Guest
Lvl 0

0 / 0
Posted
X 1
8
No, the EU Did Not Propose to Ban Anonymous Cryptos

EDIT: I'm wrong on this one. See end of post.

Alot of misleading headlines today about the EU "banning anonymous wallets." The actual documented proposal says no such thing. Search for the term "anon", and quickly you'll see that they're just applying the travel rule in a way that is consistent with physical cash and other monetary assets.

This does NOT:

  • Ban private use of anonymous cryptocurrencies
  • Force exchanges to delist anonymous cryptocurrencies
  • Prevent exchanges from receiving/sending anonymous cryptocurrencies

It only requires that they collect information from senders/receivers when transfering from exchanges. Basic information like name, address, place of birth, and identification numbers. This already happens for banking transfers and cash.

But that hasn't stopped at least one legislator from making a blatant lie about what the proposal actual does regarding anonymous cryptos, and others from headlining the quote, rather than what's actually being proposed (which is still years from being approved anyways).

Despite the lies, it's actually a bit refreshing to see some of the pleb response. Alot of "come and find it" kind of attitudes.

EDIT

Well, I have to issue a retraction for this one. I was working off of the wrong document. Here's the correct link:

https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/law/210720-proposal-aml-cft_en.pdf

Page 32 paragraph 93:

The anonymity of crypto-assets exposes them to risks of misuse for criminal purposes. Anonymous crypto-asset wallets do not allow the traceability of crypto-asset transfers, whilst also making it difficult to identify linked transactions that may raise suspicion or to apply to adequate level of customer due diligence. In order to ensure effective application of AML/CFT requirements to crypto-assets, it is necessary to prohibit the provision and the custody of anonymous crypto-asset wallets by crypto-asset service providers.

So okay, that's pretty unequivocal about what they are trying to do. Part of the reason I got this wrong is because Reuters and these other ... "reporting" ... dipshits can never provide any actual links to their articles, and I looked at quite a few trying to hunt down the link, and I ended up with a separate proposal also published today by the same organization.

I apologize yall, I got this one wrong.

       
   25 exp X 1
Post a reply.
38
Stats
Post Views: 19
Comments: 1

Upvotes: 3
Downvotes: -2

Decay Rate: 1
Current Score: 1
Top Score: 8
Top Post Tips
Top Comment Tips