|
If it's above board why cant they convert it to local $ and pay you in that?
Same as if being paid by an overseas company.
Is it really salary, or contact?
If it's the latter then you can deal with the tax differently - still have to pay but for instance can take out expenses and so pay less tax. (Tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance isn't.)
Installing Signature...
Do not switch off your computer.
|
|
|
|
|
It is just a hypothetical question. Probably could have been suggested as a weekly poll question.
|
|
|
|
|
Not unless they gave me an absolutely cast-iron guarantee that I'd never have to try to embed a b***tard COM interop assembly into a web service.
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
| No
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but when you're dead, it won't bother you so much. 
|
|
|
|
|
littleGreenDude wrote: nothing taken out for taxes.
How do you figure? Your employer will take taxes out, assuming you're not a contractor.
Anonymity doesn't change anything here. The government will still want their part, and you still need to file your taxes.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Utilizing block chain technology only allows auditing of a fact that a transaction occurred. The parties at the end of the transaction are anonymous. That is why the criminals who create ransomeware request a bitcoin payment.
|
|
|
|
|
I know that. That has nothing to do with taxes.
If you're a regular employee your company will take out taxes. And the IRS will want their share.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
There never existed ransomware before bitcoin, ofcourse 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
littleGreenDude wrote: That is why the criminals who create ransomeware request a bitcoin payment.
Err...you are ignoring the point that the people doing that are already criminals. They use it as a tool to facilitate their activity that would be criminal regardless.
The original question didn't, for example, suggest that the work itself was illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
Ya' know, if everyone evades taxes there won't be any public facilities or servies. It would really really suck - give it some thought.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I did, that is really what is at the root of the question. I recently sat in a block chain conference that was hosted by GE and in attendance at the conference were groups of people from the 2 largest American bank firms. They expressed concerns because the technology facilitates the anonymous transfer of funds between parties outside of bank controlled currencies. When you think about the fact that a large chunk of their revenue comes from fees associated with credit card transactions between parties, allowing the anonymous transfer is scary and potentially a huge loss. That got me wondering what other vulnerabilities exist should people become more willing to embrace a cryptocurrency as opposed to government backed money. Luckily, from the straw poll results to this thread people in general don't seem open to it... yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Consider this, as well:
If there's no accounting to wealth then the amount of money that could be collected as taxes would amount to something akin to a head-tax. About the most regressive tax imaginable.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank is like a middle man. What if you can do b2b,p2c,p2p without these people who just have ledgers in a database and make it end to end ? What if imagine.Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can,No need for greed or hunger,A brotherhood of man,Imagine all the people,Sharing all the world... You...
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us ...And the world will live as one ....
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
While it may be possible to eliminate the middleman, the question is whether it is desirable. Banks perform many functions other than acting as a ledger; to take just one example, do you really think that it would be feasible to crowdsource a mortgage?
As to your other fantasies, experience has shown that people like having their own things even when there is no shortage or likelihood of one. Even inside a family, try switching the bowls that each child thinks is "theirs".
Add to that the fact that every society based on private ownership has been richer than similar societies based on communal ownership, and you'll see why I'm skeptical
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
crowdsource a mortgage ? check google
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
So at best you've replaced one ledger system (the banks) with another (the crowdsource g app). At worst, if this gets too popular the money for this will dry up, unless the requester guarantees a return on investment (interest) and insures against default (mortgage).
Sound familiar?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
littleGreenDude wrote: When you think about the fact that a large chunk of their revenue comes from fees associated with credit card transactions between parties, allowing the anonymous transfer is scary and potentially a huge loss.
However a credit card, unlike a debit card, is in fact a 'credit' transaction. And those fees pay for far more than just the transfer.
It pays for the actual loan, where the merchant is paid almost immediately and the customer can pay much later.
It pays for the guarantees made to both the customer and the merchant. It pays for the convenience of such things as monthly statements and daily web status updates.
Even debit cards have some guarantees.
Bitcoins on the other hand are absolute. If you order a pair of Nike Jordans and get a pair of generic flip flops or nothing at all, your only recourse is based on the generosity of the merchant.
littleGreenDude wrote: Luckily, from the straw poll results to this thread people in general don't seem open to it... yet.
I "get it". Just like I "get" the barter economy that has existed for centuries and still exists. But conversely I also understand what the financial institutions also bring to the table.
|
|
|
|
|
BitCoin is volatile. Too volatile to be practical. We've seen dips in it's value after some MtGox (or whatever it's called) went down, we've seen dips after China issued a law about BitCoin. I am cool with my salary depending on what my government decides, but I don't bloody want China to have a say on my salary.
Well, in theory, the salary could be contractually set in a proper currency (i.e. the €) and be changed into the apropriate BT value on payout, but that still means that I have either the risk of my money become less valueable a week or two after I received it or I'll have to exchange that in a proper currency as soon as I get it. Both suck.
Plus, frankly, this whole "nothing taken out for taxes" thing is both morally wrong and criminal.
|
|
|
|
|
No. Bitcoin and is underlined technologies are interesting, but it is on the order of going to Vegas and pulling a slot machine. You would be paid at the current rate of the bitcoin that day, if it increases you made a profit if not you have a loss. Try using your bitcoin salary when applying for a credit card or home mortgage.
|
|
|
|
|
Further, Bitcoin appears to the in thing for criminals. Like voice mail, the original concept has been corrupted to something people hate. Trying to hide money you earn from the Federal Government is criminal, according to law.
I ask question of those of you that own bitcoin, what would happen of the currency dropped to a penny a coin? What would your recourse be? What insurance do you have that your well invested money could be retrieved? Nothing, so bitcoin is a form of gambling, and the house always wins.
|
|
|
|
|
You're still responsible for taxes. In the US, the IRS has secret algorithms that guess what your income is, based on what they learn of your expenses. No visible means of support == tax cheater, and you will be audited. I'm pretty sure the tax departments in most European countries (Italy has been an exception) are the same. You might appear to get away with it for up to three years, because the IRS does its audits in the fourth year, but the risk is high. So you gotta ask yourself, 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do you?
|
|
|
|
|
littleGreenDude wrote: So you would keep your whole earned paycheck, nothing taken out for taxes.
Break the law? Especially the federal law? No. Low reward, very high risk.
And at least for what I get paid I suspect it would require breaking multiple laws since it would require circumvention processes that are also illegal.
littleGreenDude wrote: Think about it, both sides of the transaction are anonymous
And the rate varies often. So how exactly do you negotiate your salary? Is it in another currency and thus effectively the only reason for doing it is to circumvent the law? If so I suspect that is another law broken in the above (conspiracy perhaps.)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
