Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
You sound like a very important person.
Not really, but merely a worm or a maggot or a tool if you will, yet, here to expose your great wickedness.You are doing a great job.
Ledger is featured in the bad news department nearly every year now.
Indeed, because you fuckers know - that it’s the most solid and secure option compared to the competition.Strange that anyone would want to be a cheerleader for any particular product - even though I admit that I like the Trezor Model T.. but there are several products that have higher ratings than it (see this list of Hardware Wallets, and see how they are rated), and surely there is value in user-friendliness when it comes to any of the products that are meant to secure your coinz.
BREAKING: Russia's Finance Ministry considers treating #Bitcoin earned through mining as export products similar to oil and gas.
BTC_Archive>>https://twitter.com/BTC_Archive/status/1735320230430200004?t=xVNw6w32U418fJSpMr7hiA&s=19
From what I have read about this form reply a on X, it seems like a way of encouraging and increasing more bitcoin mining in Russia as miners can be able to sell bitcoin like every other market commodity than just a currency. BTC_Archive>>https://twitter.com/BTC_Archive/status/1735320230430200004?t=xVNw6w32U418fJSpMr7hiA&s=19
Don't know if I understand this wrong!
I am getting the sense that some of the motivations regarding our potential upcoming Spot BTC ETF approval are similarly motivated by the ability to collect more taxes and also to cause a certain level of encumbrance (and complications) upon bitcoin related products, and I am referring to the "in cash" versus "in kind" distinguishing that the SEC is currently doing, and it seems more likely that the SEC is ONLY going to approve "in cash" settling of the spot BTC ETF providers.
The SEC claims that it is better to have "in cash" in order to avoid as much BTC price manipulations, and there could be some truth to that - but it seems to me that they are just wanting to create greater costs on BTC ETFs as compared with other kinds of ETF products, and I am not sure if they are going to end up getting sued over the matter if they approve "in cash" but they fail/refuse to approve "in kind," and surely getting any BTC Spot ETF is going to create a decent amount of ongoing and persistent UPpity pressures on the BTC price, and even if in the beginning, the SEC might not allow "in kind" settlement of the BTC shares in the ETFs, it is quite likely after the BTC spot ETFs exist for a few years, then there will be an evolution of the ETF product to allow both "in cash" and "in kind" settlement.
By the way, if we are talking about BTC spot ETFs in these here parts, just like we might be talking about inscriptions/ordinals, it is not like there is anything we can do to stop the use of bitcoin in a variety of ways, and the BTC spot ETFs seem to be quite imminent for approval, whether we like them or not, whether they are approved this month (which seems quite unlikely) or approved in early January (which seems the most likely) or approved later in the 1st quarter of 2024 (which seems possible, but at this time, not as likely as their being approved in early January seems the most likely of the scenarios).
Corporations will now be able to report btc gains on their asset if they hold it, pumping their overall stock price value for EOY reporting.
Funny how a major barrier to corporate bitcoin holding adoption is changed right before the coming Bitcoin ETF approvals?
What amazing timing! I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya! /s
https://twitter.com/davidmarcus/status/1734974716505649531
Funny how a major barrier to corporate bitcoin holding adoption is changed right before the coming Bitcoin ETF approvals?
What amazing timing! I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya! /s
https://twitter.com/davidmarcus/status/1734974716505649531
I think that part of my response in fillippone's "Micheal Salyor decalogue for a 10x Bitcoin Appreciation" thread also highlights an important part that public companies are allowed to implement the rule earlier than the December 15, 2024 mandate in which they have to use the new rule.
Finally, as the news was much anticipated, the FASB amended the accounting rules companies must follow when adding Digital assets on their balance sheets.
Standards Board Approves Long-Sought Change in Crypto Accounting Rules
This new rules is much more informative of the true value of the investment in the balance sheet, making it more transparent to the investor.
New rules will come in effect from 2025, but companies can anticipate the rule in 2024.
I think that the below statement from the article more clearly states what you might have been wanting to say in your last sentence.Standards Board Approves Long-Sought Change in Crypto Accounting Rules
Quote
Under current rules, companies have to record cryptocurrency holdings at their original cost and then write them down as an "impairment charge" if the value drops below cost—but cannot mark them up if the price rises. This method has drawn criticism for only reflecting one side of value changes.
The new FASB rules will require companies to account for digital assets at fair market value, capturing frequent price fluctuations. Gains and losses will flow through the income statement.
Having a mark to market pricing approach means the price discovery of the asset is efficient, meaning that the asset class is investable. Current standards actually tried to prevent swings in balance sheets trough a very cautious approach, that on the other hands potentially could lead to swings upon investment unwind. The new FASB rules will require companies to account for digital assets at fair market value, capturing frequent price fluctuations. Gains and losses will flow through the income statement.
This new rules is much more informative of the true value of the investment in the balance sheet, making it more transparent to the investor.
New rules will come in effect from 2025, but companies can anticipate the rule in 2024.
Quote
All public companies and private companies will need to apply the new rules, with an effective date for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2024. Earlier adoption is permitted.
Essentially public companies have to apply the new rules after December 15, 2024, but they are allowed to adopt and apply the new rules earlier.. which likely means that any public company that holds significant amounts of bitcoin may well already be wanting to apply the new rules to any reports that they make about their companies finances from here on out (because they can and because the new rule is better and more accurate in terms of showing actual value as compared with the old rule).