SBF Profile picture
9 Aug, 5 tweets, 1 min read
1) We've been working, in the background, on finding more systems we can add to our KYC process.

As we mature as a company, we've been building out our checks, finding and incorporating more signals.
2) A month ago, we added a check for you phone number's jurisdiction.

We now have another integration which will help us add more nuance to the process.
3) We check users' phone numbers against their submitted names in KYC1, in order to further verify them.

When this doesn't work or there isn't data, we'll require KYC2 to access some features of the site, including futures.
4) Meanwhile, we'll continue searching for more tools to confirm identity, hopefully while minimizing the hassle for users.

This should also help KYC on ftx.us run smoother.
5) And, as always, our users' funds and safety come first.

We will always allow withdrawals (except in cases of suspected money laundering/theft/etc.).

And we require 2FA/etc. for all accounts to help prevent theft.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with SBF

SBF Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SBF_FTX

9 Aug
1) Live now: senate.gov/legislative/fl…

talking about the ultimate compromise amendment. A live thread!

context: Image
2) @SenToomey pitching the amendment, doing a pretty good job.
3) ok I'm sure this is a complete coincidence but this speech shares a bit of language with my threads on the bill.

AGAIN THIS IS A COINCIDENCE AND I'M ONLY SAYING THIS BECUASE A MAN CAN DREAM, RIGHT???
Read 19 tweets
9 Aug
1) And more updates on the crypto tax bill/amendments;
2) Last we checked, there were a number of competing amendments for the crypto tax section of the senate infrastructure bill.

Where are we now?
3) Well...

In some sense, nothing has happened.

There have been any votes on the amendments, or new ones proposed.

Instead, there have been procedural fights on the bill.
Read 19 tweets
7 Aug
1) Even more updates on the crypto amendments in the Senate infrastructure bill!

Context:

2) The good news: after a large public outcry, the Warner/Portman amendment has modified its weirdest piece.

First, it removed the Proof of Work reference, instead excepting _all_ validation. Great!

It was then _further_ revised, to exclude both PoW and PoS, but not others.
3) Which is odd. What if something has multiple steps to its consensus mechanism, one of which is PoS?

I guess they're worried about things which are only dubiously validating?

Either way, it brings it closer to being a bit of a mess, and choosing favorites.
Read 5 tweets
6 Aug
1) More last minute updates on the crypto tax bill!

For context:
2) Last we checked in, @RonWyden / @SenLummis / @SenToomey had proposed an amendment removing blockchain/DeFi infrastructure.

This was great!

It is totally reasonable to have 1099 reporting reqs for e.g. @ftx_us / @CoinbasePro.

But nodes, developers, wallets, etc. can't.
3) And to be clear, it's not just that they *don't want to* report people's taxes.

They *can't* do it, because they don't actually have any private information.

All they're doing is providing tooling and/or propagating the blockchain.

They don't know who is using DEXes!
Read 16 tweets
5 Aug
1) There's a bill in the Senate right now about tax reporting and crypto.

What does it say, and what impact would it have?
2) Well, the first thing worth noting: there are a few different versions of it floating around, as various people have suggested amendments for it.

Let's start with the original phrasing.
3) The bill, originally, would create tax reporting requirements for "any person who (for
consideration) is responsible for and regularly provides any service effectuating transfers of
digital assets.”

They would have to send reports on US users' activity to the IRS.
Read 25 tweets
1 Aug
1) This article seems to fundamentally misunderstand how golden geese work:

finance.yahoo.com/news/did-china…
2) The whole point of golden geese is that sometimes they don't work.

Maybe they rarely do. But they're valuable enough that they're positive expected value anyway.
3) So, if you find an example of a time when a lot of 'golden geese' falter, the reaction shouldn't be "whelp guess golden geese are fucked".

The _default_ state of potential golden geese is that they falter; adding on another few examples doesn't change much.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(