This article was rejected by Qntra editor in chief, Aaron Rogier, because the legislation of interest has been withdrawn.
BingoBoingo: danielpbarron: That thing your submission discusses was already withdrawn. Otherwise it would have been in the News Roundup Xtend
Sorry, News Roundup Xtend (TM)(R)
shinohai: I haven’t found *a single thing* to qntra this week
mircea_popescu: slow week huh.
shinohai: Yeah, kinda weird. I started two submissions, then realized how dumb they sounded and canned ’em.
mircea_popescu: kinda how this goes yeah
danielpbarron: BingoBoingo, ah, so i shouldn’t even publish it myself?
shinohai: Even scammers are starting to recycle scams, like PayCon. No news :/
BingoBoingo: danielpbarron: Well with some rewording that it failed you can self republish
So here it is, presented for educational purposes, and because the general point remains sound.
As reported by Peter Van Valkenburg and Jerry Brito, a bill has been drafted by California legislators who intend to regulate Bitcoin. Not mentioned in the article is the very important distinction that fiat businesses are the only target of the bill, and the erroneous claim that node operators would be affected has been corrected with credit given to the wrong party. The text of the legislation, although too lengthy and repetitive to merit quoting in full, largely consists of baseless criticisms against the superior Bitcoin and similarly baseless advocacy of the inferior Federal Reserve Note. People who seek to derive a fiat profit from the workings of Bitcoin will be required to disclose these laughable affirmations in full whenever a customer is stupid enough to take them up on it.
The most interesting section of the bill pertains to the financial obligations that will be imposed on businesses operating under the purview of the State of California.
To quote the derpy California bill:
The bill would prohibit a person from engaging in the digital currency business without enrolling in the program and would prohibit the conduct of digital currency business through an unenrolled agent. The bill would require a person seeking enrollment to pay a nonrefundable fee of up to $5,000, not to exceed the reasonable costs of enrolling a person in the program, and would require the person to provide the commissioner specified personal and business information in a form and manner prescribed by the commissioner. The bill would also require the person to provide fingerprints and would authorize the commissioner to deliver the fingerprints to law enforcement agencies. The bill would require the commission to permit enrollment in the program unless it appears to the commissioner that the person, or related parties, are not of good character. The bill would prohibit a person from directly or indirectly acquiring control of an enrollee in the program without approval by the commissioner and would prescribe a process and a fee for applying for approval. The bill would require an application to acquire control of an enrollee to be under oath. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require an enrollee to pay an annual fee of $2,500 to maintain enrollment in the program. The bill would require that all moneys received by the commissioner in connection with its provisions to be placed in the Digital Currency Business Enrollment Program Account, which would be created in the State Corporations Fund, to be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the commissioner for expenditure for the purposes of the program.
Compare and contrast to The Declaration of Sovereignty, quoted below:
THEREFORE, it is established that any Bitcoin company, or trader or merchant or other entity deriving a worldly profit from the otherworldly workings of Bitcoin, is to pay a tax in sum of 0.1% or a hundred thousand satoshi per full Bitcoin realised, into the coffers of the Bitcoin Foundation ( http://deeds.bitcoin-assets.com/deed/9ULZPc7yeZ9fQEA1aZ73H6mcv1s2C4gYFAbNTb5urovj ) as the sole and complete public contribution that may be required of him ; that such payment satisfies the total burden of taxation upon him, and no further payments may be required, in any form nor for any reason or under any title or pretense, by anyone ; that the satisfaction of this obligation is a moral requirement, and outside of the oppinion of the sovereign people it will not be enforced.
Choose your government wisely, and sorry for your laws.