Today I was on a conference in Vilnius and went on a lecture about cryptocurrencies. I would like to share some aspects which I did't see so clear before. As we know, among those states which want to regulate cryptos, there are those which consider them as property and others as means of payment. The first approach is usually seen when there are tax companies around, because money is not taxed, but possession is. So when a state days they consider cryptos as property, it means they are getting taxed, while this is not the case with means of payment.
What do you think of this?
actually it is bitcoin spent that are being taxed and considered taxable, but possessing bitcoin is otherwise, i think that is simply what they are trying to say, it is like having money in your wallet, every penny gained from service is taxed and shouldered by the people who paid you, same as salary though, salaries and wages are subject for tax depending on the country you belong, but possessing money that was passed on to you virtually is a different thing since there are no existing law that deals with virtual currencies yet.