My husband has spent years nagging me to purchase Bitcoins and tells me constantly that it is the future. He walks around the house telling me “it’s all noughts and ones dear” and currency as you know it isn’t real. submitted by
I thought some years ago it was just another of his crazy ideas and a new band wagon to jump on. However, it seems his borderline obsession and commitment to the Crypto community may one day pay off.
We’ve seen more recently in the news that Bitcoin, Libra, XRP etc will all be a potential threat to the worlds governments and agency’s. This has been made very clear. At least they think so. Here in the UK they have already detailed the legalities of Capital Gains Tax on those profiting from their sales.
So, I’m not a “techy” girl, as I’m sure a lot of people don’t quite ‘get’ or understand the potential and the importance of this new currency within our world of noughts and ones. So I thought I would create a guide to help others like me try to understand it.
Is there already something like this? Would it be worth investing time in? Thoughts please.
So just for educational purposes of course I was wondering if the community could offer the various different ways of cashing out £1million worth of cryptos with zero
I've made a list here to start - but keen to learn about all the different ways possible.
So as comparison, I've just detailed the tax implication if one were to dispose of the entire £1million worth of crypto and withdraw it into a UK bank account:
- £11,3000 is tax free allowance.
- Pay 10% on £33,500 of the basic tax band (let's assume zero income from other sources)
- Pay 20% on remainder of £955,200.
- Total tax: £3350 + £191,040 = £194,390
Now for the zero tax implication scenarios: Scenario 1
Sell £11,300 worth every year for the next 88.5 years. This also has the benefit that HMRC does not require you to report to them provided the total disposed was less than 4 times the tax free allowance (£11,300 x 4 = £45,200)
Of course the £1million might go to £10000million in 88.5 years or zero so might not be the best option for a volatile crypto. Scenario 2
You have a big family, lots of very close friends and a few good charities you want to give the money to.
Each year you withdraw your tax free allowance of £11,300. You also make a direct gift of crypto to your family, friends and charities - which I believe are all tax free, provided you do not die within 7 years of making your gift.
- Are those gifts taxable if/when your family and friends convert them to sterling?
- It seems like an obvious loophole that your family/friends could then "gift" those gifts back to you - can someone link me to something on this? I'm assuming this is illegal.
- If you wanted to start a charity anyway, could you incorporate a charity and give the cryptos to your own charity tax-free and spend that money on only charity-related activities?
Never cash out to sterling. Wait until crypto takes over the world and you can buy everything you want directly with your cryptos and tax-seeking governments have given up trying to chase for their taxes.
Probably not likely but hey. Scenario 4
Acquire tax residency in a low-tax jurisdiction. As per this discussion
of a UK citizen living in China for 5 years and wanting to return to the UK but with crypto gains. He goes to Singapore to dispose of his crypto into a Singaporean bank first before returning to the UK.
Now I'm not totally clear from that discussion but it might only be possible if you acquired the crypto's while abroad so it might be a moot scenario. Any clarification from people on this would be valuable. I.e. Someone who already owns crypto (bought them while resident in the UK) then moved abroad for 5+ years and only sold it after 5 years while in a low-tax jurisdiction like Singapore. Would they still be liable for CGT in the UK?
- Is this also possible in the UK tax islands like Jersey/Guernsey/Isle of Man where they have 0% CGT? Would one have to get residency there for X years before being able to dispose of their cryptos to qualify for 0% CGT? (If at all possible).
This one is probably pushing it - marry someone who is citizen of a country with 0% CGT (Singapore, New Zealand, Belize etc). Gift them the crypto's for them to dispose of it. Open a joint bank account under both your names.
Doesn't matter how unfeasible it is to find someone to marry of a particular country, just hypothetically speaking - would a scenario like this work/even be legal?
Would appreciate any thoughts or links of case studies / further reading on tax guidance. Do you know of other hypothetically possible scenarios?
I ran into two interesting articles today, that both seem to be missing the same point. There's this article
from iron_dwarf on the Ran Prieur subreddit and this article
To summarize, one of these articles is David Graeber's critique of the grand myth of civilization, in which we assume that we lived in egalitarian bands of hunter-gatherers, until eventually we invented agriculture and everything went to shit. Graeber rightly points out that there were egalitarian cities without monarchs for hundreds of years, that tribes of hunter-gatherers can have oppression too and that it seems to have been more difficult for us to maintain freedom and equality within families, than within societies as a whole. Even those North American cultures that had egalitarian gatherings during some seasons had families ruled by patriarchs and tyrants for the rest of the year.
Amir Taaki, like David Graeber somewhere at the top of my list of people I admire, is an anarchist of Persian origins who saw revolutionary potential in Bitcoin and went to Syria to fight for the Kurds against the genocidal Islamists of ISIS. He's back now and hopes to transform Bitcoin into something other than a multilevel marketing scheme of frat-boys staring at charts hoping to buy lamborghini's.
So, Taaki thinks he can bring Bitcoin back to its quirky revolutionary roots, Graeber thinks the archeological evidence demonstrates we can create the kind of society we want for ourselves, rather than being forever stuck with inequality as some sort of permanent bug in our social operating system that has to be chronically treated by a class of technocrats studying GINI coefficients and other metrics.
In both cases, it seems to me that the more important point goes unmentioned. Yes, there are certainly exceptions, but hunter-gatherer tribes were taken as a whole more egalitarian than most neolithic societies. We have genetic evidence demonstrating a rapid decline in genetic diversity in our species during the Neolithic revolution, simply because a small minority of men take control over society.
At the same time, Bitcoin did in fact transform into a cult of greed, far removed from its founding principles. You have to be really dense to assume that a system that utilizes 400,000 times more electricity per transaction than VISA has any sort of future as a payment option. The coders and fanboys cling onto this system, because it gave them some sort of meaningful social role and earned them some money.
Corruption, inequality, greed, these are ailments that slip into systems. The question Graeber and Taaki are asking is: How do we reform these systems back into something that functions again? The question you need to be asking yourself is: How do we avoid becoming dependent upon systems that will inevitably become corrupt?
As an example, consider the state of modern jobs. Inequality has surged in our society, but it has had a different impact on the nature of labor, depending upon the kind of skills and background you have. If you're working a low-skilled blue collar job, you can expect to be treated as a slave nowadays. You'll have schedules that dictate where you need to be standing and how many times you're allowed to use the bathroom. The reason this happens, is because employers know you have no choice. They have no need to treat you like a human being, because you can't quit your job as you're lucky to have a job in the first place.
Now imagine having a social role that's in high demand. You're now flexible. If your boss treats you like a slave, you'll quit and move to another employer. Your boss knows this and as a result chooses to treat you with dignity, because he has no other option. Your freedom ultimately depends, on your ability to have a choice and to say no. The pain imposed upon you will gradually increase as long as it benefits your employer, until the employer fears the pain imposed upon you might exceed that of the alternatives you have.
I first figured this simple principle out when I was around 12 year old, forced to attend some terrible school for rich kids. I had two kids I hung out with during the breaks, one of whom was the typical kid who programs websites as a hobby. I once mentioned in passing that I had made a website once myself with a friend. He insisted I had to show it to him, but I told him I didn't really want to, as it was very personal and not very good looking. He told me eventually that if I didn't want to spend my breaks by myself, I had to show it to him.
Of course this kid is 12 years old, so although he has the right mentality to grow into a petty office tyrant who makes a schedule for your bathroom breaks, he doesn't have the cognitive ability yet to be subtle about it. Note however, that his desire to impose his will on me is based on the fundamental assumption that I don't have a choice. Like a Silicon Valley employer who thinks he's the only alternative you have to living in a tent city, this kid thinks he is the only alternative I had to social ostracism. This wasn't true, I quite readily found other kids to hang out with.
This principle exists everywhere however. Consider spousal abuse. The reason women were abused by husbands for generations, and modern boys are now regularly emotionally abused by their girlfriends, is because one partner has power over the other partner. The reason this power exists, is because the person has no genuine alternative, or at least believes themselves to have no genuine alternative.
A big solution to this problem, would be non-monogamy. People who have multiple partners have little incentive to put up with a partner who behaves in an emotionally abusive manner. As non-monogamy becomes more widespread, relationships in general will become less abusive. When we return to work, the same principle can apply. A person who works for multiple bosses, will have greater freedom to terminate his arrangement with a boss who behaves in an abusive manner.
Similarly, we need to have the freedom to move to different locations. A government that doesn't have to fear its citizens leaving, is a government that's free to behave in a tyrannical manner. The rich already have this freedom to move to foreign places, which is why corporations and wealthy individuals now find that governments around the world now dramatically reduce their taxes. However, poor people need to have this freedom too.
There are multiple ways to go about this. The European Union allows you to move from one nation to another. However, because the Union itself has a government that makes increasingly more decisions, it means you're practically still stuck with the same government. Instead of unification, we need devolution. Consider the example of Spain. It would be ideal to have not just Spain as a country, but to have an independent Basque country, as well as an independent Catalonia, Galacia and Andalusia, with citizens free to migrate between these nations. This is how Europe effectively functioned in the 19th century, as citizens were typically free to move to another country and America as a whole functioned as an alternative to the tyranny we endured in our own nations.
The current situation however, is a mere start. Ideally, we wouldn't have a single government operate within a particular geographical location, but to have multiple governments we can choose from. This sounds far-fetched to us, but this is exactly how Europe functioned before the emergence of the sovereign nation states of the post-Westphalian era. Living in a particular territory of the Holy Roman empire could mean being subject to a local count, as well as to a prince, a bishop, the Holy Roman Emperor, and even the Pope himself had a say in a nation's domestic affairs. There was no clear ultimate ruler of a particular geographic location. Today, the emergence of supranational organizations like the IMF, the European Union, the World Trade Organization and a wide variety of NGO's has similarly led to a situation where nobody is genuinely in control anymore.
Finally, ideally we wouldn't just have the option to choose between employers, but to choose freedom from
work. Far fetched? This situation has existed throughout history. Today we call it retirement and apply it to old people. In the past it was called the "rentiers class" and simply meant being rich. The black death decimated the population of Europe, leading to an era of unprecedented liberty, as wages grew dramatically. Peasants spent large parts of the year idle and could simply choose to refuse to work.
What matters more than the conditions you live under, is whether you choose the conditions you live under. With choice comes freedom. For this reason, for much of human history, we didn't see the city as a source of oppression, but as a source of freedom. The countryside was a place for oppression, in the city you had a choice. You could apply to join a guild, you could beg, you could play music, you could steal, you could work as a prostitute or you could jump aboard a ship. In the countryside, you're just stuck toiling the fields.
For the same reason, cryptocurrency is ultimately a source of liberation. Before the current era, you had government controlled currencies and that was all you had to work with. Today we have Bitcoin, but more importantly, we have the means to design our own currency with which we choose to perform economic transactions. Rather than working on "improving Bitcoin", we need to realize the simple fact that we have a choice to seek out alternative systems. There's nothing out there that requires us to participate in Bitcoin.
The problem that leads to hierarchy, is that humans have a habit of slipping into stasis. From stasis comes dependency, from dependency comes power, from power comes hierarchy, which then leads to the loss of freedom. Bitcoin leads to a hierarchy, because the people who run the subreddit, the forum, the exchanges, the miners and the Github repository control the system, your "full node" doesn't decide jack shit. True freedom requires never being dependent upon any single phenomenon in your environment.
To achieve such freedom, the solution has always been to forever be on the move. To stay stuck in a particular situation, means to develop dependence on the factors that surround you. The means to nomadism have always differed, but those who desire freedom and autonomy have historically tended to seek out nomadism. In the past it meant wandering around with herds of cattle, trading goods between cities. Today nomadism can mean many things. Some achieve it by playing music, others become digital nomads, whose source of income is entirely derived from the work they perform on their laptop.
This is what the archeological and anthropological evidence demonstrates. There are hierarchical societies that don't practice agriculture. However, what tends to be going on in those cases is that people depend for nutrition on a particular location that delivers large amounts of food. As an example, a tribe might live in a desert near a river that's full of fish, or a tribe might live on an island. This leads to the emergence of hierarchies, because there is property over which ownership can be enforced and people have no real option to leave. Egalitarian bands of hunter-gatherers exist, because anyone who wants to make a bathroom-break schedule for the whole tribe or expects you to fill in a TPS report for every mongongo nut you bring back to the campfire wakes up in the morning and finds that half the tribe has left.
Finally, the most important thing to understand is that freedom in our society is ultimately a mental choice. If you're working as a minimum wage slave for Amazon, you're stuck in that position because of the mental space you're stuck in. You come to believe you have no choice, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It seems to me that such mental inflexibility itself is a problem many people suffer from, it's a problem that tends slips in as we age. The personality trait openness declines as we age. When you take psychedelics however, your openness can be increased to levels of a young person again.
Most people are mentally bound to conditions they shouldn't live in. As an example, consider my own case. With the salary I earn, I could be considered rather poor if I had to live in Amsterdam. However, I live in a small town in a house that's going to be demolished, so I manage to save roughly a third of my salary every month. Similarly, there are people who earn huge wages, but live in San Francisco. The problem in those cases is that people are geographically bound to conditions that lead to poverty. The New York Times recently had an article, insisting that even wealthy people are actually poor, because if you consider the lifestyle they lead their salaries are inadequate too.
However, there's nobody out there forcing them to attend diners with their colleagues after work or to send their kids to private school. This is a case of mental poverty, a poverty of imagination. There are people in their thirties who had such jobs back in their twenties, retired and never work a day in their life again. The worst form of mental bonding however, is found in the form of religions, ideologies and traditions. Even if you have all the choices in the world available to you, you won't make use of them if you believe there's a guy who showed up thousands of years ago and appointed a bunch of guys in fancy dresses who can judge on his behalf how you should live.
I'm an anarchist, but I'm more of an individualist anarchist than most, in the sense that I think freedom is a choice you have to create for yourself, it's generally not going to come about by a revolution. I believe in propaganda of the deed, but I think the best propaganda is generally not to go out and kill someone, but by living the kind of life you wish to live. Consider the case of the trainhoppers who were immortalized
in Mike Brodie's photo series. This is what effective propaganda looks like.
I struggle to think of people who are more free. They are free in ways we don't even think about. Consider the fact that you spend every morning dousing every part of your body in water, using soap to remove grease from your hair, then using a brush to cleanse your teeth, before applying a variety of perfumes to your body. This is a social obligation I would happily go without. I feel less oppressed by Peter Thiel and Bill Gates than I do by minimum-wage earners who frown when I'm not wearing clean clothing.
Freedom is found by being perpetually on the move. We should aim to be like the wild grazers, who are perpetually journeying. Any place we graze too long is a place that will lead to our deaths. As human beings, we inhabit multiple spaces, mental as well as geographical. The overpopulated tech-boom cities should be fled from as readily as we should flee from toxic relationships, toxic cultures and toxic mentalities. If you think there is some kind of system, some ideology, some kind of government, or some group of people who can liberate you, you are mistaken. The liberators of today are the tyrants of tomorrow. Freedom is always going to have to be something you'll have to seek out for yourself. Keep moving.
Wealth transfers is a coin with two sides: insurance (against unemployment, healthcare, etc) is essentially a loan from others to you to mitigate certain risks and made under more favourable terms - the lender covers your risk. A business loan is under less favorable terms - you cover the lender's risk. Both result in wealth transfers from others to you. Bitcoin disrupts both. submitted by
How it comes about: In the US, 61% of revenue goes on social insurance (welfare, pensions, unemployment, education) in the UK it's 68%. As economic activity moves towards a Bitcoin economy, there'll logically be less fiat tax revenue available for that insurance, and so people can expect it to get harder to qualify for it. At some more distant point, it might be removed altogether, first for people without long term presence in that jurisdiction.
Prediction 1: people who have standing in their (probably online) community being able to obtain business loans from other BTC users on the basis of that standing. Got reputation? Got credit. It's unlikely that someone with several years of Reddit history will be a worse risk than someone who joined 15 minutes ago asking to be fronted coin.
As a consequence, this suggests obtaining welfare and unemployment loans from others will also be easier for such people, creating an advantage to those who join a community earlier on. In particular, we might see that someone who has demonstrably loaned to others 100-BTC might receive from others 200-BTC on the basis that he's probably a good risk. Logically, this also means a much harder limit to the amount that could be received, and so bitcoin welfare recipients will have to work very much harder than fiat welfare recipients: in terms of unemployment, this would see a faster return to any productive job; in terms of healthcare this would mean a greater focus on finding the right medical assistance (Such as "We'll fix you up for 50-BTC whatever's wrong with you, if it costs 30-BTC we win, if it costs 70-BTC our insurance still covers it and you win - so we're motivated to get the analysis and treatment right first time"); for education & pensions it drives the cost of that education down but the quality of it up as one's offspring will become a big secondary factor behind old age assistance - after you, saving for yourself.
Prediction 2: Insurers in Cyberspace (ie, Mauritius or someplace where the tax regime is more relaxed) to accept BTC insurance payments in return for later coverage, ergo jobs for people to tie online identities together the better to determine the risk; this also suggests it desirable to have out-of-band measures to communicate through that identity, such as a Reddit <-> email gateway;
Pros: Closer aligning of risk to Lenders with capacity of Lendee; Clearer insight into how risky both Lender and Lendee is - the Blockchain Knows All
Cons: Those who don't / won't have an online reputation will not look in favor at those who do, and so may not find anyone willing to take their risks on
Things we're waiting on: how to create a long term association between an address(es) and an online identity such that others can determine how well you've "kept up repayments"; establish company trading transparency the better to establish if it's being run properly
Other consequences: building up a "credit score" online by joining communities and loaning to others will be an exceptionally important job for the young; profit through the loans given out may be an additional revenue source towards and through old age; the possibility of lending to real world businesses ... and sovereigns!
Anything I forgot?
You need to pay Capital Gains Tax (CGT) when you profit from selling valuable assets such as shares, cryptocurrencies, art, or property. For the 2020/2021 tax year capital gains tax rates are: 10% (18% for residential property) for your entire capital gain if your overall annual income is below £50,000 The capital gains tax rates for individuals in the UK are 10 per cent for basic rate taxpayers when their total income and capital gains are less than £50,000 (the basic rate tax bracket). If you are in the higher tax band (your total income is above £50,000) then your profits will be subject to 20 per cent CGT. HaasBots were also the first Bitcoin bots available to the public and the company has had a working product since 2012, unlike all these sham ICOs or sketchy web services. gsmg-d0d 2 years ago Reply You might find it worth your time to check out our trade platform, even though we currently only support Bittrex. Bitcoincharts is the world's leading provider for financial and technical data related to the Bitcoin network. It provides news, markets, price charts and more. Bitcoin Charts. Blocks: 481823: Total BTC: 16.523M: Difficulty: 923233068449: Estimated: 887736944047 in 1 blks: Network total: 7983858.406 Thash/s: Blocks/hour: 7.25 / 497 s: Home What are the tax implications of selling BCH? Is this like a stock split? does it count as an asset do bought at £0 for CGT? Does it count as...
In this video I talk you through the UK tax bands for year 2019-2020. After explaining and giving an understanding behind them I then go on to talk you through how to calculate tax on income as ... UK Tax Bands & Calculating Tax on Income - Duration: 12:18. Take Home Pay 20,689 views. 12:18. How To Invest In Property At A Young Age ... UK Tax Bands & Calculating Tax on Income - Duration: 12:18. Take Home Pay Recommended for you. 12:18. Journey from UK to Malaysia - From Flight to Quarantine - Duration: 13:42. To claim your UK tax rebate you can use your P45 or P60 and details of any work-related expenses. Applying with Taxback.com takes the hassle and confusion and you’ll get the maximum rebate as we ... In this video, I give a brief explanation of UK tax codes 2019/2020 such as 1250L, BR and S and what they mean. If you feel there is something wrong with your take-home pay then this is where you ...