• Senators from the United States reach an agreement on a contentious crypto amendment

  • Senators from the United States have finally reached an agreement on the contentious crypto amendment, despite the parliamentary defeat. The industry and authorities are awaiting more information, but it appears that lawmakers have found clarity on who is and isn’t a blockchain broker.

    Senator Pat Toomey stated at a news conference on Monday that there was now a bipartisan consensus on an amendment to infrastructure bill HR 3684 that was endorsed by Cynthia Lummis, Rob Portman, Mark Warner, Kyrsten Sinema, and Ron Wyden.

    According to Toomey, the new proposal would exempt software developers, transaction validators, and node operators, while tax reporting obligations would “only apply to the intermediaries.”

    “We are not proposing anything radical or far-reaching. Our approach clarifies that a broker is someone who conducts transactions in which customers buy, sell, and exchange digital assets.”

    “None of us think this is an entirely flawless solution, but it is far better than the underlying text,” he added. As of August 9, 20:30 UTC, the planned crypto amendment had failed because Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) opposed the compromise amendment.

    The contentious Crypto Amendment was coming to an end in the Senate.

    “I’m pleased to announce that Senators Warner, Toomey, Sinema, Lummis, and I have agreed on an amendment to clarify IRS reporting rules for crypto transactions without stifling innovation or imposing information reporting requirements on stakes, miners, or other non-brokers,” Portman said in a tweet early Monday afternoon Washington time.

    The crypto community reacted quickly when word of Portman’s first crypto tax plan spread.

    The industry was informed in July that Congress intended to increase reporting requirements for cryptocurrency investors.

    Legislators calculated that requiring an IRS form for all digital asset transactions exceeding $10,000 would generate $28 billion in revenue for the US Treasury from the Bitcoin industry.

    Crypto miners and investors were taken aback when they discovered that two senators used the broad and ambiguous term “broker” in their crypto tax proposal. The plan was slipped into a $1 trillion infrastructure bill that Capitol Hill leaders considered a “must-pass.”

    Why Does It Matter?

    As part of the unique software design that has made Bitcoin famous, miners invest power and computer time to secure blockchain transactions.

    The expended resources, known as “proof of work,” allow computers running the open-source Bitcoin software to help maintain the blockchain by ensuring that each miner has something to lose if they record transactions incorrectly.

    Several cryptocurrencies have emerged in the years since Bitcoin’s introduction that use proof of stake (PoS) rather than proof of work (PoW) to speed up transaction flow and reduce network expenses.

    Stakers invest money to buy some of the native tokens of a PoS chain and store them in a one-way function that renders them unrecoverable.

    The only way to recoup the costs is to earn the cryptocurrency’s block reward by assisting in block placement and doing so correctly and in accordance with the blockchain’s regulations.

    Given the mechanics of how these blockchain enterprises operate, as well as US legal and tax standards, classifying them as brokers is illogical, imposing significant and unnecessary costs on these innovative firms.

    What's your reaction?