Thread by @JpCortez27

Great to see @SoundMoneyDef’s work mentioned in the WaPo today. The excitement around gold and silver policy is overwhelming. I've tried to avoid commenting on others' projects, but there are things in article that should be addressed.

🧵time (1/14):

(2/14) @SoundMoneyDef has been promoting and passing sound money legislation into law (32 bills enacted) at the state and federal level for over a decade. Taxes are the biggest friction to using gold and silver as money today, so that has been one of our top priorities.

(3/14) Very recently, complicated bills proposing regulatory schemes and public-private partnerships between states and "transactional gold" vendors have actually passed in MO, FL, TX, and AR.

Sound Money Defense League did not oppose these projects, but it did not back them.

(4/14) It’s becoming clearer the FL "transactional" bill (HB 999) is a debacle. The government is drafting sweeping regulations and new burdens on dealers and depositories in the state based on poorly written legislation.

(5/14) Some folks are now worried they were sold a bill of goods, and are looking at fines and penalties for non-compliance should the state allow new regulations to go into effect.

(6/14) Given it’s already possible to transact in gold and silver, public-private partnerships with states are, at best, unnecessary, and at worst, miss the mark. They may undermine pro-freedom, anti-surveillance, and decentralized money, which gold and silver are.

(7/14) The promoters' claim that you're spending gold is misleading. You aren't spending gold, you're monetizing gold holdings, settling in fiat currency (USD, etc), and spending that.

A debit card powered by Visa or Mastercard connected to gold holdings somewhere is not true innovation; it could even be a trojan horse.

(8/14) Taking the current financial systems and rails, used as tools of surveillance today, and painting a coat of gold and silver over them does not promote sound money or its principles.

(9/14) Experts across many fields were interviewed for this article, many of which voiced concerns about these "transactional gold" laws. They are right.

"The new laws are 'making it easier to do this thing that you can already do,' he said. 'The real barrier is the tax consequences'."

(10/14) No one wants to use a money that is taxed. It cannot function as money with taxes in place (not to mention Gresham's law, etc.).

Harebrained legal theories that existence of private-public partnerships can somehow block the IRS from collecting federal income taxes are setting folks up for some big disappointment.

(11/14) A true fix to the issue of federal capital gains on gold and silver involves passing this federal bill -- moneymetals.com/news/2024/05/0…

(12/14) More directly, a state declaring gold and silver “legal tender” does not remove any potential federal tax obligation. This is a Michael Scott-level of understanding of what it means when a state declares something to be legal tender.

(13/14) Transactional systems absolutely should exist, & individuals should be able to use them as they see fit. Installing complex public-private relationships at the state level is something that lovers of liberty would instinctively balk at if not for the fact that these bills involve gold & silver.

(14/14) @soundmoneydef has been laser focused on priorities that have real, functional impact on individuals, dealers, state balance sheets, and more for over a decade. We will continue to support sound money policies that make sense.