10 members of Congress ask Nancy Pelosi to help revise the encryption clause in the infrastructure bill – Regulate Bitcoin News

Ten members of the U.S. House of Representatives called on Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi to resolve the issue of the encryption clause in the infrastructure bill. They explained that the current definition of a broker in the bill “will increase uncertainty in the cryptocurrency industry, pick winners and losers…and weaken our country’s competitive advantage with other countries in the digital asset market.”

10 MPs urged House Speaker Pelosi to resolve the encryption clause in the infrastructure bill

Ten members of the U.S. House of Representatives jointly sent a letter to Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi concerning the encryption clause in the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill signed into law by President Joe Biden this week.

The letter was signed by representatives Darren Soto, Ro Khanna, Stacey Plaskett, Eric Swalwell, Tim Ryan, Susan Wild, Macarc Veasey, Jake Auchincloss, Al Lawson and Charlie Crist.

“We are writing to express our concerns about the digital asset provisions of HR 3684 (Section 80603), the Infrastructure Investment and Employment Act, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework (BIF),” the letter dated November 15 begins Say. “As you and our colleagues in both houses strive to’rebuild better’, we must ensure proper taxation and regulation of the cryptocurrency industry,” it said.

The letter emphasized that “those who profit in the cryptocurrency market should pay fair taxes” and urged regulators to “ensure that this innovative technology does not make it easier for criminals to circumvent our laws and regulations.” It continued:

However, as written today, BIF will increase uncertainty in the cryptocurrency industry, pick winners and losers, and hinder the efforts of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to accurately tax cryptocurrencies, while weakening our country’s digital currency Competitive advantages in the field and other countries in the asset market.

The legislator emphasized, “We must conduct reasonable supervision of cryptocurrency, but the legislation should not weaken the industry in doing so.”

The letter went on to explain the definition of “broker” in the Infrastructure Act. “As drafted today, the clause will include miners and other validators, as well as software and hardware wallet manufacturers, who are not engaged in trading activities and are beyond the scope of brokerage services,” it explained. “In addition, many entities included in this extension cannot access the personal customer information that brokers need to report to the IRS.”

The legislator added that “well-designed regulation promotes innovation and American ingenuity” and elaborated:

Therefore, we ask you to consider ways to resolve the BIF digital asset clause in future legislation and ongoing discussions surrounding this clause.

“Your support will help ensure that the BIF will not capture verifiers, wallet providers and others who are unable to comply,” the letter concluded.

Last week, Senators Cynthia Lummis (Cynthia Lummis) and Ron Wyden (Ron Wyden) introduced a bill to modify the definition of brokers in the encryption clause of the Infrastructure Act.In addition, Senator Ted Cruz introduced a bill of his own to fully Repeal the encryption clauseCurrently, the requirements in the Infrastructure Act will not take effect until January 1, 2023.

Tags in this story

Bipartisan bill, Congress, Cynthia Rumis, Darensotto, House of Representatives, Home speaker, Infrastructure Act, Infrastructure package, Infrastructure package, Nancy Pelosi, pack, Senate, senator, Signed into law

Do you think the encryption terms will be revised? Please let us know in the comments section below.

Image Source: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wikimedia Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. It is not a direct offer or invitation to buy or sell, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin Network Does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. The company or the author is not directly or indirectly responsible for any damage or loss caused or claimed to be caused by using or relying on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Source link