Another day, another new cryptocurrency regulation!
Recently, the US Senate passed a whopping $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill. The proceedings took place without taking into account any of the proposed amendments to the crypto tax.
Needless to say, the world of cryptocurrency is a little bruised and battered at the moment. However, many experts say that the showdown at Washington was not a complete loss. Such developments are a common theme in the cryptocurrency industry.
They also said that even though cryptocurrency took a short-term blow, it can prove to be a victory for long-term investors.
As for the controversial language mentioned in the infrastructure bill, it is “unworkable and onerous.” Moreover, Cowen’s Jaret Seiberg made a statement regarding this on Tuesday, which said that the language of tax reporting is one of the clearest signs showing Washington’s willingness to include cryptocurrency as part of the existing financial structure.
The statement mentioned above means the government is done looking for ways on how to drag cryptocurrency.
Here is a quick rundown of what went down in this week’s “Cryptocurrency and Infrastructure Bill” drama and saw what the results could do for the market.
As of January 2021, cryptocurrency trading had grown by $400 billion. However, the cryptocurrency industry was still caught between the political theaters after being silently shoved into the 2,700-page bill. It was done as a pay-for provision.
Even though it could not stop lawmakers’ actions, the digital world of cryptocurrency and the community decided to stick together to protect the other members. However, crypto-friendly senators and other industry lobbyists continue to bring them up to speed on what happens on social media and urge them to voice their opinions.
However, the true crux lies with a simple matter – the ultimate definition of who a crypto broker is. These Senators wrote and explained in a broad language that was not specified correctly. That made it hard for people to interpret it as it included all individuals involved in cryptocurrency transactions.
That is why a team of crypto-friendly lawmakers proposed an edit on the Infrastructure Bill that was deemed adequate as per the industry’s requirements. This team included Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo, and Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.
However, the group immediately tackled this action with another proposal. Even if this proposal did not cut it, it still gained support from the Treasury Department and the White House itself.
It is also interesting to know that lawmakers throughout last week put off the vote for the bill for a long time. However, during this time, they were able to decide on a new, complex subject and wrap their heads around it completely.
The following Monday, an amendment for compromising was put up by the senators. It was based on the prior amendment properly. The next day, because of the unanimous vote, they gave it to the Senate floor. However, it was also rejected immediately by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.
He said that that reason for rejecting its life is not related to the $50 billion defense amendment that was previously blocked. Therefore, this allowed the infrastructure bill to pass using the original language, which brings us back to square one, AGAIN.
Following this, Seiberg voiced out his opinion by saying that Shelby could have simply objected to it instead of wanting more for our defense. He also said that Shelby had used that amendment to give way for the GOP to put the Democrats under fire for failing to back up their troops.
He also added, saying that this was the reason why they view this subject as a political sideshow rather than seeing it for it is – a direct, straightforward attack on the cryptocurrency industry.
Amidst all this chaos, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, also added his own statement by saying that he had previously filed an amendment to attack the language of crypto. However, this was not made possible due to a bipartisan deal.
Is This Bad News for Crypto?
As mentioned earlier, the topic of infrastructure bills and cryptocurrency is extremely controversial. One of the major concerns now after the loss is the question of how several crypto operators will comply with this new rule. That includes the stakeholders, software developers, miners, and so on.
However, Stephen Palley, a law firm partner, gives a glimmer of hope by saying it is not a complete death blow.
Even if the whole thing blows out of proportion, the language of cryptocurrency is ambiguous. Palley also assured the people that this language intends not to impose certain harsh requirements on the crypto operators.
Moreover, the language is also extremely broad. Therefore, it could apply to anyone on the internet.
What Does the Future Look Like for Cryptocurrency?
Seigberg also mentioned that the risk to the infrastructure bill is very little or has no risks. However, this will give Congress more opportunities to do the same during the other legislations.
Nevertheless, the world of cryptocurrency and the industry will always stand up for a fight. However, Darren Soto, Reps. Tom Emmer, D-Fla., R-Minn., David Schweikert, Bill Foster, D-Ill, and R-Ari (the co-chairs of the esteemed Blockchain Caucus) have reportedly sent forward a letter to every partner in the house asking them to fix the situation.
Either way, the new infrastructure laws will not go into effect for another two years. Moreover, a lot can change during this team.
- The crypto industry recently lost the battle to remove harmful language and terms from the Infrastructure Bill. However, the response of the Senator is a long-term confident signal.
- Jaret Seiberg, Cowen said that the language of tax reporting is by far one of the most clear-cut indications that show Washington’s preparedness to make cryptocurrency a part of the existing financial structure.
- As of now, the worst-case scenario for cryptocurrency as per the language of the Infrastructure Bill is unlikely to happen. It is an assessment made by industry professionals.
You must log in to post a comment.