Quote from: AgentofCoin on January 17, 2017, 09:04:46 PM

Quote from: Bungeebones on January 17, 2017, 05:05:37 PM

Quote from: maku on January 17, 2017, 02:21:00 PM

So, basically IRS forced the law (is is even possible to do something like that without wide consensus of other financial institutions?) that benefit the state (in terms of collecting more taxes from Bitcoin users) more.
I thought that US Treasury classified bitcoin as virtual currency in 2013, also bitcoin was categorized as such by various courts - i.e. Texas US District Court.
Amazing how paper pushers can be so two-faced and label bitcoin as currency and commodity at the same time.

yes, but the IRS classified it totally different from the other branches of government. They declared it property (for tax purposes). What that ruling requires taxpayers to do is to report the value gained in the "dollars". The problem, as I see it, is that we (the US and others) don't use actual dollars, and they are, instead, actually Federal Reserve Notes. They were, at one time, promises to pay actual dollars but that is no longer true. In fact, they are no longer even notes, as they exist only in digital form in bank ledgers. So, since the IRS requires taxpayers to report their Bitcoin earnings in "dollars" they should be able to clarify this little point quite easily. Their actions indicate that a Federal Reserve Note somehow and someway became the very thing (i.e. a dollar) that it was promising to pay. Such an occurrence surely would be recorded clearly either in statute or case law. I don't believe the FRN ever became the dollar so we (taxpayers) need it to be clearly identified if we are to report our earnings based on that standard.

The term "dollar" is only used as a representative of United States' currency.
It is like saying the "Euro" or the "Pound". It is only a denomination now.

Originally, the "dollar" was backed by gold and silver with the US Treasury.
Later, I think under Nixon, the laws were changed to remove precious metals
fully and depend entirely on Fiat currency.
Now, the "dollar" is backed by assets and debts with the Federal Reserve.

Whatever the "dollars" backing was and is today, the IRS do not care.
They think that US Dollars are the same as Federal Reserve Notes.
If the law in certain areas uses the term "dollars" they will interpret as
"federally approved US currency" which is actually 'Federal Reserve Notes".
Otherwise, no US Citizens would be able to legally and literally pay their taxes
or other debts, since "true dollars" no longer exist or are in circulation.

You got it! "Otherwise, no US Citizens would be able to legally and literally pay their taxes
or other debts, since "true dollars" no longer exist or are in circulation.".

And if the words in laws have no meaning then there is no law. That is why every statute ever written ahs all the terms defined. So, just ask them that question and, rather than open that can of worms, they will quietly go away from Bitcoin. If they really press it, there is NO US Dollar and there hasn't been for a long time. The fraud of the Federal Reserve Note would be out in the open. The more publicity they generate, the more people see "The Emperor has No Clothes".

But one very important correction regarding your statement "Originally, the "dollar" was backed by gold and silver with the US Treasury.". The truth is that, originally, the dollar WAS SILVER, not backed by it. That little twist of truth and meaning enabled them to slip the FRN in as being "the dollar" as it was what was backed by gold and silver. The dollar was silver, and legally is still the only dollar.