Just discovered I never paid taxes on my bitcoin from 2013/2014 after filing my 2017 taxes. Am I screwed/should I be worried ?
As a frame of reference, I'm currently 23 years old so this was done was I was a dumb freshman in college and had no idea about tax law or taxes in general. While filing my taxes for trades I made last year (2017) and consolidating all of my trades via Cointracking.info, I discovered that I had a marginal amount of bitcoin that I had purchased and spent/sold back in 2013/early 2014 on Coinbase. After not trading or doing anything crypto related for the later 3/4ths of 2014 - early 2017, I came back to it in 2017 after my coworker brought it back to my attention. In 2013, I bought 0.13 bitcoin for $130 and sold them off for roughly $144 after losing interest, essentially meaning a capital gain of $14. In 2014, I bought 0.08 bitcoin for ~$54 and ended up using them to buy a belt a a few weeks later for $45. Essentially meaning I had a loss for -$9. I've made a sizable gain off of my investments last year and while I'm still holding them, I'm worried about what might happen if I get audited when I do decide to cash them out and they somehow find out I didn't pay taxes on the gains/losses from those prior years as there are records of them in coinbase. I'm 100% going to be paying taxes on my trades for last year, but do I need to be worried that about the taxes on bitcoin I didn't pay from 2013/2014? Since I believe I missed the amendment deadline, what should I do? I've read online that these might be considered de minimis since the values were so small? Thanks in advance!
Putting $400M of Bitcoin on your company balance sheet
Also posted on my blog as usual. Read it there if you can, there are footnotes and inlined plots. A couple of months ago, MicroStrategy (MSTR) had a spare $400M of cash which it decided to shift to Bitcoin (BTC). Today we'll discuss in excrutiating detail why this is not a good idea. When a company has a pile of spare money it doesn't know what to do with, it'll normally do buybacks or start paying dividends. That gives the money back to the shareholders, and from an economic perspective the money can get better invested in other more promising companies. If you have a huge pile of of cash, you probably should be doing other things than leave it in a bank account to gather dust. However, this statement from MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor exists to make it clear he's buying into BTC for all the wrong reasons:
“This is not a speculation, nor is it a hedge. This was a deliberate corporate strategy to adopt a bitcoin standard.”
Let's unpack it and jump into the economics Bitcoin:
Is Bitcoin money?
No. Or rather BTC doesn't act as money and there's no serious future path for BTC to become a form of money. Let's go back to basics. There are 3 main economic problems money solves: 1. Medium of Exchange. Before money we had to barter, which led to the double coincidence of wants problem. When everyone accepts the same money you can buy something from someone even if they don't like the stuff you own. As a medium of exchange, BTC is not good. There are significant transaction fees and transaction waiting times built-in to BTC and these worsen the more popular BTC get. You can test BTC's usefulness as a medium of exchange for yourself right now: try to order a pizza or to buy a random item with BTC. How many additional hurdles do you have to go through? How many fewer options do you have than if you used a regular currency? How much overhead (time, fees) is there? 2. Unit of Account. A unit of account is what you compare the value of objects against. We denominate BTC in terms of how many USD they're worth, so BTC is a unit of account presently. We can say it's because of lack of adoption, but really it's also because the market value of BTC is so volatile. If I buy a $1000 table today or in 2017, it's roughly a $1000 table. We can't say that a 0.4BTC table was a 0.4BTC table in 2017. We'll expand on this in the next point: 3. Store of Value. When you create economic value, you don't want to be forced to use up the value you created right away. For instance, if I fix your washing machine and you pay me in avocados, I'd be annoyed. I'd have to consume my payment before it becomes brown, squishy and disgusting. Avocado fruit is not good money because avocadoes loses value very fast. On the other hand, well-run currencies like the USD, GBP, CAD, EUR, etc. all lose their value at a low and most importantly fairly predictible rate. Let's look at the chart of the USD against BTC While the dollar loses value at a predictible rate, BTC is all over the place, which is bad. One important use money is to write loan contracts. Loans are great. They let people spend now against their future potential earnings, so they can buy houses or start businesses without first saving up for a decade. Loans are good for the economy. If you want to sign something that says "I owe you this much for that much time" then you need to be able to roughly predict the value of the debt in at the point in time where it's due. Otherwise you'll have a hard time pricing the risk of the loan effectively. This means that you need to charge higher interests. The risk of making a loan in BTC needs to be priced into the interest of a BTC-denominated loan, which means much higher interest rates. High interests on loans are bad, because buying houses and starting businesses are good things.
BTC has a fixed supply, so these problems are built in
Some people think that going back to a standard where our money was denominated by a stock of gold (the Gold Standard) would solve economic problems. This is nonsense. Having control over supply of your currency is a good thing, as long as it's well run. See here Remember that what is desirable is low variance in the value, not the value itself. When there are wild fluctuations in value, it's hard for money to do its job well. Since the 1970s, the USD has been a fiat money with no intrinsic value. This means we control the supply of money. Let's look at a classic poorly drawn econ101 graph The market price for USD is where supply meets demand. The problem with a currency based on an item whose supply is fixed is that the price will necessarily fluctuate in response to changes in demand. Imagine, if you will, that a pandemic strikes and that the demand for currency takes a sharp drop. The US imports less, people don't buy anything anymore, etc. If you can't print money, you get deflation, which is worsens everything. On the other hand, if you can make the money printers go brrrr you can stabilize the price Having your currency be based on a fixed supply isn't just bad because in/deflation is hard to control. It's also a national security risk... The story of the guy who crashed gold prices in North Africa In the 1200s, Mansa Munsa, the emperor of the Mali, was rich and a devout Muslim and wanted everyone to know it. So he embarked on a pilgrimage to make it rain all the way to Mecca. He in fact made it rain so hard he increased the overall supply of gold and unintentionally crashed gold prices in Cairo by 20%, wreaking an economic havoc in North Africa that lasted a decade. This story is fun, the larger point that having your inflation be at the mercy of foreign nations is an undesirable attribute in any currency. The US likes to call some countries currency manipulators, but this problem would be serious under a gold standard.
Currencies are based on trust
Since the USD is based on nothing except the US government's word, how can we trust USD not to be mismanaged? The answer is that you can probably trust the fed until political stooges get put in place. Currently, the US's central bank managing the USD, the Federal Reserve (the Fed for friends & family), has administrative authority. The fed can say "no" to dumb requests from the president. People who have no idea what the fed does like to chant "audit the fed", but the fed is already one of the best audited US federal entities. The transcripts of all their meetings are out in the open. As is their balance sheet, what they plan to do and why. If the US should audit anything it's the Department of Defense which operates without any accounting at all. It's easy to see when a central bank will go rogue: it's when political yes-men are elected to the board. For example, before printing themselves into hyperinflation, the Venezuelan president appointed a sociologist who publicly stated “Inflation does not exist in real life” and instead is a made up capitalist lie. Note what happened mere months after his gaining control over the Venezuelan currency This is a key policy. One paper I really like, Sargent (1984) "The end of 4 big inflations" states:
The essential measures that ended hyperinflation in each of Germany,Austria, Hungary, and Poland were, first, the creation of an independentcentral bank that was legally committed to refuse the government'sdemand or additional unsecured credit and, second, a simultaneousalteration in the fiscal policy regime.
In english: *hyperinflation stops when the central bank can say "no" to the government." The US Fed, like other well good central banks, is run by a bunch of nerds. When it prints money, even as aggressively as it has it does so for good reasons. You can see why they started printing on March 15th as the COVID lockdowns started:
The Federal Reserve is prepared to use its full range of tools to support the flow of credit to households and businesses and thereby promote its maximum employment and price stability goals.
In english: We're going to keep printing and lowering rates until jobs are back and inflation is under control. If we print until the sun is blotted out, we'll print in the shade.
BTC is not gold
Gold is a good asset for doomsday-preppers. If society crashes, gold will still have value. How do we know that? Gold has held value throughout multiple historic catastrophes over thousands of years. It had value before and after the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and Gengis Khan being Gengis Khan. Even if you erased humanity and started over, the new humans would still find gold to be economically valuable. When Europeans d̶i̶s̶c̶o̶v̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ c̶o̶n̶q̶u̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶d̶ went to America, they found gold to be an important item over there too. This is about equivalent to finding humans on Alpha-Centauri and learning that they think gold is a good store of value as well. Some people are puzzled at this: we don't even use gold for much! But it has great properties: First, gold is hard to fake and impossible to manufacture. This makes it good to ascertain payment. Second, gold doesnt react to oxygen, so it doesn't rust or tarnish. So it keeps value over time unlike most other materials. Last, gold is pretty. This might sound frivolous, and you may not like it, but jewelry has actual value to humans. It's no coincidence if you look at a list of the wealthiest families, a large number of them trade in luxury goods. To paraphrase Veblen humans have a profound desire to signal social status, for the same reason peacocks have unwieldy tails. Gold is a great way to achieve that. On the other hand, BTC lacks all these attributes. Its value is largely based on common perception of value. There are a few fundamental drivers of demand:
Means of Exchange: if people seriously start using BTC to buy pizzas, then this creates a real demand for the currency to accomplish the short-term exchanges. As we saw previously, I'm not personally sold on this one and it's currently a negligible fraction of overall demand.
Criminal uses: Probably the largest inbuilt advantage of BTC is that it's anonymous, and so a great way to launder money. Hacker gangs use BTC to demand ransom on cryptolocker type attacks because it's a shared way for an honest company to pay and for the criminals to receive money without going to jail.
Apart from these, it's hard to argue that BTC will retain value throughout some sort of economic catastrophe.
BTC is really risky
One last statement from Michael Saylor I take offense to is this:
“We feel pretty confident that Bitcoin is less risky than holding cash, less risky than holding gold,” MicroStrategy CEO said in an interview
"BTC is less risky than holding cash or gold long term" is nonsense. We saw before that BTC is more volatile on face value, and that as long as the Fed isn't run by spider monkeys stacked in a trench coat, the inflation is likely to be within reasonable bounds. But on top of this, BTC has Abrupt downside risks that normal currencies don't. Let's imagine a few:
A critical software vulnerability is found in the BTC codebase, leading to a possible exploitation.
Xi Jinping decides he's had enough of rich people in China hiding their assets from him and bans BTC.
Some form of bank run takes hold for whatever reason. Because BTC wallets are uninsured, unlike regular banks, this compounds into a Black Tuesday style crash.
Blockchain solutions are fundamentally inefficient
Blockchain was a genius idea. I still marvel at the initial white paper which is a great mix of economics and computer science. That said, blockchain solutions make large tradeoffs in design because they assume almost no trust between parties. This leads to intentionally wasteful designs on a massive scale. The main problem is that all transactions have to be validated by expensive computational operations and double checked by multiple parties. This means waste:
BTC was estimated to use as much electricity as Belgium in 2019. It's hard to trace where the BTC mining comes from, but we can assume it has a huge carbon footprint.
A single transactions is necessarily expensive. A single transaction takes as much electricity as 800,000 VISA transactions, or watching 50,000 hours of youtube videos.
There is a large necessary tax on the transaction, since those checking the transaction extract a few BTC from it to be incentivized to do the work of checking it.
Many design problems can be mitigated by various improvements over BTC, but it remains that a simple database always works better than a blockchain if you can trust the parties to the transaction.
"I have not lived in MA or earned income in that state since 2003, and I worked with a CPA to pay all of my state and federal 2007 taxes in full and on time. I did everything 100% by the book, and yet here I am in 2013, with a negative bank balance and frozen assets." -- This is why we need Bitcoin
Analyzing the Bitcoin Foundation's 2013 tax return
First, a disclaimer: I only have done (simple) accounting for a German non-profit. I have no idea about American tax laws, so I might be wrong on some things. Here's the tax return. It's 33 pages but most of them are blank or uninteresting, so you can get through pretty quickly. The interesting parts: Page 2: The foundation had revenue of $877k but spent $1.4m, for a loss of $590k. Yet, its total net worth at the beginning of the year was $97k, and at the end it was $4.7m. You can probably guess how that happened, but it will be detailed later. Page 8 shows the salaries the foundation pays.
Gavin Andresen, "chief scientist", received $209k of "reportable compensation" + $2,884 of "other compensation", for more than $212k. Apparently the foundation thinks it's better to pay one guy $212k for writing blog posts and giving talks and interviews than paying three guys $70k each to work on the software the whole pyramid scheme currency depends on.
Patrick Murck, general counsel, received $57k + $6k.
Lindsay Holland, assistant director, received $160k + $2,512. I have no idea what she's doing, other than writing press releases, uploading conference videos to YouTube and giving interviews about how she's paid in Bitcoin.
All of them work (or "work") 40 hours a week. Other listed employees, who don't receive compensation, are Jon Matonis (as executive director, 20 hours a week - we'll get back to the "no compensation" part later), and board members, including Peter Vessenes (known for failed businesses and suing MtGox), the convicted felon Charlie Shrem, and my namesake. Page 9: Revenue. They made $358k off membership dues. Page 11: Expenses. Interestingly, they spent $161k on management expenses (not salary). Also, they paid $15,431 in "fines and penalties" - how come we've never heard of that? Page 12 is also interesting. They kept $314k in cash, but $4.5m in "other securities" - probably Bitcoin (up from $107k in the beginning of the year). Seeing how their membership dues are less than the salaries they pay, their conferences lose money and they have little cash reserves, the Bitcoin foundation will likely go belly-up fast when the Bitcoin price stops rising or even goes down. Page 23 provides the confirmation: their holdings of "other securities" are actually Bitcoin. Page 31 is probably the strangest. According to that statement, the foundation paid a "The Hole of Roy, LLC" of a certain Jon Matonis $31k for his role as executive director. Why the payment is not given as salary but as a payment to a LLC which apparently runs a coffee shop in Utah, I have no idea. tl;dr: The Bitcoin Foundation exists so a few people can pay themselves generous salaries and play important. Also, they seem to depend on the Bitcoin price rising seeing they lose money on revenue vs. expenses.
Tax season has arrived (in the US). Maybe you didn't do things "right" in 2013. If you want to in 2014, I've made a small tool that will help you do so. [x-post /r/bitcoin]
Most of you will remember this thread by a tax attorney where he gave lots of helpful advice. The most important for the average consumer, I think, is keeping track of your basis. In order to do so, you need to know how much they were worth when you got them. This is where my tool steps in.
Here you can input any date1 and time and find out what the price of bitcoin was at that time at bitstamp, coinbase, mtgox, and btce (want more added? Let me know). You can even get historic data in a computer-friendly format for your automated tools like this, or like this if you'd rather. For quick manual checks, you can input the date/time/timezone information at the url above. Or if you'd like help automating the process, see the end of this post.
Here the process is much simplier. If you'd only like to see the current value at any of the four exchanges listed above (and for some reason you don't want to pole them directly or look at pretty graphs and such), then simply choose the exchange(s) you'd like and the format you'd like the data in. Please post any questions or comments. Hate is also accepted in the form of private messages, though comments are cool too.  any date. Data collection started January 7th, 2014 07:06:01 UTC. Therefore, I unfortunately cannot help you with prices during all of 2013 and the first week of 2014. EDIT: I've added data from at least 2011 for mtgox, bitstamp, and btce.
Automatically getting data
Current data is easy. Simply put the format and the exchange in the url, like so
Bitcoin, capital gains, and tax amendments from 2013/14
Back in 2013 when I was early in my college career, I bought some bitcoin through Coinbase (~$100 worth) along with a absurdly small amount that I received via some bitcoin faucets (something absurdly low, like 35 cents worth) and ended up buying some items off of Massdrop for roughly ~$110. In early 2014, I bought $55.21 worth off of coinbase, only to sell it when it started falling for a conversion of what ended up being $45.78, resulting in a capital loss of $9.43 These losses/gains were populated from the tool on Bitcoin.tax's website. Since I was a dumb kid at the time and didn't really think things through with regards to how Bitcoin was being regulated tax wise, I didn't file any capital gains/losses for either year. What should be my course of action here? Especially given the fact that I'm accounting for what is essentially $11 in capital gains in 2013 and $9 in losses in 2014? Thanks in advance! I ask because I've recently gotten back into the cryptocurrency scene as of this past April and I've been diligently tracking cost basis and gains/losses which I'll submit for this year's taxes come next year when it's time to file.
Have a small amount of unaccounted capital gains/losses from 2013/2014, what do I need to do tax wise to amend them? (X-Post /r/bitcoin)
I bought a small amount of bitcoin back in 2013 through Coinbase (~$100 worth) along with a absurdly small amount that I received via some bitcoin faucets (something like $0.31 after cashing out) and ended up buying some items off of Massdrop for roughly ~$110. In early 2014, I bought $55.21 worth off of coinbase, only to sell it when it started falling for a conversion of what ended up being $45.78, resulting in a capital loss of $9.43 These losses/gains were populated from Libra Tax's tool. At the time, I believe (although I'm probably wrong) that Bitcoin's place in tax regulations wasn't defined, which is why I never thought about accounting for gains/losses I currently don't have any money involved with Bitcoin, but after reading in the news that Coinbase is involved with a legal case with the IRS that might end up with Coinbase handing over all of their customer transaction histories over, I'm starting to get concerned. What should be my course of action here? Especially given the fact that I'm accounting for what is essentially $11 in capital gains in 2013 and $9 in losses in 2014? Thanks in advance!
[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] US tax: Should I amend BTC gain in 2013 and loss in 2014 (net loss = $4000)
The following post by somalo1 is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed. The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link: np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/80kcej The original post's content was as follows:
Coinbase emailed me that my data will be sent to IRS. I have checked my record in Coinbase. I gained $11000 in 2013. And lost $15000 in 2014. I did not trade afterward. Unfortunately, I did not report these gain and loss in my returns because I was young and stupid. Now it is 2018, which of the following plans is better? A. Wait for IRS to come to me. And show IRS the Coinbase spreadsheet that I actually lose money (lost $4000). So that I don't owe IRS. B. Before IRS found out, I go ahead and amend forms 1040x and Schedule D for 2013 and 2014 to tell IRS that I can claim a net capital loss. It seems that plan B is better because I can deduct my loss in my 2017 tax. And amending a return before getting caught might avoid some fines and penalties? Secondly, can IRS come to me to ask for my capital gain tax in 2013 and evilly pretend that he did not see my loss in 2014? If IRS can do this, I should go with Plan B, right? Lastly, I have searched and did not see discussions on how to amend capital gain/loss in BTC in the past years. Any insights/experience is appreciated. Many thanks. Have a good day.
How far will the IRS go to gain information from every user on coinbase? As we all witnessed back in July 2017 the IRS probed coinbase users with transactions over 20,000$ dating from 2013-2015. What should we expect this tax season? The IRS only knows what coinbase shows them. Do we all /r/Bitcoin
A federal judge in California has ordered bitcoin wallet service Coinbase Inc. to hand over records of all American user transactions from 2013 to 2015 to the IRS, as part of a tax evasion investigation.
Paying taxes on bitcoin With the increase in popularity of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies over recent years, the question about how we should be handling our taxes pops up more frequently. The legal standing of bitcoins and cryptocurrencies are always changing since it is such a new asset; HMRC and governing bodies aren’t quite sure about how to define them. For example, assume you mine 1 bitcoin in 2013. On the day it was mined, the market price of bitcoin was $1,000. You have $1,000 of taxable income in 2013. Going forward, your basis in the bitcoin is $1,000. If you later sell the bitcoin for $1,200, you have a taxable gain of $1,200 - $1,000 = $200. See below for the character of this gain. You mining expenses, such as electricity, would not ... Satoshi Nakamoto’s Whitepaper Introducing Bitcoin; Bitcoin for Business Accepting Bitcoin; Advertise with Bitcoin; Bitcoin for People; Bitcoin Charities List; Fun and Useful; Bitcoin Deals and Discounts; Sign in. Welcome! Log into your account. your username. your password. Forgot your password? Create an account. Sign up. Welcome! Register for an account. your email. your username. A ... For federal taxes, that means you pay a 15% tax on any gains, unless you make a lot of money (more than $479,000 (for married couples) or $425,800 (for individuals)), in which case you pay 20%. I restated my taxes from 2013 using ZenLedger and found $235,000 in overpayment to the IRS. Key Exchanges. We support all major exchanges and are continuously adding more. Our Team is The Secret Sauce! ZenLedger is built by a team of experts with backgrounds in technology, finance, and accounting. Pat Larsen. Co-Founder / CEO . Former Amazon business manager ($100M P&L). M&A investment banking ...
September 13, 2013 -- Jakarta, Indonesia -- There's always room for MadBitcoins... Here are Today's MadBits: CoinDesk BPI reports that Bitcoin prices continue to trend slightly upwards, with a ... Financial expert Terry Savage talks about the stock market, bitcoin and filing your taxes. Bienvenido! Si te gusto el video dale Like y Suscribite! Welcome! If you like please like and subscribe! ganar dinero desafio ganar dinero ganar dinero por i... How much Bitcoin do you actually need to get rich? How much Bitcoin for financial freedom? ABRA - GET $25 IN BTC - (US bank deposits or AMEX)- https://invite... Nothing herein shall be construed to be financial legal or tax advice. The content of this video is solely the opinions of the speaker who is not a licensed financial advisor or registered ...