich people can't send money to poor people.

9/
To be sure, the rule prohibits sending virtual currency to homeless, unhoused, and refugee populations.

But in context, it's much worse.

10/ The rule would ALSO prohibit sending virtual currency to smart contracts that are specifically designed to eliminate the middlemen who keep the poor out of our financial system.

11/ The rule seeks to choke off resources to smart contract development, where those smart contracts are the very things that would grant access to a new, accessible financial system for those who can't afford access to today's system.

The consequences are perverse.

12/ Perhaps in recognition of this, FinCEN is attempting to sneak this proposed rule into law over the holiday season - hoping nobody will notice - and even if we did, giving us only 15 days to respond.

13/ This is some WAP. Kraken is going to oppose this. You should, too.