I just posted this in another post.
But isn't this a positive? I am not familiar with crypto but isn't this a net positive? Why would any legitimate holder of crypto care about this unless they were shady and avoiding taxes, involved with trafficking of drugs or buying drugs. Normal banking across much of the world has been regulated. Why should bitcoin or crypto be any different?
Using cryptocurrency for illicit activities such as tax evasion or drug dealing would be foolish because of its transparent ledger system, which facilitates tracing transactions back to users with relative ease.
Despite this, traditional means such as cash (USD and Euros) and complicit banks remain the preferred choice for criminal exchanges worldwide.
The ongoing debate revolves around whether Bitcoin should be classified as a security or a commodity, with various regulatory bodies worldwide taking differing stances.
In the USA, the current administration leans towards classifying it as a commodity, while Argentina plans to treat it as a security, requiring Bitcoin-related entities to be registered and regulated.
Should cryptocurrencies be treated as securities, it could impose excessive regulatory burdens on companies operating in the sector, potentially deterring investment and development in Argentina. Consequently, these companies may establish themselves in more crypto-friendly jurisdictions like the US, UK, Singapore, Japan and Hong Kong.
Such stringent laws in Argentina could stifle innovation, preventing the development of the next generation of software, and tokenized assets, including payment systems, video games, and more.
If these regulations come into effect, it would represent a significant setback for Argentina, IMHO.
www.forbes.com
