BoE Governor says that Bitcoin should not be anonymous

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,802
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...um=social&cmpid==socialflow-twitter-economics

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said cryptocurrency payments are often used for money laundering or other illicit activity and he’s against users having their identities kept secret from authorities.

Carney, who also chairs the global Financial Stability Board, said he wasn’t talking about investors who are buying digital currencies such as bitcoin to speculate on increases in value.

“A lot of the underlying use for these currencies has been illicit activity, particularly money laundering,” he told a committee of lawmakers in the U.K. Parliament on Tuesday. Anonymity means you are “potentially closing a chain which at somewhere along it had some illicit activity. One doesn’t have anonymity for bank account transactions, why would you for cryptocurrency transactions?”
 
The amount of money laundering using cash v Bitcoin is non-comparable. Why aren't central bankers like Carney calling publicly for an end to cash?
It does appear that money laundering inside the system (with cash) is significantly more tolerable than money laundering outside the system.
 
Cash isn't necessary.

Banks and governments have created enormous power through control of currency.
They don't like it when the little people bypass them.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Cash is necessary.
Click to expand...

For money laundering, yes.

However, a digitalised electronic financial transaction system is totally plausible now. Ask Duke, he is already 99% there! I rarely use cash myself. And it is, and has been, the primary tool for money laundering throughout history. So why have banks tolerated, and continue to tolerate, cash as a tool for money laundering?
 
Including myself. But it's not necessary anymore. It can be got rid off, and with it, it's use as a tool for money laundering. Unfortunately, central bankers seem a bit coy in calling for it.
 
TheBigShort said:
Including myself. But it's not necessary anymore. It can be got rid off, and with it, it's use as a tool for money laundering. Unfortunately, central bankers seem a bit coy in calling for it.
Click to expand...
Do you want to be paid your wages in bitcoin we could pegged it at the exchange rate of the 1st of January 2018 and hold it at that rate until the First of January 2019,
 
Do these people have any experience with cryptocurrency? How many cryptocurrency users are anonymous. In my experience it is beyond the ability of non experienced people to use cryptocurrency anonymously because all of the exchanges require ID.
 
Why do i get the feeling that if one goes to their dealer and buy something illegal using cash that's one thing; but if they buy it using bitcoin then it's a much bigger deal?
 
Exactly, at the end of the day there is only thing that is being laundered - cash.
Bitcoin, art, casinos, bookmakers, off-the-book accounting, property etc are simply tools to use to turn dodgy cash into 'legitimate' cash.

Cash is the problem, not bitcoin.
 

First of all we have no idea how much money laundering is going on via Bitcoin and secondly there is absolutely no reason what so ever that we should allow a system to flourish that has a very strong potential to allow such activities to be conducted.
 

Would you be in favour of banning cash? There is no requirement for it anymore as everything can be bought electronically now.
No cash, no (certainly less) money laundering.
 
TheBigShort said:
Would you be in favour of banning cash? There is no requirement for it anymore as everything can be bought electronically now.
No cash, no (certainly less) money laundering.
Click to expand...

It's not the same thing. Laundering cash requires huge effort. Even physically moving or storing large amounts of cash is difficult. Laundering bitcoin and other crypto currencies is not as easy as people think but it is still much more ideal for laundering and illegal transactions than cash. That's just the reality. Doesn't make them the tool of the devil but it does mean that authorities are right to be concerned.
 

Laundering cash can be quite simple.
Its been going on for donkeys years, and as for storing and moving large amounts - where there is a will there is a way. If the reward is considered worth the risk, then people will launder money including large amounts involving physical movement and storage.
 
Not true.
A study was only recently published about this.
PDF here: http://www.defenddemocracy.org/content/uploads/documents/MEMO_Bitcoin_Laundering.pdf

It was found that less than 1% of bitcoin transactions were for laundering money.
 
If a lot of the use is for this purpose ... where is the evidence for this statement??? Was any asked for or presented or is the guvnors word enough these days?
 
I disagree.
Laundering cash from proceeds of illegal activity has been occurring for what, centuries?
There are only a small number of on and off ramps where bitcoin can be exchanged for fiat currency.
Maybe with the exception of Localbitcoins, but as a vehicle to launder money it would be erratic.

Mexican cartels use Banks that are beholden to them, and legitimate businesses to launder money.

here: https://www.npr.org/sections/parall...-cartels-rely-on-big-banks-to-launder-profits
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register