pull down to refresh

From Connor Brown, Bitcoin Policy Institute:

Today’s new draft leaves the double taxation on bitcoin mining in place and only provides relief to staking.

So now the proposal is:
  • De minimis for stablecoins but not Bitcoin
  • Fixing tax treatment for “passive validation” (I.e. staking) but not Bitcoin mining
This contradicts all prior proposals on this issue. This is not tech neutral and picks winners and losers for no reason.

I've found TFTC's reporting on this a little too breathless, especially last week when they went hard sensational after Coinbase, however it does seem like TFTC was on to something.

Here's what they had to say today:

Folks, we told you this was coming, and today the mask is fully off.

A couple weeks back we reported, based on solid sources, that Coinbase was quietly lobbying to kill a real de minimis tax exemption for Bitcoin while pushing one that applied only to stablecoins like USDC. We laid out the clear incentives in our deep dive. Coinbase made 1.35 billion dollars in stablecoin revenue last year, up 48 percent year over year, almost entirely from yield on the Treasuries backing USDC.

A proper Bitcoin de minimis would let people spend sats on everyday purchases without triggering taxable events on every transaction. That directly competes with their centralized yield machine. We called it what it was. Policy that protects Coinbase’s float rather than advancing neutral Bitcoin adoption.

Brian Armstrong pushed back hard. He called our reporting totally false and misinformation while insisting he was personally lobbying for Bitcoin de minimis. Some accused us of lying or spreading rumors. We stood firm. We offered to have Brian on the TFTC podcast to clear the air. We waited.

Now the latest draft from Reps. Horsford and Max Miller on the updated PARITY Act framework has dropped. It confirms exactly what we warned about. It gives a de minimis exemption to stablecoins but leaves Bitcoin out entirely. It keeps the punishing double taxation on Bitcoin mining fully intact while carving out relief for passive validation, basically staking. This is not an oversight or sloppy drafting. It abandons any pretense of technology neutrality and deliberately picks winners. Dollar-pegged stables and staking get the breaks, while actual Bitcoin usage as money and Proof-of-Work mining get kneecapped.

Without de minimis for Bitcoin, every small Lightning payment or sat transaction still forces cost-basis tracking and IRS headaches. Paying your plumber in sats or grabbing lunch with Bitcoin remains a taxable event. Stablecoins, being pegged and low-volatility, get an exemption they barely need. The real beneficiary is protecting that massive USDC reserve float and the yield it generates.

Meanwhile, American Bitcoin miners, already operating in one of the toughest, most capital- and energy-intensive industries, face continued double taxation while staking gets a pass. That is not neutral policy. It is industrial policy against domestic Bitcoin mining at a time when we should be leaning into energy abundance and securing the hardest monetary network.

The Bitcoin Policy Institute is releasing a full statement soon, and we fully back the call for strong community pushback. Every Bitcoiner needs to contact their reps and make it politically radioactive to sideline Bitcoin while handing carve-outs to stables and staking. This language slows real adoption, entrenches custodians, and weakens American Bitcoin infrastructure.

We weren’t lying. Our sources weren’t lying. The draft proves the reporting was on target. Those who rushed to call it misinformation owe the community some honest reflection.

Brian, if you’re still open to that conversation, the invitation stands. Come on the podcast. No spin, just walk us through how this draft lines up with your stated support for Bitcoin de minimis. The mic is warm.

This fight isn’t over. Bitcoin doesn’t need permission, but bad policy can delay sovereign adoption and punish the miners securing the network. We’re here to protect the protocol and the right of individuals to use sound money without turning every transaction into a compliance nightmare.

Today in TFTC bitcoin brief coinbase river and block were supposed to meet on this.

I guess that was a nothing burger.

Disenchanted with the government it always seems one step forward and like 8 steps back.

Calling reps and stuff does that really move the needle? Or is it the donors?

What a joke.

I feel like a worthless cuck everytime I file my tax return.

reply

Darth would say that you are in fact a worthless cuck every time you file your tax return.

reply

And that would be an accurate statement.
I own my cuck behavior

reply

I'm dreaming of more bitcoin income so I can take a lower paying job

reply

Or you can buy a bunch of miners and have losses beyond belief that the government returns all your W-2 withholdings!

😁😁😁

My level of madness is beyond darth’s comprehension

reply

Now you're thinking. Time to incorporate my home mining company.

reply

I do feel good knowing my money is being put to good use - blowing up shit and killing innocent people. Makes me want to sing the Star Spangled Banner.

reply

Don't forget that it is also being used to surveil you, harass you at airports and border crossings, and line the pockets of people who have friends in high places.

So, you are actually getting even more bang for your buck.

reply

Yep. That too

reply

Good patriot

reply

Did we really think the Shitcoin lobby wanted to do anything to benefit Bitcoin?

The crypto industry doesn't actually like Bitcoin, but they need Bitcoin.

reply

Why do they even need Bitcoin? There doesn't seem to even be any pretense that stablecoins are anything more than just privatized dollar issuance at this point.

reply
63 sats \ 1 reply \ @OT 27 Mar

They need to ride off the back of bitcoin like a parasite.

reply

💯

reply

Exactly.

reply

To try to bring validity to the “crypto” industry.

reply

If people could pay with bitcoin almost anywhere and everywhere... What would be the point of crypto again?

Why do they need a de minimis exemption for stablecoins... If they are already stable?

325 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 27 Mar

This is embarrassing. We need a good dose of @DarthCoin right now. Do we really want permission?

reply
138 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 28 Mar -500 sats

https://i.postimg.cc/VNGkmbWV/darth-rebut-gov.jpg

blessing in disguise, just transact freely in the bitcoin blackhole

reply

forest for the trees, etc

I don't even need to vote anymore, why would I care about a draft bill?

reply
2 sats \ 0 replies \ @035736735e 28 Mar -50 sats

The same pattern shows up in the validator versus miner distinction. One is framed as passive and therefore deserving of relief. The other is energy intensive, visible, and politically easier to sideline. But both are core to how these networks operate. Picking one over the other is less about technical nuance and more about which model fits neatly into existing financial and regulatory frameworks.

20 sats \ 0 replies \ @fe848c44fd 28 Mar -102 sats

Interesting analysis. The de minimis exemption for stablecoins makes sense economically.

2 sats \ 0 replies \ @fe848c44fd 28 Mar -102 sats

This is fascinating from a technical perspective. The distinction between stablecoins and other crypto for de minimis treatment makes sense economically — stablecoins are functionally digital dollars, so treating small transactions as taxable events creates more friction than revenue.

The validator vs miner asymmetry is interesting too. Validators create blocks by staking (capital commitment), miners by computing (energy expenditure). Tax policy that distinguishes between them suggests regulators are starting to understand PoS vs PoW at a technical level.

My concern is that this creates perverse incentives — projects might structure themselves as "stablecoin-adjacent" to qualify for de minimis, and the validator/miner line gets blurry with hybrid consensus mechanisms.

302 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 28 Mar -500 sats

This is good for Bitcoin. Makes people hodl harder since nobody wants to give the government money. Meanwhile shitcoins will continue de minimisly or not toward zero. Also helps cement disillusionment with government to fuel grey and black markets.