Blockchain
The evolution of crypto exchanges — What’s next for the industry
Published
2 Monaten agoon
By
From what started as something of a “technological experiment” with Bitcoin (BTC) over a decade ago, the crypto asset industry has become a significant driver for change in global financial markets. Cryptocurrency exchanges started as a means to enable crypto enthusiasts to trade digital coins outside the traditional financial system on a decentralized and largely autonomous basis.
It is likely that combined with regulatory recognition and development of digital market infrastructures, acceptance of essential Anti-Money Laundering practices, investment in security protection systems, and recognition of investor protection measures will see these businesses continue to expand and potentially merge or compete on an even footing with existing regulated marketplaces.
The success of these platforms in allowing an unregulated free-flow of value across borders has unsurprisingly resulted in interest from governments and regulatory bodies. Initial skepticism was replaced by concern over weaknesses in relation to AML, fraud and investor protection measures. As crypto exchanges have improved their systems to meet AML and investor protection requirements, there is a begrudging recognition that these platforms have brought much-needed modernization and democratization to a market that has generally been seen as remote and privileged.
Crypto exchanges have provided 24-hour, global access to trading venues with participants eligible from all walks of life and able to participate directly through accessing online trading tools and graphics, which have historically been available almost solely to a limited set of professional investors.
Crypto regulation overview
Crypto assets have generally been on the outer edge of the regulatory perimeter, but are increasingly facing pressure to be included within the regulatory framework.
The first key step in this direction at an international level was the extension of the AML standards announced in June 2019 for crypto-related businesses from the Financial Action Task Force, the global standard-setting body for fighting financial crime.
Related: Slow but steady: FATF review highlights crypto exchanges’ struggle to meet AML standards
In the European Union, this was followed by the adoption of the 5th Anti-Money Laundering Directive, or 5AMLD, which brought crypto-asset exchanges and custodian wallet providers into the scope of the EU AML regime. As a result, in-scope crypto asset firms operating in the EU and the United Kingdom are now subject to the full suite of AML obligations applicable to most financial market participants, such as the need to undertake customer due diligence checks when onboarding a new client. In addition, they are required to register with the relevant national competent authorities where they intend to carry on crypto-related business.
The general regulatory attitude
The general approach to the regulatory treatment of crypto assets has been more complicated. At an EU-wide level, the position so far has been to apply the existing regulatory framework to crypto assets that have the characteristics of regulated assets. Specific regulations such as outlawing the sale of crypto derivatives to retail investors are imposed, but more specific requirements are considered necessary.
Exchanges dealing in digital assets are therefore subject to regulation if the assets traded fall within this regulatory perimeter. To a large extent, this has meant understanding the application of the existing regulatory framework and applying this to relevant circumstances, relying on interpretative guidance where necessary.
As a result, two main categories of crypto assets, which function in a similar manner as regulated instruments, and their respective service providers have been brought within the scope of existing rules. These are digital assets akin to “financial instruments” (generally capturing crypto assets used as means for raising finance and derivatives), but are being treated with existing rules for tokens functioning as “electronic money.” This captures crypto assets designed to facilitate payment transactions or some stablecoins.
Importantly, this means that crypto exchanges trading digital securities, such as DLT-based shares, bonds, fund units or derivatives — often referred to as security tokens — are required to obtain authorization as regulated trading venues to do business in the EU. This would also capture EU-based crypto exchanges trading particularly popular instruments, such as derivatives referencing Bitcoin (BTC) or other cryptocurrencies as underlying assets. This has been supplemented by jurisdictions putting in place bespoke regimes for the crypto sector, for example, clarifying aspects concerning the use of the underlying DLT technology (e.g., Luxembourg) or closing gaps in existing rules (e.g., France).
Digital securities
In the securities space, significant steps are being made toward developing a credible digital market infrastructure for issuance, trading and settlement of digital securities. Most notably, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority has recently granted a MiFID licence to Archax Limited, which has become the first fully-authorized trading venue for digital securities in the U.K.
At the same time, established exchanges are building their own “digital versions,” such as the Börse Stuttgart Digital Exchange in Germany and the SIX Digital Exchange in Switzerland. However, despite these developments, integrating digital solutions with existing market infrastructures remains challenging, not least due to constraints stemming from existing rules around settlement finality requirements in the post-trading systems.
In an effort to unlock opportunities for innovation in the space, the European Commission has recently published a proposal for a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on DLT, which aims to create a bespoke legal regime for the application of DLT in post-trade services and would allow for the creation of digital securities settlement systems.
Regulating crypto exchanges
Some of the largest crypto exchanges are looking to obtain regulatory licences across the world in order to be able to directly compete with incumbent financial institutions, adapt to user demand for more sophisticated services, and enhance their own credibility in the market.
For example, in March 2018, the U.S.-based cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase obtained an e-money licence from the U.K. FCA, as well as from the Central Bank of Ireland in 2019, allowing it to issue e-money and provide payment services, thereby enhancing its fiat-to-crypto services. Kraken has recently obtained a banking license from the State of Wyoming to create a special purpose depository institution (Kraken Financial), which will allow it to provide deposit-taking, custody and fiduciary services for digital assets.
With a view to enhancing market integrity and investor confidence, the EU Commission put out a proposal on Sept. 23 for a regulation on markets in crypto assets, or MiCA. The draft regulation captures crypto assets such as “asset-referenced tokens” (commonly known as “stablecoins”) as well as “utility tokens.”
Under the MiCA draft, crypto exchanges operating in the EU are required to obtain regulatory authorization and are subject to strict prudential and conduct requirements. In addition, the draft rules include prescriptive requirements around admission of crypto asset instruments to trading, including the requirement to publish a white paper with specified content.
European Commission proposals have to go through a long legislative process before they become binding law. The MiCA however, is likely to be a significant step toward establishing credibility and structure in creating a viable crypto asset industry in the EU, which will identify the contrasting regulatory framework for security-type crypto assets and non-security-type crypto assets. For many, the process of imposing regulatory requirements at all in the pure crypto assets sector will be an anathema that stifles innovation and creates barriers to entry for smaller fintech firms. However, this is the most likely approach to establishing a long-term, viable marketplace.
What it means for the industry
There is significant interest from large institutional players in entering the crypto asset space. Some of the biggest European institutions have extensive digital asset programs. As an example, ING is currently working with industry participants on a digital custody and safekeeping solution within the FCA sandbox that will provide institutional-grade security for digital holdings and transfers of digital assets. The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency recently gave the “all-clear” to U.S. banks to provide cryptocurrency custody services for their customers, a development that could put crypto asset service providers (including exchanges) in direct competition with traditional players.
Going forward, the innovation, democratization and expansion of access brought about by crypto exchanges, as well as an improved financial regulatory recognition of their services, will be combined with the digitalization of traditional asset securities and development of market infrastructure for digital trading. This is likely to lead to a powerful dynamic for combinations and mergers between rapidly developing crypto exchanges and incumbent institutions. We are currently at the forefront of advising on developments in the space and welcome the significant changes undoubtedly ahead.
This article was co-authored by Martin Bartlam and Marina Troullinou.
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the authors’ alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
Martin Bartlam is partner and head of FinTech at DLA Piper.
Marina Troullinou is an associate at DLA Piper.
You may like
-
Crypto taxes, reporting and tax audits in 2021
-
BlackRock Seeks VP Blockchain Lead to ‘Drive Demand’ for Firm’s Crypto Offerings
-
Crypto Long & Short: The Christmas Poem Edition
-
Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer
-
Israelis Must Now Disclose Crypto Holdings: Report
-
Fed’s Powell Wins Forbes’ Crypto Person of the Year Honors; Do They Give Awards for Snark?
Blockchain
The new ‘Bank of England’ is ‘no bank at all’
Published
30 Minuten agoon
Dezember 29, 2020By
As one of the first countries to industrialize in the 1760s, Britain’s manufacturing revolution instigated one of the greatest practical and ubiquitous changes in human history. But even more extraordinary than the cultural shift itself, is the fact that Britain’s industrialization remained way ahead of potential competition for decades. Only in the early 1900s did historians come to grips with the issues of causation. Max Weber’s pithy answer, “the Protestant work ethic,” pointed to Puritan seriousness, diligence, fiscal prudence and hard work. Others point to the establishment of the Bank of England in 1694 as a foundation for financial stability.
In contrast, continental Europe lurched from one national debt crisis to another, then threw itself headlong into the Napoleonic wars. Unsurprisingly, it was not until after 1815 that industrialization took place on the European mainland, where it was spearheaded by the new country of Belgium.
250 years later, another revolution has begun with the launch of Bitcoin (BTC), but this one is more commercial in nature than industrial. Though the full impact has yet to play out, the parallels between these two historical events are already striking.
Bitcoin may not match the obviousness of industrialization, but the underlying pragmatics touch on the very foundations of the non-barter economy. Like the establishment of the Bank of England, the creation of the cryptocurrency infrastructure has been prompted by ongoing and worsening threats to financial stability: systemic fault-lines created by macroeconomic challenges stemming from the 2008 financial crisis.
If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em…right?
Where a central bank once anchored financial enlightenment, it now plays the role of antagonist. For those who could “connect the dots” in 2008, there was the realization that central banks no longer existed as guardians and protectors of national currencies, but rather as tools for creating politicized market distortions, abandoning their duty to preserve wealth in favor of creating the conditions for limitless, cheap government debt. While many of the underlying intentions were benign, the process inherently worked to punish savers and reward reckless debt.
Meanwhile, it has steadily taken time for the potential of digital assets to reach their potential and approach something like critical mass, though thankfully full acceptance shouldn’t take as long as Britain’s industrial revolution. Over the past 12 years, cryptocurrencies have moved from unknown to novel to significant, growing interest. As a result, profound changes are underway, affecting the mechanics by which investors, the investment industry, wealth managers and even the commercial banking sector are engaging with cryptocurrencies.
This interest has accelerated as we enter into a period of deep economic uncertainty and growing awareness that structural soundness is shifting away from traditional investment options. Not only that, this growing financial innovation and public interest has largely occurred outside of the central banks’ control, if not outright antagonism led by the banks’ regulatory arms in government.
Now, many central banks are trying to join a game they’ve tried almost every way of beating, with digital currencies that adopt the glowing sheen of crypto innovation, but which also eschew the underlying innovations and philosophy that made those innovations so popular to begin with.
Follow or get out of the way
The popularity of cryptocurrency has largely been due to its protean fungibility — it has been whatever the independent financial community has needed it to be, from digital currency to speculative financial instruments to smart contracts that can power smart financial technology.
However hard central banks might try to co-opt the hype of cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency succeeding will mark the fundamental end of critical aspects of the central banking monopoly by offering a more competitive vehicle for facilitating commercial transactions and providing a more stable medium to store monetized assets. Cryptocurrencies actually offer real returns on “cash” deposits, something that the fiat banking system has long since abandoned. Most of all, cryptocurrencies reveal the fictitious nature of fiat currencies as a principle.
Cryptocurrencies as an ecosystem will increasingly constrain, redirect and set the parameters for government macroeconomic policies. Certainly, sound alternatives to fiat currencies will drive the latter to the periphery of commercial life, concomitantly reducing the number of tools the nation-state has at its disposal to regulate or respond to changing economic conditions. Above all, this means that government financial engagement can no longer be a rule unto itself. It will have to engage by the same principles as everyone else. A level playing field here has dramatic implications.
Against the backdrop of the essential limits of fiat currencies, current geo- and macroeconomic policies and a new emerging world order, cryptocurrencies offer vast potential as an efficiency facilitating frictionless commerce and investment, a medium of stability against uncertainty and inflation, increased security in value transfer and wealth management, optimum autonomy in an increasingly intrusive climate, and “cash” asset preservation/growth in a world of negative interest rates.
The edifice that supports the concept of a “global reserve currency” is also weakening. This will reduce political influence over global finance, as well as nations’ abilities to run a long-term balance of payments deficits, current account deficits and borrow at little or no interest. Indeed, given current trends, changes in trading mechanics may speedily evolve to the point that such “reserve currencies” no longer have a function at all. And cryptocurrency success will hasten the end of the U.S. dollar monopoly in global commerce.
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
James Gillingham is the CEO and a co-founder of Finxflo. James is engaged in developing and implementing strategic plans and company policies, maintaining an open dialogue with stakeholders and driving organizational success. He is an expert in managing and executing high-level strategic objectives with more than 13 years’ experience in building, developing and expanding multinational organizations. His deep knowledge of financial markets, digital currencies and fintech has played a pivotal role in his success to date.
Blockchain
Why you wouldn’t eat chicken nuggets, and why you shouldn’t trust Big Data
Published
11 Stunden agoon
Dezember 29, 2020By
Just like you might think twice about eating chicken nuggets once you see how they are made, you’d likely hesitate about volunteering your personal information once you see how it is used and monetized.
Freedom has become one of the world’s most commoditized assets — and over the years, the internet has eroded it.
We live in a world where we’re confronted with 5,000 words of terms and conditions when buying sneakers. Crucial details about what companies do with our data is buried in masses of legalese — prompting most of us to click “I agree” without thinking of the consequences.
In other cases, companies are unacceptably opaque about how our data is used. This is a big problem when businesses are offering their services for “free”… provided we can give our email address, phone number and a few other details.
A scene from the recent sci-fi series Maniac perfectly illustrated where the world is heading. A character is given a choice — they can either pay for their subway ticket or get it for free in exchange for some personal information. As you’d guess, they bluntly chose the latter.
That’s basically what we’re doing every day — giving our data to corporations, big and small, and sacrificing our privacy and freedom in the process.
It’s gotten so bad that individual states have had to step in with rules and regulations designed to protect the public, many of whom are unaware of what they’re signing up for when they tick a seemingly innocuous box on a website.
And it’s also telling that tech giants are worried about the taps being turned off. When Apple unveiled a new feature that would enable users to opt out of having their activity tracked across apps and websites, Facebook launched a ferocious PR campaign against the measures. The social network said it was speaking out to protect the small businesses who rely on its platform for targeted advertising. Cynics among you will see it as a brazen attempt to protect profits by a company charged with some of the most insidious and influential data mining in history.
Pandora’s box has been opened
The tide is beginning to change — because we’ve opened Pandora’s box — and the world is starting to have long-overdue discussions about the privacy we’re entitled to online.
For more than 10 years now, we’ve experienced abundant financial freedom thanks to Bitcoin (BTC) and its rivals… but there’s still a long way to go in other parts of our society.
Last week, I went to the shop and spontaneously bought some moisturizer, and when I got home, I did a Google search to learn more about the product. For the next seven days, I was bombarded with moisturizer ads on Facebook.
Just like our health, our well-being and our careers, freedom is an inner personal responsibility that we need to monitor, maintain and protect — especially in the digital realm, where it can all too easily be sold in exchange for access to free services.
To feel free and safe in our homes, we rely on the privacy of our ownership, and the trustworthiness of our friends and neighbors. Government laws and housing association rules underwrite this. But we also entrust our financial privacy to institutions — in the expectation that they will be held accountable by regulators and central banks — and the whole reason Bitcoin launched in 2009 was because our expectations weren’t being met.
Why blockchain is the answer
Every modern proof-of-stake blockchain tackles the problems surrounding digital privacy and trust in a unique way, and in these vibrant communities, decentralized governance helps to ensure that standards are upheld, with slashing mechanisms serving as a deterrent to those who are tempted to work against a network’s best interests.
With PoS blockchains, users benefit from informed consent. They’re kept in the loop about proposals for improving and expanding the network and ideas for new services. Digital social consensus means they can read debates about the pros and cons associated with each proposal, come to their own conclusions, and cast a vote accordingly. Can you honestly imagine a tech giant doing this?
Privacy issues can be solved by generating abstract network addresses that are not permanently tied to public keys — or through the use of special proxy smart contracts, which are similar to VPN and Tor but on top of the blockchain.
Can blockchain technology solve some of the most pressing privacy and trust issues seen in a generation? I believe so. Once the technology is there and transactions are cheap enough, consumers will be able to make a choice — share their private data or pay a small fee instead.
We need to learn harsh lessons from the past and make the right decision this time around. I remember the early days of email when spam messages were a big issue. A small sender’s fee was considered as a way of circumventing this problem — but in the end, the likes of Gmail came out on top. Now, there’s no monetary cost… we just pay the small price of Google hosting all of our electronic correspondence.
Proof-of-stake blockchains can deliver cheap transactions, decentralized governance that regulates the network’s rules, maximum privacy, and no data collection policies. Each story starts with trust — and in the blockchain world, the trust starts with the network.
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
Vladimir Maslyakov is the CTO of Thekey.space and former CTO of Exante.eu. He developed several distributed financial systems as an IT architect. He has been a blockchain enthusiast since 2012 and is an initial member of the Free TON community.
Blockchain
Crypto taxes, reporting and tax audits in 2021
Published
21 Stunden agoon
Dezember 28, 2020By
This year was like no other. Now that it has limped to a close and we look at the promise of a better 2021, it is time to think about taxes. Although there were many other notable things about 2020, there were some tax points to savor — and some to fear.
Gains and losses
It is hard to look at crypto and 2020 without commenting on gains and losses. Bitcoin (BTC) ballooned in price, making a lot of investors happy. Of course, if you had taken short positions, you are less content. And if you were invested in XRP, the news that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission is unhappy with XRP has caused some price impact in the unwanted direction. When it comes to real and perceived value and buying power, these developments matter. But what about taxes?
Related: SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development
Tax day delay: IRS more lenient?
Tax returns for 2020 are due on April 15, 2021, which is not too far away. Don’t count on a delay like last year. In 2020, the Internal Revenue Service gave us all a 90-day reprieve on return filing and payments, until July 15, 2020 (IRS Notice 2020-17). The world may still be in COVID-19’s grip during the upcoming tax-filing season, but most observers do not expect the same kind of latitude from the IRS when it comes to 2020 tax returns.
The same can be said for the IRS easing up on many of its enforcement activities. Early in 2020, the IRS Commissioner Chuck Rettig announced the “People First Initiative.” Need to pay your taxes in installments? The IRS will help because it has a well-worn process for working out installment payments. Plus, installment payments due between April 1 and July 15, 2020, were suspended, as were tax liens and levies. Even new passport debt certifications when delinquent tax debts exceed $50,000 were on hold, and most new tax audits were on hold, too.
How about now in early 2021? Many IRS employees are still working mostly remotely, but don’t assume that this means you are going to be cut some slack in early or mid-2021 that taxpayers received in 2020. It is highly unlikely. How about arguing with the IRS or in court that you shouldn’t have to pay IRS penalties because you were adversely impacted by the pandemic? You can try it, but the IRS commissioner has already pushed back hard on suggestions that the IRS should have a special pandemic allowance for penalties. Again, don’t count on it.
IRS forms for crypto taxes
Two years ago, the IRS made crypto a kind of everyman’s tax issue by adding a question to everyone’s tax return, and the same thing has happened with 2020 tax returns. It means that starting with 2019 tax returns filed in 2020, the IRS asks you a simple question:
“At any time during 2019, did you receive, sell, send, exchange or otherwise acquire any financial interest in any virtual currency?”
It’s pretty simple: just yes or no; it does not ask for numbers or details, though that would go elsewhere on your tax return.
This addition for 2019 returns is being continued for the 2020 returns you file in 2021. In fact, you should assume it will be a standard feature of tax returns from now on. Because the IRS classifies crypto as property, any sale is going to produce either a gain or loss, and a yes or no box can turn out to be pretty important. In fact, given the IRS’ track record with offshore bank accounts, it could even mean big penalties or even jail.
The Department of Justice’s Tax Division has successfully argued that the mere failure to check a box related to foreign account reporting is willfulness. Willful failures carry higher penalties and an increased threat of criminal investigation. The IRS’ Criminal Investigation Division is even meeting with tax authorities from other countries to share data and enforcement strategies to find potential cryptocurrency tax evasion. This seems reminiscent of the foreign bank account question included on Schedule B.
If a taxpayer answers “No” and then is discovered to have engaged in transactions with cryptocurrency during the year, the fact that they explicitly answered No to this new question (under penalties of perjury) could be used against them. What if you just have a kind of “signature authority” over crypto owned by your non-computer-savvy parents or other relatives? That way, you can help them manage their crypto.
If you sell a parent’s crypto on their behalf, at their request and/or for their benefit, should you answer “Yes” or “No” to the question? Various escrow and trust arrangements — some informal, some not — have blossomed. They can be sensitive, particularly now with the IRS’ much greater access to information. But be careful of who is selling and how such activities are reported.
Should you attach an explanatory statement to the return explaining your relationship to the digital currency? There probably aren’t perfect answers to this question, but what is clear is that answering “No” if the truth is “Yes” is a big mistake. Skipping the boxes entirely might not be as bad, but it isn’t good either if the truth is “Yes.” If the truth is “Yes,” say so, and remember to disclose and report your income, gains, losses, etc. Maybe that’s the point of the question: to be a prominent reminder.
Other tax forms
Don’t think that your tax return is the only tax form you’ll see. Although crypto still escapes some reporting forms, that is much less true today than it once was. How about IRS Forms 1099-MISC, 1099-K, 1099-B or Schedule K-1? There’s even the new Form 1099-NEC for the 2020 tax return season.
All of these forms can and do report crypto payments and transactions. These forms arrive around the end of January for reporting payments or transactions made in the previous calendar tax year. Wages paid to employees in digital currency must be reported on a Form W-2 and are subject to federal income tax withholding and payroll taxes.
Salaries made in digital currencies made to independent contractors are taxable to them, and payers engaged in business must issue Form 1099-NEC. A payment made using a digital currency is subject to Form 1099 reporting just like any other payment made in property. That means if a person in business pays crypto worth $600 or more to an independent contractor for services, a Form 1099 is required.
If you receive any Forms 1099, keep track of them. Each one gets reported to the IRS (and state tax authorities). If you don’t report or otherwise address the reported income on your tax return, you can expect the IRS to follow up.
Transactions trigger taxes
In 2014, the IRS announced that crypto is property. If you have 100 BTC and you sell 10, which 10 did you sell? There is no perfect answer to this question. Most of the tax law considers shares of stock, not cryptocurrency. Specific identification of what you are selling, when you bought it, and for what purchase price is likely to be the cleanest. But that may not be possible. Some people use an averaging convention, where you essentially average your cost across a number of purchases. Consistency and record-keeping are important.
IRS audits and information access
The IRS uses software to track crypto and has also gotten access to records via other sources. Besides, with the forms 1099 and K-1 being issued, many reports are now being dropped in the IRS’ lap. That should be a cause for concern for taxpayers.
The IRS has crypto training now for its auditors and criminal investigation division agents. Should the latter scare you? I think so. The IRS and Department of Justice still bring criminal charges primarily involving crypto use for illegal purposes involving other crimes, such as money laundering or child pornography. But that is no guarantee.
Besides, most criminal tax cases historically come out of regular old civil IRS audits. The IRS auditor sees something it thinks is fishy and invites the criminals to the IRS to take a look. It’s called a referral, and you don’t know if it is happening. In fact, you usually don’t know until it is too late. If you forget to report your crypto gains in past years, then you ought to reconsider this. Don’t wait for the IRS to find you even if you did not get one of those 10,000 IRS crypto warning letters.
Taxpayers may think they will not be caught, but the risks are growing — and the best way to avoid penalties is to disclose and report as accurately as you can. IRS commissioner Chuck Rettig has even moved to increase criminal investigations, too, so be careful out there.
The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Robert W. Wood is a tax lawyer representing clients worldwide from the office of Wood LLP in San Francisco, where he is a managing partner. He is the author of numerous tax books and writes frequently about taxes for Forbes, Tax Notes and other publications.
If History Rhymes, This Indicator Suggests Bitcoin May See a Parabolic Explosion
‘Bullish year ahead’ — Bitcoin primed for Q1 2021 gains, strength index suggests
The new ‘Bank of England’ is ‘no bank at all’
Trending
-
Bitcoin4 Monaten agoBitcoin and cryptocurrency are no hedge for inflation
-
Regulation3 Monaten agoCongress weighs crypto payments and fintech lending in hearing today
-
Bitcoin3 Monaten agoMicroStrategy CEO seems to embrace Bitcoin maximalism
-
Altcoin3 Monaten agoDfinance: Layer 2 Blockchain Network
-
Cryptocurrency4 Monaten agoBank of England is Planing to Adopt Digital Currency
-
Monero9 Monaten agoSophisticated Mining Botnet Identified After 2 Years
-
Market4 Monaten ago
The request could not be satisfied
-
Blockchain3 Monaten agoThe US is number one…in blockchain patents

