The price of bitcoin surged to its highest level in three years today in a rally that some are suggesting will surpass the run-up in 2017.

Therecentsurge coincided with the U.S. presidential election, but bitcoin started to climb before that, trading at $11.406.06 on Oct. 17.

Although bitcoin has not surpassed its record high of $19,783.06 on Jan. 1, 2017, it has hit its all-time record high in terms of market capitalization, sitting at $329.3 billion. More bitcoin has been mined three years after bitcoins price record, boosting its market cap.Market capitalization is a helpful measure for comparing bitcoin to other financial assets, companies or value systems, Peter Chawaga at Bitcoin Magazinenoted.

Whether the current rise of bitcoin is sustainable is another matter. CNBC reportedthat bitcoins climb this year, during which it has risen 137% year-to-date, is down to a number of factors, including government-related COVID-19 stimulus and interest from big-name investors.

The gap between the crypto world and traditional financialinstitutions has closed dramatically, Charles Hayter, chief executive officer of crypto market data provider CryptoCompare, told CNBC. The result is that incumbent players are now fine to play in the digital asset markets. The narrative that is compelling them to do so is this alignment of COVID,monetary policy and political disarray globally.

Coindesk warnedthat the recent highs could result in a sell-off in response. Mike McGlone, senior commodity strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence, while warning thats likely, also described any sell-off as a speed bump to bitcoins long-term trajectory.

Others are predicting near-future record highs for bitcoin.Philip Swift, a bitcoin analyst and the creator of Lookintobitcoin.com told Cointelegraph that he believes that bitcoin will peak at $22,000 for a variety of reasons, including reserves dropping, institutional accumulation and a growing futures market.

Althoughthe prospects for bitcoin come year-end are looking positive, theres next to no chance that it will hit $1 million. The prediction for bitcoins price was famously made by John McAfee when he said in 2017 that he would eat his own dick if bitcoin didnt hit the mark.

McAfee has since deniedmaking the claim and hassaidthat he never believed bitcoin would hit $1 million, but the internet doesnt forget. Theres even a site with a countdown to when McAfee is meant to deliver on his promise.

Show your support for our mission with our one-click subscription to our YouTube channel (below). The more subscribers we have, the more YouTube will suggest relevant enterprise and emerging technology content to you. Thanks!

Support our mission: >>>>>> SUBSCRIBE NOW >>>>>> to our YouTube channel.

Wed also like to tell you about our mission and how you can help us fulfill it. SiliconANGLE Media Inc.s business model is based on the intrinsic value of the content, not advertising. Unlike many online publications, we dont have a paywall or run banner advertising, because we want to keep our journalism open, without influence or the need to chase traffic.The journalism, reporting and commentary onSiliconANGLE along with live, unscripted video from our Silicon Valley studio and globe-trotting video teams attheCUBE take a lot of hard work, time and money. Keeping the quality high requires the support of sponsors who are aligned with our vision of ad-free journalism content.

If you like the reporting, video interviews and other ad-free content here,please take a moment to check out a sample of the video content supported by our sponsors,tweet your support, and keep coming back toSiliconANGLE.

View post:

In post-election rally, bitcoin surges to its highest price in three years - SiliconANGLE News

Bitcoin has continued to soar higher after our last market update. The cryptocurrency recently traded as high as $16,770, a new year-to-date high and a new multi-year high.

Many analysts saw this latest leg higher as notable as BTC moved above $16,600, the level at which John McAfee famously tweeted the following statement:

Bitcoin now at $16,600.00. Those of you in the old school who believe this is a bubble simply have not understood the new mathematics of the Blockchain, or you did not cared enough to try. Bubbles are mathematically impossible in this new paradigm. So are corrections and all else.

Analysts think the cryptocurrency rallies even higher in the days ahead. Tyler Winklevoss, CEO of Gemini and a prominent cryptocurrency investor recently said:

I do think we will see an all-time-high price for #Bitcoin before 2020 is over. Even though the price has climbed from 10k to almost 14k in less than a month, it hasnt really gone on a breakout run yet. When we start to see 3-5k surges then the bulls will be on the run.

The fundamentals also lend to continued upside.

Analyst Willy Woo recently noted that the Realized Price Bitcoin metric is moving higher, suggesting the ongoing rally is organic:

Realised Price estimates the average price the market paid for their BTC. Now at its steepest slope for this cycle, meaning capital influx into#Bitcoinis at its highest rate since the last bull market. (Higher than last years $4k-$14k move; the current move is more organic.). For the sake of this comment Ill define organic.

Bitcoin could continue to move higher if the daily candle closes above the previous local highs.

See more here:

Bitcoin Price Continues to Roar Higher, Pushing to $16,750 - NewsBTC

Bitcoin price In post-election rally, bitcoin surges to its highest price in three years

The price of bitcoin surged to its highest stage in three years at present in a rally that some are suggesting will surpass the run-up in 2017.

Thecurrentsurge coincided with the U.S. presidential election, however bitcoin began to climb earlier than that, buying and selling at $11.406.06 on Oct. 17.

Though bitcoin has not surpassed its report excessive of $19,783.06 on Jan. 1, 2017, it has hit its all-time report excessive by way of market capitalization, sitting at $329.three billion. Extra bitcoin has been mined three years after bitcoins price report, boosting its market cap.Market capitalization is a helpful measure for comparing bitcoin to other financial assets, companies or value systems, Peter Chawaga at Bitcoin Journalfamous.

Whether or not the present rise of bitcoin is sustainable is one other matter. CNBC reportedthat bitcoins climb this 12 months, throughout which it has risen 137% year-to-date, is right down to various elements, together with government-related COVID-19 stimulus and curiosity from big-name buyers.

The gap between the crypto world and traditional financialinstitutions has closed dramatically, Charles Hayter, chief govt officer of crypto market knowledge supplier CryptoCompare, instructed CNBC. The result is that incumbent players are now fine to play in the digital asset markets. The narrative that is compelling them to do so is this alignment of COVID,monetary policy and political disarray globally.

Fintech Zoom warnedthat the current highs may lead to a sell-off in response. Mike McGlone, senior commodity strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence, whereas warning thats probably, additionally described any sell-off as a speed bump to bitcoins long-term trajectory.

Others are predicting near-future report highs for bitcoin.Philip Swift, a bitcoin analyst and the creator of Lookintobitcoin.com instructed Fintech Zoom that he believes that bitcoin will peak at $22,000 for quite a lot of causes, together with reserves dropping, institutional accumulation and a rising futures market.

Thoughthe prospects for bitcoin come year-end are wanting constructive, theres subsequent to no likelihood that itll hit $1 million. The prediction for bitcoins price was famously made by John McAfee when he stated in 2017 that he would eat his own dick if bitcoin didnt hit the mark.

McAfee has since deniedmaking the declare and hasstatedthat he by no means believed bitcoin would hit $1 million, however the web doesnt overlook. Theres even a web site with a countdown to when McAfee is supposed to ship on his promise.

Present your help for our mission with our one-click subscription to our YouTube channel (beneath). The extra subscribers weve got, the extra YouTube will recommend related enterprise and rising know-how content material to you. Thanks!

Help our mission: >>>>>> SUBSCRIBE NOW >>>>>> to our YouTube channel.

Wed additionally prefer to inform you about our mission and how one can assist us fulfill it. SiliconANGLE Media Inc.s enterprise model is predicated on the intrinsic value of the content material, not promoting. Not like many on-line publications, we dont have a paywall or run banner promoting, as a result of we wish to maintain our journalism open, with out affect or the necessity to chase visitors.The journalism, reporting and commentary onSiliconANGLE together with dwell, unscripted video from our Silicon Valley studio and globe-trotting video groups attheCUBE take a variety of onerous work, money and time. Preserving the standard excessive requires the help of sponsors whore aligned with our imaginative and prescient of ad-free journalism content material.

When you just like the reporting, video interviews and different ad-free content material right here,please take a second to take a look at a pattern of the video content material supported by our sponsors,tweet your support, and maintain coming again toSiliconANGLE.

Bitcoin price In post-election rally, bitcoin surges to its highest price in three years

More:

Bitcoin price - In post-election rally, bitcoin surges to its highest price in three years - Fintech Zoom

In this issue

From the Editors Desk

Dear Reader,

What happens when there is no consensus, and governance breaks down into two distinct groups that instead of working together, decide to split and go their own separate ways?

Thats exactly what happened in the world of cryptocurrency and blockchain this past week. Bitcoin Cash (which separated from Bitcoin back in August 2017) has forked again, with a faction called Bitcoin ABC splitting off Bitcoin Cash. But if you were to have sat with the rhetorical question I started this missive with, really it could have been a commentary on what were experiencing politically around the world. In this way, I think that is the truest challenge of our human nature.

What happens when two distinct points of view cant agree? In blockchain, those lined up behind the two tribes split. In the case of Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin ABC (the group breaking away via hard fork of Bitcoin Cash), the market has decided. The miners (akin to the electorate) decided to stay with Bitcoin Cash, voting with their work. The majority of miners continued to provide hash power to Bitcoin Cash and continued doing the important job of adding transaction records upon which that blockchain protocol is based. Bitcoin ABC failed to win the miners over.

It reminds me of something most of us learned as children from that old Aesop fable about a bundle of sticks: the importance of cooperation. That we are stronger together. Being divided exposes weaknesses and presents more opportunities for attack, with fewer allies to help overcome obstacles. It underscores the adage: United we stand, divided we fall. In blockchain, or otherwise.

Until the next time,

Angie LauFounder and Editor-in-Chief

Forkast.News and Decrypt are inviting you to Around the Campfire, an online salon with cryptos biggest names. This week features an exclusive discussion with the Filecoin team about their launch, the roadmap ahead and the future of decentralized storage.

By the numbers: Bitcoin over 5,000% increase in Google search volume.

Bitcoin crossed the US$18,000 mark for the first time in three years and is currently trading at $17,770 at press time. According to a Citibank note to institutional clients titled, Bitcoin: 21st Century Gold that was shared on social media by community members, managing director Thomas Fitzpatrick is predicting bitcoin prices to reach US$318,000 by the end of 2021.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

Predicting that bitcoin will skyrocket to six-figure valuations is a hobby as old as time. John McAfee perfected the craft, but he was far from the only one. So much of crypto Twitter would love to chime in with their large-figured forecasts to build positive sentiment around the coin and push prices to the moon.

As bitcoin moves further to becoming an institutional-grade asset versus being a speculative commodity and a not-very-useful currency, its going to get more analyst attention from big name financial institutions, which in turn generates headlines such as this. But that doesnt mean the methodology is valid. Citibanks analysis, which points to bitcoin hitting US$318,000, is based on parallels to the gold market from the 1970s to the present. Gold, as the report notes, was constricted around the $30 mark until it was officially de-linked from the U.S. dollar in 1971 and became a popular hedge against inflation in the 1980s free of a tie to any currency.

But can all of this be applied to bitcoin? In some ways, yes. We will likely see a long run in prices as the market hunts for an alternative asset class with the likely weakening of the U.S. dollar due to unprecedented debt loads and deficits as recovery from Covid-19 defines the early 2020s. Should we be expecting a 20-times multiplier on current prices? Not likely. Golds rally was because of a tectonic shift in the ability to convert gold to dollars. Theres nothing like that in store for cryptocurrency.

By the numbers: Bitcoin Cash ABC over 5,000% increase in Google search volume.

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) experienced its second hard fork into Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin ABC after the BCH community rejected a proposed update from developer Amaury Sechets group, Bitcoin Cash ABC. Sechet, the self-described benevolent dictator of Bitcoin ABC, proposed 8% of mining rewards be redistributed to the development team.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

The fork of Bitcoin Cash to create Bitcoin Cash ABC its second after the creation of Bitcoin Satoshi Vision in 2018 is best described as contentious, with a debate centered around the proposed infrastructure funding plan (IFP), which taxes miners at 8%, with the proceeds earmarked for future development of the protocol. At the same time, Bitcoin Cash ABC proponents argued that there was a pathway forward for Bitcoin Cash with creating larger block sizes, but this development costs money and hence the need for the tax. Opponents of the idea argued that this would increase centralization and was antithetical to the idea of cryptocurrency in the first place.

Battle lines were drawn between Bitcoin Cash Node (BCHN) and Bitcoin Cash ABC (BCHA). Given Bitcoin Cash Nodes associations with Craig Wright who lives in the fiction of being Satoshi some big names have come out swinging against it. Vitalik Buterin called on team BCH to not give in to pressure and stand their ground, even if it meant a fracture in the community, while Bitmains Jihan Wu has called Wright a fake and encouraged both sides to work things out instead of going through with a fork.

But despite all of this, BCHA seems to be on the losing side of history. According to CoinDance, the ABC team simply cant muster the hash power that the other side can. The fact that BCHN has pulled so far ahead in terms of support from miners shows the idea of an 8% tax simply wasnt a winning proposition despite the involvement of Craig Wright on the other side.

By the numbers: Tron over 5,000% increase in Google search volume.

Trons total transaction volume in Q3 increased by 2,725% when compared to Q2 of this year. According to the dapps analysis company DappRadar, This Q3 increase was enough for Tron to edge out Ethereum in total transaction volume for the month of October. Tron generated US$280 million while Ethereum generated $159 million in transaction volume.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

Is the cryptocurrency world now taking a shine to Tron and its controversial founder, Justin Sun?

Trons spike in total transaction volume is largely because of Ethereums congestion and DeFi protocols looking for a new temporary home. During this quarter, a number of DeFi platforms were launched on Tron, including the eponymous Sun token, which has over US$200 million staked, or the JUST family of protocols that lets anyone develop a turnkey solution for DeFi, as well as the Decentralized Exchange JustSwap.

Despite the bad press and many controversies involving Trons founder Sun, Tron is a well established blockchain with plenty of liquidity. Its in a perfect place to catch the spillover from Ethereum for industry players that dont want to bet on an unestablished startup chain. This isnt in any way supposed to canonize Tron as something other than what it is, but rather a matter of Tron being in the right place at the right time.

By the numbers: Ethereum over 5,000% increase in Google search volume.

Ethereum is experiencing turbulence leading up to the launch of phase 0 of Ethereum 2 which is currently scheduled for December 1 if conditions are met. Ethereums major infrastructure provider Infura experienced a service outage, which brought down popular dapps such as MakerDAO and Metamask.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

A platform thats supposed to be the worlds computer became much less useful overnight because a centralized software infrastructure provider failed.

Ouch! Take that, blockchain maximalists.

As much as people like to tout the decentralized nature of Ethereum, the reality is, things like dApps and ERC-20 tokens rely on infrastructure providers like Infura to act as a bridge between the blockchain and their apps. Infuras application programming interface (API) allows blockchain apps to write to the blockchain. Everything from price feeds to token withdrawals were impacted.

Decentralized Ethereum relies on centralized pipes that act as a layer between the blockchain and software. Of course, Infura doesnt have a monopoly on this; there are other providers. But the problem is, there are points of failure. So what sort of decentralization exists if you are reliant on one of three major infrastructure providers? Of course, any large institution such as an exchange would have multiple providers but it seems like many were still adversely impacted regardless.

Theres no obvious solution to this, as there will only be a handful of providers of that scale, but its something to think about when extolling the virtues of blockchains ability to decentralize.

The Digital Currency Research Institute, a unit of Peoples Bank of China, signed a pact with Lakala Payment, a third party payment company in China, to further develop the payment functions of the new DCEP digital yuan.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

Any sort of payments will require a payment processor, the entity to move funds from the customers bank to the merchant, and Lakala Payment group is no stranger to that. In fact, the firm was one of the first credit card payment processors in China with a network of 30,000 terminals across 38 cities by the end of 2009.

But then it got disrupted. Once smartphones became popular in 2012 and 2013 and WeChat and AliPay became payment giants, card-based transactions became, for many, a thing of the past. WeChat and Alipay were disintermediaries for the payments sector as they handled the payment processing business themselves everything was done on the app, both the seller and merchants accounts exist on the platform. Firms like Lakala found themselves pushed to the sidelines, without a market.

Chinas new DCEP digital currency is now changing this dynamic. With DCEP, you still need to have third parties handle the process of transferring the yuan. Unlike the WeChat and AliPay era, there are once again multiple parties involved: the customers bank, the merchants bank, and the path between them.

One of Chinas goals for the DCEP digital yuan may be to wrestle control away from the nations current mobile phone payments duopoly so that no private company will have such singular influence and power over the nations money supply. This is where firms like Lakala can be useful.

Coherent Hong Kong, Series A, US$14 million

Hong Kongs Coherent, an insurance technology startup, closed a $14 million Series A funding round led by Cathay Innovation, an early growth venture capital firm in San Francisco. Cathay Innovation is a subsidiary of the French-headquartered venture capital firm Cathay Capital. Coherent provides insurance digitization tools for businesses as well as customer-focused insurance sales platforms. The company stated that the funds would go into talent expansion in Hong Kong, Singapore and China as well as create new teams in Japan and the United States.

LinkAja Indonesia, Series B, US$100 million

LinkAja, a Indonesian state-owned and state-funded digital wallet app and payment platform, closed a $100 million funding round led by Singaporean ridesharing, courier and food delivery superapp Grab. Other investors included Jakartas BRI Ventures, which invested in its earlier Series A round, which was a result of state takeover. In a news release, the company explained that funding was to go toward expansion opportunities as well as research and development.

Forkast.Insights | What does it mean?

This week we have two different stories of FinTech. First, a bet on the continued rise of insurtech in rich-world Asia. In the U.S., investors have deployed $8.5 billion in capital into the sector. Within Asia, that number is closer to US$6 billion. As the economy matures in the region, this sector is bound to continue to grow. Payments is another growth story and a frequent theme for VCs. Cross-border transactions and trade have often been the pathway to wealth for developing countries, and in fragmented Asia there is a huge market in curing this pain point.

Read this article:

Ep. 39 | Bitcoin soars to new highs as Bitcoin Cash hard forks into two. Tron blows past Ethereum. - Forkast News

HodlX Guest PostSubmit Your Post

Crypto Twitter is a real force. Everyone who matters in the crypto industry is active on Twitter, and many of us are used to finding out the latest news on the platform. One can even assume that opinion leaders directly influence coin prices. A new study by BDCenter Digital reveals whether this is true.

Do influencers tweets really have an impact on the market? To find out the answer, we analyzed over a million tweets by 100+ influencers.

Why Vitalik Buterin isnt on the list

Crypto Twitter is a densely populated realm, with hundreds of influencers on various scales. It wouldnt be possible to study them all, so we selected the influencers for our study based on several criteria.

The resulting list included 123 accounts with a total of 30 million followers. Between January 2018 and June 2020, these influencers posted a total of 1,300,000 tweets. Out of this sea of messages, we selected those that mentioned coins from the CoinMarketCap top 200 138k mentions in total.

The portrait of a perfect influencer

An interesting fact just 30 influencers account for 70% of all coin mentions.

These 30 opinion leaders have two very important traits in common.

To calculate engagement, we divided the overall number of reactions to tweets (likes, comments and retweets) by the number of tweets mentioning coin tickers.

If you are a startup owner, these numbers are significant. They can help you choose the most suitable influencers for promoting your business. Engagement rate is crucial; a large number of comments and retweets can create a discussion and much-needed hype around a coin. And as weve discovered, mid-sized accounts can have a far more active and engaged audience than whales.

Influencer marketing rates partly depend on the number of followers. Therefore, by contracting opinion leaders with a smaller but more engaged audience, you can both save money and get better results than when working with larger and more expensive Twitter accounts.

KOLs impact on coin prices

Opinion leaders influence their followers sentiments and expectations but what about coin prices?

At first glance, the charts plotting the number of a coins mentions and its price look very similar such as in the case of BNB.

This is only an illusion, however. Our correlational analysis demonstrated that the price of a cryptocurrency doesnt depend on how often influencers tweet about it. Rather, the link is inverse. Opinion leaders tend to mention a coin more often when its price fluctuates.

From the left the zone of correlation is shown between the price and the number of mentions by influencers. From the right is the correlation zone between the prices of different coins. The scale on the right shows the level of correlation.

As you can see, the correlation is strong in the right area. But in the left area, it varies from 0 to 0.2, which means a weak correlation.

For startup owners

Of course, this doesnt mean that collaborating with influencers cant help to increase the price of a token. Its worth reminding that our study focused on the 200 largest coins by market cap; for smaller assets, things can be quite different.

Crypto Twitter remains a key channel of blockchain marketing even if the opinion leaders dont directly impact prices. The key to success is selecting the right influencers for each project. As it turns out, the number of followers is far from the most important factor.

Aliaksandr Dabranau

Aliaksandr Dabranau is a researcher and communication manager at BDCenter Digital a growth marketing and consulting agency for blockchain projects, which has been conducting research on crypto since 2011. You can find more information on the official website.

Follow Us on Twitter Facebook Telegram

Featured Image: Shutterstock/jtstockimage/goodluz/Peppy Graphics

Read more:

Top 30 Twitter Influencers Account for 70% of Crypto Asset Mentions Do They Actually Influence Prices? - The Daily Hodl

Plan B appears to be rather confident in his stock to flow (S2F) model. Hes predicting that bitcoin is going to reach a six-figure price of $100,000 by the time 2021 is over, and hes ready to stick by this prediction no matter what.

The price of bitcoin is presently $15,600. The currency has been in a steady bull run for the past month and a half, and it looks like nothing has been setting the currency back. Bitcoin is likely to continue adding to its price granted it can keep this momentum up.

Still, however, its hard to imagine that bitcoin can add another $85,000 to its price over the course of 13 months. While wed all like to imagine it happening, its another thing entirely to expect it. In the past, many people from John McAfee to others have suggested that by this point in time, bitcoin was supposed to be much larger than it is, and none of these predictions have come true, so why would this one enter the realm of reality?

As we all know by now, bitcoin is very unpredictable, and it would be a huge mistake to assume that things are not going to work out for the asset or that everything will go exactly as planned. Plan B appears to be shoving these ideas aside and is supremely confident in what hes saying. He states that the asset will be selling for anywhere between $100K and $288K by December of next year.

In a recent tweet, he writes:

People ask if I still believe in my model. To be clear: I have no doubt whatsoever that bitcoin S2FX is correct and bitcoin will tap $100K $288K before Dec 2021. In fact, I have new data that confirms the supply shortage is real. IMO, 2021 will be spectacular. Not financial advice!

The big clincher behind Plan B and his stock to flow model is that they both seek to predict bitcoins price based on its remaining supply. He says that bitcoin is going to incur several more halvings before it runs out, meaning that rewards will be consistently cut in half every four years or so. This will make the currency rarer and will ultimately drive up the demand for the worlds primary digital asset.

This, combined with the rising effects of inflation, will likely cause bitcoin to surge in price further than anyone initially thought possible. For the most part, the model appears to hold some ground, granted that each halving in bitcoins short, yet significant history, has resulted in heavy price swings. At the time of bitcoins second halving, the asset was trading for around $640. About a year-and-a-half later, the currency had reached its all-time high of roughly $20,000 per unit.

Follow this link:

Plan B Thinks 2021 Will Be Bitcoins Biggest Year to Date - Live Bitcoin News

Where were you when you first heard "Baby Shark"? When did those "doo doo doo doo doo dooos" first penetrate your blood brain barrier? When did you oh so innocently think, "Huh, this is fun!"

If you're like most "Baby Shark" victims, that first time was likely not the last. According to YouTube statistics reported by the BBC, the Pinkfong music video recording of Baby Shark is now the most watched YouTube video of all time. Doo doo doo doo doo doo!

Surpassing 7.044 billion views, it has overtaken the 2017 Luis Fonsi jam, "Despacito," which was previously the most watched video with some 7.038 billion views. Suave, suavecito, indeed.

A longtime kids' summer camp song that's sort of just been in the ether, "Baby Shark" went big when the Korean kids' educational entertainment company Pinkfong put their catchy recorded version up on YouTube in 2016.

It gained popularity in South Korea, and doing the arm chomping dance became a viral challenge across the globe in 2017. The Baby Shark craze has continued to spread in the ensuing years, and no one's ears especially parents of young kids who insist on watching it over and over and over and OVER again have been the same since.

Baby Shark........ congrats.

More:

'Baby Shark' is now the most watched YouTube video of all time - Mashable

XRP has dropped approximately 17% while Bitcoin has rallied over 48% in the past twelve months.

As notable global financial players including PayPal Holdings Inc (NASDAQ: PYPL) recently enter the crypto industry, major digital assets have significantly benefited. However, XRP, which is heavily controlled by Ripple, lags behind as it continues to face regulatory clarity issues, especially in the United States. Last week Ripple CTO David Schwartz went to his Twitter page to explain the reason why financial institutions are reluctant to adopt XRP as a bridge asset.

The cry from the XRP community that continues to absorb Ripples market dump to fund the companys projects seems to be increasing by the day.

In its monthly escrow release, Ripple received 1 billion XRP. According to the Twitter bot @XRP_EscrowBot, Ripple locked back 900 million XRP and ended up with 100 million to dump into the market. This comes even after the company had previously indicated that there will be no more programmatic sales. As a result, Ripple eats away the majority of XRP market demand in expense of the retail customers.

At the time of writing, XRP was trading around $0.240632, having added approximately 2.8% in the past 30 days according to metrics provided by CoinGecko.

Notably, in the past 30 days, Bitcoin has rallied approximately 30% whereby at the time of writing it was trading around $13,671.67. Apparently, XRP has dropped approximately 17% while Bitcoin has rallied over 48% in the past twelve months, hereby attracting outrage from the XRP community over lack of market growth.

Schwartz was responding to a comment that likened his tweets to those of John McAfee, who has in the past made predictions that never materialized. In his defense, Schwartz said that he did not make any monumental prediction in his past tweets but instead clarified that they are in a wait and see game.

He indicated that there are hurdles that the company has to deal with to enhance XRP adoption.According to him, the company has done most of the technical work and only remains for the bank to adopt their system. However, with the lack of clarity on whether XRP is a security or a digital asset, its market adoption lacks the needed momentum.

Notably, Ripple recently partially won its lawsuit case in California but there remain about four of the initial charges to be ruled for the case to be completed.

In addition, Schwartz indicated that existing financial institutions are not using XRP for fear of reprisals from existing partners. According to him, financial institutions that are willing to use XRP as a bridge asset have zero customers since the product is new.

A financial analyst who sees positive income in both directions of the market (bulls & bears). Bitcoin is my crypto safe haven, free from government conspiracies.Mythology is my mystery!"You cannot enslave a mind that knows itself. That values itself. That understands itself."

You have successfully joined our subscriber list.

Read more:

Ripple CTO Explains Why Financial Institutions Are Reluctant to Adopt XRP in... - Coinspeaker

Ripple CTO David Schwartz explained the obstacles to Ripples development in a post he made on Twitter. The Twitter feed discussed banks desire to use XRP as a bridge asset and various obstacles encountered in this regard.

David Schwartz suggested that banks use of cryptocurrencies such as Ripple (XRP) as bridge assets caused some problems. According to Schwartz, the use of bridge assets by customers to create new products leads to the need for new customers, which causes the company to develop more slowly.

A Twitter user posted an image of David Schwartz and John McAfee tweets. The image featured a 2018 Ripple CTO comment. In the comment, Schwartz said, It is too late for us to benefit. Our XRP strategy cannot wait that long. seems to say. David Schwartz replied to this post, in which his 2018 tweet was shared, on 28 October. In his reply, he said that he had just stated in the tweet that they would expect banks to adopt digital assets using their own initiative.

The Twitter user was surprised by the Ripple CTOs response and asked if there might be justified reasons for a bank wanting to use a bridge asset like XRP, but if he had any idea why they deliberately withdrew from the practice. David Schwartz replied without delay.

Schwartz explained the obstacles to banks further adoption of XRP as follows:

I think there are some obstacles. Regulatory uncertainty, last mile issues, fear of retaliation from existing partners, etc. Another important aspect is that the best customers will use bridge assets to create new products.

These clients are highly motivated to see the projects complete, and they want to offer the benefits of the projects to all clients. However, even if the products created in this case are 100% ready for use, they will have 0 customers because the product is new. So the problem is that gaining momentum is slow.

Read more here:

Ripple CTO: What Are The Obstacles To The Company? - Somag News

Editor's note: Seeking Alpha is proud to welcome Eric Gonzalez as a new contributor. It's easy to become a Seeking Alpha contributor and earn money for your best investment ideas. Active contributors also get free access to SA Premium. Click here to find out more

McAfee (NASDAQ:MCFE) launched its second IPO last week to a middling reception. As of this writing, the stock is down 20% from its IPO price. McAfee raised $740 million in the IPO, and it has a market cap of $8.1 billion after the first day of trading. Lead underwriters include Morgan Stanley, TPG Capital, and Bank of America Corp.

This poor reception perhaps summarizes McAfee as a whole. The company has had a middling decade ever since being bought by Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) for $7.7 billion in 2010 and then sold to private equity firm TPG a few years later. It struggled in its partnership with Intel, as the chip company never found a good use for an antivirus company, and McAfee watched other antivirus and cybersecurity companies surpass it. McAfee has basically stayed flat over an entire decade which has seen the tech market perform extremely well, and thus has largely been a failure.

McAfee is trying to re-market itself as a cybersecurity company which does more than sell antivirus software, but its poor reputation and finances should scare away investors. There are much more attractive IPOs or tech companies for your money, whether we are looking at the recent past or future.

McAfee these days is not a well-respected company. There are shenanigans surrounding its founder, John McAfee, who was arrested in Spain earlier this month on tax evasion charges. McAfee the founder currently has no connection to McAfee the company, but the company may take a small hit to its reputation.

The bigger problem is that to anyone with tech knowledge, McAfee is that annoying antivirus software which comes pre-installed whether you want it or not, causes more problems than it solves, and is far too difficult to uninstall. There is a tech argument that antivirus programs, whether we are talking about McAfee or Symantec (NASDAQ:NLOK) or another program, are entirely unnecessary and that relying on Windows Defender is good enough for most computer users.

Antivirus programs will still continue to be installed despite this argument, if for no other reason than that governments and businesses will use them to shield themselves from liability. But even if the antivirus market continues to grow, it is a crowded field and McAfee finds itself against competitors with a much better reputation.

These problems are unsurprisingly why McAfee has chosen to rebrand itself as a cybersecurity company which sells more than antivirus products. A cybersecurity company offers a wider range of protections such as a password manager and additional protections when conducting online shopping or banking. Cybersecurity is a field which is growing fast, with McAfee stating in its S-1/A that its addressable market is "projected to grow at a four-year CAGR of 7.9% and reach $41.2 billion in 2024." If it can re-market itself and improve its reputation, then McAfee could become a growing, valuable company.

The problem is that McAfee is neither growing nor valuable. According to McAfee's S-1/A, its revenue grew by 9.4% from 2018 to 2019 and by 8.5% from the first half of 2019 to the same time period in 2020 for a six-month revenue of $1.4 billion. These are low growth numbers for a tech IPO.

Furthermore, the aforementioned partnership with Intel and then TPG has left McAfee with a tremendous debt burden. As of June 27, 2020, McAfee has $4.6 billion in long-term debt and $7.8 billion in total liabilities. McAfee plans to use $525 million of its raised IPO proceedings to pay down a portion of this debt, which is a disappointing sign for investors who hope their funds will be used to pursue further investment.

This is not to suggest that there are no good financial news. McAfee's net income numbers are trending in the right direction, as the company recorded a net income of $31 million in the first half of 2020. Furthermore, gross profit has been steadily rising, and gross margin improved from 65% in 2018 to over 70% in the first half of 2020. But $31 million is nothing to boast of given this company's size, and its overall financial profile appears mixed at best given its middling growth. The company stands well below the Rule of 40 which is commonly used to measure tech companies.

The positive side is that McAfee is not heavily overvalued like many IPOs are. McAfee has a market cap of $8.1 billion, $4.6 billion in debt, and $257 million in cash. Calculate these numbers accordingly, and it has an enterprise value of almost $12.7 billion. If we assume a steady 9% growth rate from 2019, its 2020 revenue should be projected to be around $2.87 billion, which creates an EV/revenue ratio of 4.3. This is substantially lower compared to other, similar companies.

Despite its myriad problems, there is a path on which McAfee can be successful. If it can rebrand itself as a cybersecurity company instead of an antivirus company, it could start growing and become profitable again. The fact that it has a low valuation means that this could be a moment to buy low.

But that low valuation exists for a reason. In the present, McAfee is a company focused on the declining field of antivirus software, has not grown rapidly over the past few years, and is not profitable.

Cybersecurity is hardly a brand-new market, and yet McAfee has failed to take advantage of this new market to grow rapidly in the past. Why should investors expect that to change in the future? While McAfee has a host of new leadership such as CEO Peter Leav and CFO Venkat Bhamidipati, the two men have experience in working for established companies such as Motorola or Providence according to their backgrounds as reported in the S-1/A as opposed to raising a startup out of nothing with rapid growth. And what investors should want to see out of McAfee more than anything is growth and innovation.

There are far better cybersecurity companies on the market such as CrowdStrike (OTC:CRWD) or even Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). If you are interested in McAfee, consider waiting until it can actually lower its debt load with other people's money or improve its revenue growth.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Read the original:

McAfee IPO: Not Worth The Limited Upside - Seeking Alpha

The US Attorney Generals Cyber Digital Task Force recently issued a comprehensive report outlining the United States framework for enforcement against cryptocurrency-related crimes. This report explains emerging threats, enforcement challenges, and case studies. According to the task force report, tax evasion is one of the three major ways bad actors use cryptocurrency. This report adds to other reports issued in 2020 by regulators such as GAO, TIGTA, OECD where crypto taxes have been the main theme.

According to the IRS Tax Crimes Handbook, there are two kinds of tax evasion: evasion of assessment and evasion of payment.

Evasion of assessment is the more common of the two and occurs when someone willfully attempts to omit income from taxes, significantly underreports income, or overstates deductions. The Cyber Digital Task Force report points out: not reporting capital gains from the sale or other disposition of the cryptocurrency, not reporting business income received in cryptocurrency, not reporting wages paid in cryptocurrency, or using cryptocurrency to facilitate false invoice schemes designed to fraudulently reduce business income are examples of evasion of assessments

The report further states that these are frequently seen evasion of assessment scenarios in the cryptocurrency world. Evasion of payment occurs after the tax assessment is made and the taxpayer conceals funds or other assets that could be used to pay off the tax liability.

The recent indictment of John McAfee exemplifies both of these scenarios. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), McAfee earned millions in income from promoting cryptocurrencies, consulting work, speaking engagements, and selling the rights to his life story for a documentary. From 2014 to 2018, McAfee allegedly failed to file tax returns, despite receiving considerable income from these sources (evasion of assessment). Further, McAfee attempted to evade the IRS by concealing assets, including real property, a vehicle, and a yacht, in the names of others (evasion of payment).

Tax evasion is a serious offense. Upon conviction, wrongdoers can be fined up to $100,000 ($500,000 for corporations) or imprisoned up to five years plus the cost of prosecution.

Local and global regulators have paid a tremendous amount of attention to the cryptocurrency world in 2020, specifically with a focus on taxes. This is a notable difference compared to previous years where regulators primarily focused on security fraud concerns related to Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs). At the beginning of the year, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report suggesting the IRS improve cryptocurrency tax enforcement efforts. This was reinforced again by the TIGTA report issued in October. And just this week, the OECD recommended tax authorities all over the world to form a uniform effective tax policy for cryptocurrencies. Governments everywhere are waking up to cryptocurrency taxes, so make sure that your filings are up to date.

Disclaimer: This post is informational only and is not intended as tax advice. For tax advice, please consult a tax professional.

Link:

Crypto Tax Evasion Is A Criminal Offense - Forbes

The McAfee logo is displayed at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on Feb. 25, 2019. (Agence France-Presse/Getty Images)

McAfee Corp. plans to return to the public markets after nearly a decade as a private company, but the security-software company is re-emerging as a structured entity that would take a team of lawyers and accountants to truly explain.

On Tuesday, McAfee MCFE, established a projected price range for its initial public offering of $19 to $22 a share, after initially filing for an IPO in late September. The company plans to list under the ticker MCFE on the Nasdaq. Underwriters include Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, TPG Capital, BofA Securities, and Citigroup. The IPO involves 37 million shares, or 42.6 million if underwriters exercise all options to cover overallotments.

McAfee reportedly plans to price the IPO late Wednesday, with trading to begin on Thursday.

Here are five things you should know.

A little more than a decade ago, Intel Corp. INTC, +0.77% announced it was buying McAfee for $7.7 billion in a deal that closed the following year. About five years later,Intel sold a majority stake in McAfee to private-equity firm TPGfor $4.2 billion. The following year, Thoma Bravo cut a deal with TPG to take a minority stake.

Rumors that McAfee would go public have been circulatingfor more than a year, but its owners chose to make the leap amid a strong year for IPOs. The Renaissance IPO ETF IPO, -0.12% is up 80% this year, compared with a 34% gain in 2019 and an 18% loss in 2018. The S&P 500 index SPX, -1.63% is up 8% this year, following a 29% gain in 2019, and a 6% loss in 2018.

When all is said and done, TPG, Thoma Bravo and Intel will control about 82.2% of the voting power.

Following the IPO there will be two classes of stock, up to 166.7 million Class A shares and up to 264.7 million Class B shares, and each of those classes will carry one vote.

But thats where simplicity ends, because those class distinctions are mixed up with a witches brew of exchanges of management incentive units and LLC units and reorganization transactions, as shown in this chart from the companys filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

How all the moving parts fit together is not easy to deduce even after several readings of the SEC filing, but the bottom line appears to be that public stockholders will get 22.4% economic interest in the company with only 8.6% voting interest.

The security software company brought in $2.64 billion in revenue in 2019 for a loss of $236 million, according to McAfees S-1 filing. For the first 26 weeks of 2020, the company reported revenue of $1.4 billion and net income of $31 million, as long as you adjust the numbers for the massive reorganization and other factors

When the reorganization transactions and other pro forma adjustments are taken into account, McAfee ran at a $3 million loss for the first half of 2020.

McAfee said it plans to use about $525 million to repay all outstanding obligations with respect to our Second Lien Term Loan, while it estimates that if shares price at the midpoint of the range, or $20.50 a share, it will net about $612 million if underwriters exercise their full options of shares.

Thats only a drop in the bucket for McAfees debt after its private-equity flip, however. In its financial statements, McAfee lists $4.66 billion in debt, which it estimates should get cut down to $4.15 billion after the offering.

The recent arrest and federal charges against John McAfee, who founded the company in 1987 and left it in 1994, dont pose a risk to the IPO, according to the SEC filing.

In its indictment, the Justice Department noted that from 2014 to 2018, when John McAfee is alleged to have not filed tax returns, he did not receive any income or had any connection with the antivirus company bearing his name. In 2017, John McAfee and Intel settled a lawsuit where McAfee agreed not to use his name or trademark his name in any security-related products or services.

View original post here:

McAfee IPO: 5 things to know about the security-software company - MarketWatch

McAfee, the cybersecurity company founded by tech eccentric John McAfee, has set the terms for its initial public offering, hoping to raise as much as $682 million.

McAfee, based in San Jose, plans to sell 37 million shares at a price of $19 to $22 each. The stock will trade on Nasdaq, with the ticker symbol MCFE, the company said in an SEC filing.

Of the 37 million shares, 30,982,558 will come from the company and 6,017,442 from existing stockholders. McAfee expects to have 165.44 million Class A shares outstanding after the IPO.

Including class B shares, the company would have a valuation of between $9.5 billion and $10 billion at the top of the pricing range.

In the six months through June 27, McAfee posted profit of $31 million, swinging from a loss of $146 million in the year-earlier period. Revenue rose 9% to $1.4 billion from $1.29 billion.

John McAfee founded McAfee Associates in 1987 and ran it until 1994, when he left the company.

McAfees anti-virus software was a market leader along with Norton in the 1990s and 2000s. It sold itself to Intel INTC for $7.7 billion in 2011.

In 2016, Intel sold a 51% stake to the San Francisco private-equity firm TPG for $1.1 billion. In its IPO prospectus, McAfee cites TPG and Chicago PE firm Thoma Bravo as investors.

After leaving McAfee Associates, John McAfee founded a raft of companies, including Tribal Voice, which offers the PowWow chat program; QuorumEx and Future Tense Central.

In 2016 he sought the Libertarian Party nomination for president, losing to former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson. He gave it another shot this year, to no avail.

McAfee was arrested last week in Spain and is facing extradition to the U.S. on tax evasion charges. In a statement announcing the charges, the Department of Justice noted "The indictment does not allege that during these years McAfee received any income or had any connection with the anti-virus company bearing his name."

See the article here:

McAfee Sets Terms of IPO, Hoping to Raise Up to $682 Million - TheStreet

The SEC has taken action on various cryptocurrency-related issues in recent weeks. These developments are notable.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is one of the most active regulators in the blockchain industry. Over the past several weeks, it has taken action against several crypto companies and startups. At the same time, it has put forward suggestions that could improve opportunities for cooperative companies. These are the SEC's most notable actions during September and October 2020:

On Oct. 5, the SEC charged crypto celebrity John McAfee with promoting ICO sales for profit. The SEC alleges that McAfee earned $23 million worth of cryptocurrency by endorsing the relevant projects, and by misrepresenting his relationship with those projects. The SEC now seeks to fine and penalize McAfee and prevent him from serving in leadership roles in a public company. The U.S. Justice Department has also charged McAfee with tax evasion for reasons related to the case.

On Oct. 2, SEC chairman Jay Clayton suggested that the regulator is open to tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Clayton stated that the SEC is "willing to try that" and that its "door is wide open." It does not appear that Clayton is open to a Bitcoin ETF, which has been a long-standing issue for the SEC. Rather, Clayton seems to be suggesting that traditional financial institutions may choose to represent their assets on a blockchain or digital ledger in the future.

On Sept. 21, the SEC commented on an OCC statement on stablecoins. The OCC's original statement effectively gives some banks and savings institutions the authority to handle tokens pegged to the U.S. dollar, as long as those tokens meet certain criteria. The SEC, however, intends to regulate stablecoins and determine whether those coins are securities, based on "facts and circumstances." This makes it clear that new stablecoin projects will not be exempt from scrutiny.

In early September, various news outlets reported that the trading firm Robinhood is facing a joint investigation from the SEC and FINRA. There appear to be two issues at stake. In the first, the SEC is investigating customer complaints around service interruptions in March. In the second, the SEC is investigating Robinhood's failure to disclose deals with high-speed traders. Though no public announcements have been made, insider sources suggest that Robinhood may have to pay a $10 million fine.

On Sept. 15, the SEC revealed that it has settled with Unikrn, a cryptocurrency-based eSports betting company. The SEC charged Unikrn with operating a $31 million unregistered securities offering; now, Unikrn will pay a penalty of $6 million and return funds to investors. Unikrn will not be forced to admit or deny the findings, and the company says that the business will continue to go forward. However, the company will abandon its native token in favor of established cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.

On Oct. 30, the SEC charged SALT Lending with operating an unregistered ICO. The crypto lending and borrowing platform raised $47 million in 2017. Now, SALT has agreed to settle with the SEC by paying a civil penalty of $250,000 and establishing a claims process that allows investors to return their tokens for a refund. SALT does not need to admit or deny the findings, and like most crypto companies in a similar position, it will continue to operate as usual.

On Sept. 30, a lawsuit between the SEC and the blockchain company Kin produced a ruling. A district court in New York ruled that Kin's 2017 ICO constituted an unregistered securities offering. However, this is not the end of the story: the ruling only impacts the possibility of a summary judgment, and Kin and the SEC will continue to battle in court. Kin believes that the SEC's regulations are unclear, conflicting, and a problem for the entire blockchain industry. The conflict has been ongoing since January 2019.

The past several weeks have made the SEC's stance on crypto clear. Settlements and charges from the SEC have reinforced the fact that crypto startups will need to work quite closely with the regulator in the future if they want to succeed. However, the SEC has also made it clear that it is interested in seeking out new ideas and products. Hopefully, up-and-coming crypto firms are not discouraged by the strict situation.

Disclaimer: information contained herein is provided without considering your personal circumstances, therefore should not be construed as financial advice, investment recommendation or an offer of, or solicitation for, any transactions in cryptocurrencies.

Join our newsletter and be the first to know!

We value your privacy, your email address is safe with us.

Go here to read the rest:

SEC Regulatory Actions For September and October 2020 - Bitrates

INTERNATIONAL

An article on Friday about protests in Indonesia described incorrectly a jobs bill that was passed by Indonesias Parliament. Although the bill contained a provision allowing companies to eliminate paid maternity and menstrual leave, it was removed before final passage.

An article on Thursday about preparation by election officials anticipating unrest at the polls misstated the increase in volunteers recruited by the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The group said its volunteers had increased from 5,000 to over 21,000, not from 500 to over 2,100.

A chart with an article on Thursday about polls of likely voters in Nevada and Ohio mislabeled the responses that voters could choose. To the question, How should politicians campaign in person? the responses were Large crowds and Small crowds, not Yes and No.

A chart with an article on Friday about stock market gains made by executives during the economic downturn sparked by the pandemic carried the wrong photograph for the president of Peloton Interactive. It showed John Foley, the companys chief executive, not William Lynch, the companys president.

An article on Wednesday about the arrest of the software engineer John McAfee referred incorrectly to the potential prison terms he faces. The five counts of failure to file taxes each carry a maximum one-year sentence, while the five tax evasion counts each carry a maximum of five years.

An obituary on Sept. 23 about the activist and adventurer Henrietta Boggs referred incorrectly to the civil war after which Jos Figueres Ferrer, her husband at the time, became president of Costa Rica in 1948. It lasted about six weeks, not four years; and Mr. Ferrer restored democracy to Costa Rica he did not establish a democracy.

An obituary on Friday about Stephen Barnes of the law firm Cellino & Barnes referred incorrectly to his niece Elizabeth D. Barnes, who died in the same plane crash that killed Mr. Barnes. She was a lawyer with the federal Department of Health and Human Services, not with Cellino & Barnes. The earlier version also misstated the number of lawyers employed by the firm in 2017. It was 50, not 250.

Errors are corrected during the press run whenever possible, so some errors noted here may not have appeared in all editions.

To contact the newsroom regarding correction requests, complaints or other comments about our coverage, please email nytnews@nytimes.com.

More here:

Corrections: Oct. 13, 2020 - The New York Times

Written by Dana Sanchez

Oct 19, 2020

The Internal Revenue Service is paying an extraordinary amount of attention to cryptocurrency-related taxes. It wants you to know that crypto tax evasion is a criminal offense, and it wants you to be afraid. Be very afraid.

Fear appears to be working.

Chandan Lodha is chief operating officer of CoinTracker, a software firm selling crypto tax-prep services. Many of the companys new customers are seeking help, not just with 2019 forms but also for earlier yearspresumably to amend prior returns, Lodha told Wall Street Journal.

Based on what were seeing, people are starting to get scared, Lodha said.

Here are three things to know about crypto tax evasion.

The IRS this question to the front page of the standard 1040 form:At any time during 2020, did you sell, receive, send, exchange or otherwise acquire any financial interest in any virtual currency?

The question appears, just below the taxpayers name and address. Its the first question youll see and you have to check the box yes or no.

The government made an example out of Silicon Valley legend John McAfee, an antivirus software pioneer and former presidential candidate who was recently arrested in Spain on tax-evasion charges, the U.S. Justice Department said in an Oct. 5 announcement. The U.S. is seeking McAfees extradition.

McAfee allegedly earned millions in income from promoting cryptocurrencies, consulting work, speaking engagements, and selling the rights to his life story for a documentary. From 2014 to 2018, McAfee he allegedly failed to file tax returns. He evaded taxes by paying income into bank and crypto-exchange accounts in other peoples names. He is accused of concealing assets including real property, a vehicle and yacht.

U.S. Attorney General Bill Barrs Cyber Digital Task Force this month issued a report outlining enforcement against cryptocurrency-related crimes. Tax evasion is one of the three major ways bad actors use cryptocurrency, Forbes reported.

Tax evaders can be fined up to $100,000 ($500,000 for corporations) or imprisoned up to five years plus the cost of prosecution.

Listen to GHOGH with Jamarlin Martin | Episode 73: Jamarlin Martin Jamarlin makes the case for why this is a multi-factor rebellion vs. just protests about George Floyd. He discusses the Democratic Partys sneaky relationship with the police in cities and states under Dem control, and why Joe Biden is a cop and the Steve Jobs of mass incarceration.

The IRS treats virtual currency as property for tax purposes, which means that the general tax principles that apply to property transactions also apply to virtual currency transactions. It also means the I.R.S. can seize your cryptocurrency.

Income, including capital gains, from virtual currency transactions is taxable, and virtual currency transactions themselves must be reported on a taxpayers income tax return. Wages paid in virtual currency to employees are also taxable, reportable on a Form W-2, and subject to withholding and payroll taxes.

Tax cheats may believe that the Internal Revenue Service is not able to uncover or attribute their cryptocurrency transactions, and they mayeven use additional anonymizing features of cryptocurrencies to further obfuscate their transactions, according to the report. Tax cheats may then attempt tax evasion by, among other things, not reporting capital gains from the sale or other disposition of their cryptocurrency, not reporting business income received in cryptocurrency, not reporting wages paid in cryptocurrency, or using cryptocurrency to facilitate false invoice schemes designed to fraudulently reduce business income.

Read more: Looking For You, Bitcoin: IRS Moves Surveillance Crypto Question To The Top Of Page 1 On 1040 Tax Form

Read the original here:

The Feds Are Watching: 3 Things To Know About Crypto Tax Evasion, A Crime - Moguldom

Chrissy Suttles|Beaver County Times

Beaver County Commissioners lauded the economic benefits of oil and natural gas in an open letter to both major-party presidential candidates.

The commissioners, joined by Butler County and Washington County leadership, signed a letter Tuesday addressed to President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Joe Biden asking them to support natural gas and manufacturing in any future policy decisions ahead of the November election.

As elected leaders representing communities across the western Pennsylvania region, we know that political campaigns often highlight our differences on policies and approach and not the areas where we share common ground, the letter begins. We want to see a level playing field set for people and businesses to succeed.

That common ground, according to the letter, is a shared recognition of the natural gas industry's impact on regional job growth and affordable energy. Natural gas, elevated by the Marcellus and Utica Shale reservoirs, has filled the economic void left by steel and coal, commissioners said. This includes attracting jobs in manufacturing and petrochemicals.

Trade unions facing the prospect of their halls being emptied by demand for skilled labor have built modern training centers to supply a new generation of workers, the letter read. Good paying jobs arent a partisan issue. Lower energy bills are good for both Democrats and Republicans.

The letter also called the abundant supply of natural gas the backbone of a sustainable energy grid by helping the region reduce carbon emissions and meet climate goals, adding that $2 billion collected in impact fees over the past decade has supported environmental programs, trail building, infrastructure improvements and conservation.

Natural gas supporters laud the industry's role in lowering Pennsylvania's power sector carbon emissions by double digits as it replaces coal, although drillers risk leaking methane, a more potent greenhouse gas, into the air.

As presidential candidates vie for Pennsylvanias coveted electoral votes, the issue of fracking has been a primetime topic. President Trump throughout his campaign has repeated claims that Biden would eliminate fracking and kill up to 600,000 Pennsylvania jobs by doing so. The states job statistics identify roughly 20,000 jobs in the oil and gas industry.

Biden has routinely denied Trumps claims, saying he would ban only new oil and gas permits on federal land. This, he said, would not apply to existing permits or fracking performed on private or state-owned land, where the majority of fracking happens.

The letter comes days after a Progressive Policy Institute poll that found the majority of Pennsylvania and Ohio voters, or 74 percent, oppose an immediate ban on natural gas extraction, although 71 percent of voters said climate change is a real and very serious problem. Fifty-five percent of voters polled said the country should use fossil fuels as a bridge to renewable energy sources.

A recent survey conducted by Climate Nexus found 76percent of Pennsylvanian voters consider climate change to be a serious problem, with nearly half of voters saying it is very serious.

More than 70 percent supported the state updating and strengthening regulations to restrict the release of methane from natural gas wells, pipelines and storage facilities.

Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank, commissioned ALG Research to focus on swing state attitudes about energy and climate change last month. Even among liberal-leaning groups, theres little support for a fracking ban right now, the poll suggests, with most worrying about potential job loss and higher energy costs.

Amajority, however,hope the country phases out the use of natural gas in the coming decades and replaces it with renewable energy sources to preserve the environment. This compares to an August CBS poll of Pennsylvanians showing a slight majority of the state opposes fracking 52percent of voters were opposed and 48percent were in favor of it.

Despite Bidens lead in the poll, voters were nearly equally split on who they trust on energy issues.

Original post:

Beaver County signs letter to Trump, Biden in support of natural gas - The Times

We are on slippery ground. The state, hiding behind the thin patina of good intentions, is making us fear our freedoms. This time the fetters have been placed by the Supreme Court. Its decision to restrain Sudarshan TV from telecasting future episodes of its show Bindaas Bol will only strengthen the states ability to exercise greater control over freedom of expression.

Indeed this is a case where while the apex court appears to have acted in the interest of upholding liberal values it is also paradoxically further eroding the liberal outlook of the Constitution. While our laws allow for prior restraint on free speech as a rule, they should be applied only in the exception. There are any number of laws and regulations on the books that could have been invoked against Sudarshan TV for violating the programming code, the peace of the land and the rights of a community.

There is an argument to say there are already one too many criminal laws regulating hate speech in this country. The allegedly vile provocations contained in the show it reportedly depicts Muslims in a derogatory light that could arouse a backlash against them would have easily attracted some of these stringent penal provisions.

Perhaps, the Supreme Court could have considered events in France. There, a few weeks ago the magazine Charlie Hebdo, known for what some describe as tasteless takes on Muslims, decided to reprint the same set of cartoons of the Prophet that invited an unpardonable terror attack on its office in 2015. Few know that in 2007, when it originally printed the cartoons, the decision to publish the depiction of the Prophet was challenged in French courts as a blasphemous act of reckless provocation, but the judge ruled in favour of the magazine.

The court said that it was upholding the Constitutions abiding commitment to free speech. Just like in 2007, even now the decision taken by the magazine to republish the contentious cartoons has been fiercely criticised. France, like India, has seen protests by civil liberties groups against the perceived discrimination and villainisation of minorities. France is widely thought to be succumbing to an insular impetus. Despite a call by the organisation that represents all French Muslims to condemn the act of extreme intolerance by the magazine, no one has moved to restrain Charlie Hebdo from republishing the cartoons. As in most robust democracies, trust has been placed in the publics ability to make the right distinctions.

But here in India, in the days following the Supreme Courts order restraining Sudarshan TV, much self-congratulatory commentary has erupted in liberal circles. Is it the liberal case that censorship, that too prior restraint, is praiseworthy? If it is, would they also support the recent Andhra high court order placing prior restraint on the media from reporting a case of alleged corruption involving a Supreme Court Justices daughters?

In all honesty, the liberal establishment has shown that it selectively champions free speech. Just ask the prominent RSS affiliated lawyer Monica Arora and her co-authors who found that a leading publishing house suddenly pulled their book on the 2020 Delhi riots after their work was deemed to be pushing an anti-Muslim narrative. According to reports, a cabal of self-proclaimed liberal writers persuaded the editor of the publishing house to cancel the contract with the bigoted author for painting Muslims as the sole protagonists of the riots.

If this Bloomsbury sect has any genuine concern for freedom and democracy they must restart a conversation around the first amendment to the Constitution. The founders of our Constitution were clearly free speech absolutists who had faith in the ability of the public to discern right from wrong. But in 1951 Nehrus government amended the Constitution to limit the scope of free speech and expression.

Since then, the first amendment has been used to forbid dozens of books, publications, articles, political parties, citizens groups and used to jail intellectuals, cartoonists, activists, politicians and journalists. Over the decades, the interventions based on the first amendment, particularly by the state, have acquired a worrying frequency and ferocity. A paternal state that thinks it can decide for the people is to be feared not cheered.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

More here:

A paternal state that thinks it can decide for the people is to be feared not cheered - The Times of India Blog

Torbay Council has approved up to 23million support for its housing company to build around 150 homes on fields near Paignton.

Councillors also voted in favour of selling another housing site at Collaton St Mary on the open market which has been zoned for 180 homes.

The strategy was approved at a meeting on Thursday night to progress the schemes on council-owned land given 3million by the Government to prepare for housing.

The money from the Land Release Fund was accepted in 2018 and a deal has to be in place with developers by December or it will have to go back.

The council, which is run by a partnership of Liberal Democrats and Independents, rejected an alternative from the Conservative opposition group to split the sites into smaller plots to be sold off.

The Conservatives said their option would mean local firms could be involved and there was not enough information available to make a decision about the administrations proposals.

But the leadership said its plans were the best way to deliver the housing schemes within the timescale.

The council has already spent 2.4million to regain control of the land which had been leased to the Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust.

The council voted to give 10 acres either side of Preston Down Road at Paignton to its housing company TorVista or another council company to develop.

The strategy involves the authority receiving at least the amount it has already spent to get back the sites.

It will borrow or provide a guarantee of up to 23million to cover the development costs.

Profits would then be split between the council and the housing company to be invested in more social housing.

Councillors were told the benefits would include control over social housing and the number of job placements and apprenticeships.

The proposal for the 45-acre site at Little Blagdon Farm off the A385 Totnes Road at Collaton St Mary is for the council to sell it to a developer on the open market.

The deal would include a condition for 30 per cent of the homes to be affordable housing sold to TorVista.

Cabinet member Swithin Long said giving both sites to TorVista to be developed had been considered.

But officers advised the size of the overall project with around 400 homes was too big for a start-up social housing provider.

He said there would be tax implications if a site was split into smaller parcels to be sold individually.

Deputy leader Darren Cowell said: We are where we are. It is a situation we have inherited and we have been trying to resolve it in the best way possible.

Conservative group leader Dave Thomas said his groups proposals were based on ideas from the Paignton Neighbourhood Forum and would allow the council to achieve all its aims within the required timescale.

After the opposition move was rejected, Cllr Thomas described the meeting as Torbay Councils darkest day.

He said: It is absolutely bizarre. We have got no plan, there is no business plan.

He said an extra 23million loan would mean a total of 61million invested by the council in TorVista Homes.

Conservatives argued there were too many unanswered questions about the administration's strategy.

James ODwyer said the lack of information such as a business plan made it impossible to decide if the proposals were good value.

More here:

Torbay Council approves strategy to build hundreds of homes on its land - Devon Live

The Ontario government has significantly ramped up its use of special orders that eliminate the requirement to give public notice before changing the way land can be developed.

Ministers zoning orders, or MZOs, were once considered a tool only for extraordinary cases. They allow the minister of municipal affairs currently Steve Clark to set aside local planning processes and public consultations, and designate land use without the possibility of appeals.

The Star reported in June that Doug Fords Progressive Conservative government had used the tool eight times since taking office in 2018; the previous government had filed just two MZOs throughout 2016 and 2017. The Ford governments count has more than tripled since, hitting 26 MZOs by early October.

The tally includes a flurry of orders related to long-term-care developments this summer two in Toronto, and many others across the GTA. Several of the orders were connected to pandemic-era efforts to speed up development of nursing homes that meet modern standards.

Not all the MZOs are solely for nursing home beds: some permit uses from food and retail to offices and retirement homes. A piece of provincially owned land in Torontos Thistletown will also permit a wide range of residential development. The province declined to detail its plans for that site, saying no final decisions have been made since it scrapped a plan developed by the former Liberal government.

Other MZOs issued in Toronto this summer expedited construction on a pair of modular housing projects for the homeless.

While critics acknowledge that MZOs, in some cases, can be appropriate and serve the public interest, several argue that the Ford governments escalated use since taking office in 2018 is unprecedented, reduces government transparency and undermines local planning processes.

What it does is send a signal to the development world that, hey, this is possible. We can just sidestep the development process and go straight to the Minister, said Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence.

The Ontario Federation of Agriculture wrote to Clark in August and expressed concern with the uptick of MZOs in municipalities with robust planning systems, arguing that doing so short-circuited planning principles and policies, while depriving affected people of consultations.

The Greenbelt Council, in a report sent to Clark in July, recommended MZOs be used sparingly. Where they were deemed necessary, it urged greater transparency through a detailed and specific explanation of the proposals urgency, size and nature.

But the province said its orders this summer kickstarted critical projects, and that any MZOs filed for non-provincially owned land were requested by municipalities.

Torontos chief planner, Gregg Lintern, said the city still held consultations for the modular sites granted MZOs, though he acknowledged that not everyone may be satisfied by its efforts.

For the modular sites, MZOs meant not having to turn to Torontos committee of adjustment, which has been in a backlog, he said.

COVID-19 demanded an accelerated response to issues like homelessness, which the new supportive housing units could address, said Lintern.

Victor Doyle, a retired bureaucrat who spent decades in Ontarios housing ministry, acknowledged that efforts to increase long-term-care beds or supportive housing were hard to take issue with.

If (the pandemic) is the rationale for expediting them, then thats all that should be allowed, Doyle said.

Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...Loading...

He was skeptical of zoning orders allowing for other uses as well.

My biggest concern is these things are promoted as cutting red tape, he added. But the red tape theyre cutting is basically the cutting out of any citizen participation.

With files from Noor Javed

Here is the original post:

Ontario government ramps up use of special orders to rezone land without appeals - NiagaraFallsReview.ca