Crypto is the first question on IRS Form 1040 in 2022 [pdf](irs.gov)
irs.gov
Crypto is the first question on IRS Form 1040 in 2022 [pdf]
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf
159 comments
Maybe a dumb question, but how does or doesn’t this apply if you have played virtually any modern multiplayer video game in which you receive digital assets from loot boxes, or from buying cosmetics?
“Digital asset” seems like a VERY broad term just looking for perjury.
Not that the entire concept of how one files taxes in the US isn’t one big perjury trap already, it just seems less and less subtle about it with each iteration.
“Digital asset” seems like a VERY broad term just looking for perjury.
Not that the entire concept of how one files taxes in the US isn’t one big perjury trap already, it just seems less and less subtle about it with each iteration.
You see how it says "See instructions"? So let's go see what the instructions say: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
> Digital assets are any digital representations of value that are recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology. For example, digital assets include non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and virtual currencies, such as cryptocurrencies and stablecoins.
Obviously, V-Bucks are not a "representation of value" and are not "recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology".
> Digital assets are any digital representations of value that are recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology. For example, digital assets include non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and virtual currencies, such as cryptocurrencies and stablecoins.
Obviously, V-Bucks are not a "representation of value" and are not "recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology".
> Obviously, V-Bucks are not a "representation of value" and are not "recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology".
Neither of those things are at all obvious. They are very much a "representation of value", and for all I know Epic might record them in a cryptographically secured distributed ledger (indeed that seems like a pretty good idea for resilience).
Neither of those things are at all obvious. They are very much a "representation of value", and for all I know Epic might record them in a cryptographically secured distributed ledger (indeed that seems like a pretty good idea for resilience).
Does a git repository, when duplicated, qualify as a "cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology"?
I guess the argument would be that it's not "secured"? It's certainly similar though.
Does a git repo try to be a representation of value. If we're going to be pedantic, it can cut both ways
I don't think the full text is at all unclear. It effects cryptocurrencies. Pretty simple. Loot boxes won't apply. Why? They are not based on technology derived from Bitcoin.
No one is saying that loot boxes and what-have-you aren't problematic. But it is only mildly relevant.
No one is saying that loot boxes and what-have-you aren't problematic. But it is only mildly relevant.
Yes, and I'm supporting that by calling the previous comment needlessly pedantic trying to make something confusing that was not confusing to start.
V-Bucks are not a "representation of value", and if you don't understand that there's an FAQ that goes into even more painful detail: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
> Virtual currency is a digital representation of value, other than a representation of the U.S. dollar or a foreign currency (“real currency”), that functions as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange. Some virtual currencies are convertible, which means that they have an equivalent value in real currency or act as a substitute for real currency. The IRS uses the term “virtual currency” in these FAQs to describe the various types of convertible virtual currency that are used as a medium of exchange, such as digital currency and cryptocurrency.
Video game currencies are (generally, if your game lets you convert the in-game currency to USD you might actually want to report it) NOT:
1. A store/representation of value
2. Convertible to a real currency
3. A medium of exchange
> Virtual currency is a digital representation of value, other than a representation of the U.S. dollar or a foreign currency (“real currency”), that functions as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange. Some virtual currencies are convertible, which means that they have an equivalent value in real currency or act as a substitute for real currency. The IRS uses the term “virtual currency” in these FAQs to describe the various types of convertible virtual currency that are used as a medium of exchange, such as digital currency and cryptocurrency.
Video game currencies are (generally, if your game lets you convert the in-game currency to USD you might actually want to report it) NOT:
1. A store/representation of value
2. Convertible to a real currency
3. A medium of exchange
How is a gift card that lets me buy virtual costumes not a "a store of value and a medium of exchange?" It's literally a medium that is accepted as payment for clothing, dance moves, music etc in the store. Kids are doing chores in exchange for vbucks. They can take that gift card and sell it to a friend for USD.
On that note, where does it say it needs to be convertible back into USD? It's only "unconvertable" once its redeemed. Plus, you can always sell your account, despite it being against TOS.
Obviously the IRS doesnt care one way or another if the value of the vbucks is pegged or inflates, as there would be no capital gains.
On that note, where does it say it needs to be convertible back into USD? It's only "unconvertable" once its redeemed. Plus, you can always sell your account, despite it being against TOS.
Obviously the IRS doesnt care one way or another if the value of the vbucks is pegged or inflates, as there would be no capital gains.
> Virtual currency is a digital representation of value, other than a representation of the U.S. dollar or a foreign currency (“real currency”), that functions as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange.
This implies that things that aren't virtual currencies can still be a "representation of value".
> Video game currencies are (generally, if your game lets you convert the in-game currency to USD you might actually want to report it) NOT:
> 1. A store/representation of value
How are they not? Certainly under the plain face meanings of those words they are. There's a reason we call them "currencies".
This implies that things that aren't virtual currencies can still be a "representation of value".
> Video game currencies are (generally, if your game lets you convert the in-game currency to USD you might actually want to report it) NOT:
> 1. A store/representation of value
How are they not? Certainly under the plain face meanings of those words they are. There's a reason we call them "currencies".
> This implies that things that aren't virtual currencies can still be a "representation of value".
Of course, for example: stocks/bonds.
> How are they not? Certainly under the plain face meanings of those words they are. There's a reason we call them "currencies".
They only have value in the video game world of Fortnite, not the real world. Nobody accepts V-Bucks for payment of goods/services.
Of course, for example: stocks/bonds.
> How are they not? Certainly under the plain face meanings of those words they are. There's a reason we call them "currencies".
They only have value in the video game world of Fortnite, not the real world. Nobody accepts V-Bucks for payment of goods/services.
Something that is only redeemable in one place probably isn't a medium of exchange.
That can be pretty shakey though.
That can be pretty shakey though.
Cryptographically secured? Perhaps. Distributed, in the sense of a blockchain? Highly unlikely.
Interestingly enough, V-Bucks were _specifically_ included in the original wording you quoted [1]. The IRS said it was in error, but a spokesman was fairly evasive [2]:
[1] https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/irs-pulls-wor...
[2] https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/calling-fortn...
> Desmond demurred when asked to confirm that gamers wouldn’t need to mark
> ‘yes’ to the new 1040 question, but said addressing gaming currencies in
> the virtual currency context isn’t a major focus for the agency right now.
>
> “I am not even looking into that. So I’m not saying one way or another.
> I think I’d be getting ahead of myself if I said anything,” Desmond said.
> “Read the website. We posted a correction yesterday and I kind of leave it
> at that.”
[1] https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/irs-pulls-wor...
[2] https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/calling-fortn...
Yes, and as mentioned the IRS decided including V-Bucks/Robux as an example was wrong and posted a correction.
See my other comment here [1]. The IRS removed that part to avoid freaking people out and because they don't actually care about the trivial amount of money being made on game currencies, not because it was an incorrect interpretation of the law. If you make $100K arbitraging V-Bucks you have always needed to pay tax on that, same as any other capital gain.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34169522
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34169522
This has nothing to do with whether or not you pay tax. You pay tax on income even if it is not related to digital currencies.
If you somehow made $100k off V-Bucks then you need to report that income, but you should say "No" to the question about digital currencies.
(Disclaimer: I can't believe I have to say this, but if you are making significant money off of video game currencies you should talk to a professional rather than listening to an anonymous HN poster as your sole tax advice)
If you somehow made $100k off V-Bucks then you need to report that income, but you should say "No" to the question about digital currencies.
(Disclaimer: I can't believe I have to say this, but if you are making significant money off of video game currencies you should talk to a professional rather than listening to an anonymous HN poster as your sole tax advice)
That question in form isn't about currencies, word used is "asset". People here are understanding that fundamentally they need pay taxes from any income, but that "Digital Assets" question seems overly broad and seems cover even non-income situations ("gift or otherwise dispose" for example).
Additionally, I think that your definition of "digital currencies" is little bit strict. IRS isn't going to look definitions, that exclude taxable income. User semiquaver already posted snippet from "Bloomberg Tax", showing potential interest for gaming currencies.
Additionally, I think that your definition of "digital currencies" is little bit strict. IRS isn't going to look definitions, that exclude taxable income. User semiquaver already posted snippet from "Bloomberg Tax", showing potential interest for gaming currencies.
Sure… I read that. The instructions do a great job of explaining a few cases of what is definitely a digital asset, and they explain what you and I both know are obviously included.
The instructions “include” a few obvious things. They don’t “exclude” anything like V-bucks.
So what constitutes a “representation of value”?
I can buy and sell V-Bucks cards, can I not?
It may sound like I’m being a bit obtuse, but there is nothing here that tells me whether my ultra rare skin that I received that I could sell my account for $100 on eBay applies or not.
Many things are obviously a digital asset, but determining what isn’t is far trickier, especially once you move away from perhaps the easiest example of digital currency in Fortnite.
Saying “obviously they’re targeting Bitcoin and the Charlie Bit My Finger NFT” tells me what I already know I should declare. Nothing tells me what I shouldn’t… almost like they can decide that whenever they want during an audit.
The instructions “include” a few obvious things. They don’t “exclude” anything like V-bucks.
So what constitutes a “representation of value”?
I can buy and sell V-Bucks cards, can I not?
It may sound like I’m being a bit obtuse, but there is nothing here that tells me whether my ultra rare skin that I received that I could sell my account for $100 on eBay applies or not.
Many things are obviously a digital asset, but determining what isn’t is far trickier, especially once you move away from perhaps the easiest example of digital currency in Fortnite.
Saying “obviously they’re targeting Bitcoin and the Charlie Bit My Finger NFT” tells me what I already know I should declare. Nothing tells me what I shouldn’t… almost like they can decide that whenever they want during an audit.
I guess most reasonable answer is that you should include anything that would transfer a significant amount of money to the IRS. Starbucks points and FFXIV gold may be theoretically included, but the liquidity for those is so small that the IRS just doesn't care and would never enforce it. They don't want that $100. What they're trying to do here is get a cut of the billions of dollars that come from crypto.
I know that's probably obvious to you, but I don't think there's much more to it. It's just another way to make money.
I know that's probably obvious to you, but I don't think there's much more to it. It's just another way to make money.
> there is nothing here that tells me whether my ultra rare skin that I received
> that I could sell my account for $100 on eBay applies or not.
> Almost everything you own and use for personal or investment purposes is a
> capital asset. Examples include a home, personal-use items like household
> furnishings, and stocks or bonds held as investments. When you sell a capital
> asset, the difference between the adjusted basis in the asset and the amount
> you realized from the sale is a capital gain or a capital loss.
1) As a heads up to people that may not have realized that crypto gains are taxable.
2) To force you to lie if you want to conceal gains, so you can't claim ignorance later.
A $100 gain on a skin that you sell on ebay (less your cost basis, however that might be computed) has _always_ been a taxable event and the failure to declare it is minor tax evasion of the type that literally everyone is guilty of. But the IRS doesn't particularly care about small beer like that. The crypto question is there because for some people there's serious money involved.
(IANAL, but if you have any question at all about this a CPA or tax attorney is well worth the cost)
[1] https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc409
The question is not "do I have to pay capital gains tax?"
The question is "do I need to check that digital currency box?"
The question is "do I need to check that digital currency box?"
I think the more subtle question is about assets you got via a prize. For example if you win a real-world lottery, you have to pay taxes on the winnings. If you win a crypto lottery, you have to pay taxes on the winnings (at the time of winning, not at the time of cash out!). If you "win" a loot-crate lottery, do you have to pay taxes on your winnings? And afact the answer is no, because the loot crate thing isn't an asset, it's treated more like a consumable good. On the other hand, I can see the argument that in fact it's an illiquid asset (like pre-IPO stock) and so you need to pay taxes on the income immediately.
On the off chance you later sell your account, you should pay taxes on that income and it mostly comes out in a wash, unless the value of the lootbox item has changed significantly (because no one plays fortnite anymore)
On the off chance you later sell your account, you should pay taxes on that income and it mostly comes out in a wash, unless the value of the lootbox item has changed significantly (because no one plays fortnite anymore)
The IRS guidelines specifically exclude assets you purchased.
And more generally the guidelines the require you to provide the capital gains or loses, I don't think there's a secondary market for such in game items to be redeemed for dollars or equivalents.
(Now there is something funny here about MTGO and the set redemption mechanic, so you could argue that MTGO cards are digital assets, but MTGA cards aren't).
And more generally the guidelines the require you to provide the capital gains or loses, I don't think there's a secondary market for such in game items to be redeemed for dollars or equivalents.
(Now there is something funny here about MTGO and the set redemption mechanic, so you could argue that MTGO cards are digital assets, but MTGA cards aren't).
There is. Any game that allows trading has a potential to create a secondary market.
> Any game that allows trading has a potential to create a secondary market.
Even games without trading (or the ability to do lootboxes with real money) have the potential to create a secondary market, since you can always sell accounts. My OSRS party hat has some real world market value. I don't need to count it as income on my taxes.
Even games without trading (or the ability to do lootboxes with real money) have the potential to create a secondary market, since you can always sell accounts. My OSRS party hat has some real world market value. I don't need to count it as income on my taxes.
I sold some collectibles on Steam to a guy for euros, pretty sure that the only reason it wasn't a taxable was because it was a one-off and under the reporting minimum.
Right, the income is taxable obviously. But when was it taxable?
When you traded the asset for dollars, or when you received the asset from steam?
When you traded the asset for dollars, or when you received the asset from steam?
I would figure that the conversion to cash would be the taxable event. After all their value is largely indeterminate (and at that point 0) while the collectible is being given out.
IIRC this created problems for Blizzard when they did the real money auction house on Diablo III, and was part of why that was ended.
IIRC this created problems for Blizzard when they did the real money auction house on Diablo III, and was part of why that was ended.
I agree for assets like those, the point is that for many other assets (art, Bitcoin, cash, stock), receipt of the asset for less than market value is also taxable.
But those usually have more developed secondary markets where prices can be widely known (and also nontrivial value). I can at least see the argument.
But those usually have more developed secondary markets where prices can be widely known (and also nontrivial value). I can at least see the argument.
> Obviously, V-Bucks are not a "representation of value"
Second point, sure, but this one? I would disagree vehemently that its obvious.
I've always thoughts "points" from credit cards, gift cards in shops, or virtual currencies in a game world that you can exchange directly for fiat/crypto, represent value. Its just that value is now no longer liquid and locked into some services ecosystem to make it psychologically easier for people to spend money.
In my mind, (normative statement incoming) V-bucks and similar digital practices should not be legal. They should be required to have a tradable interface, and it should be possible to put them on a marketplace.
Second point, sure, but this one? I would disagree vehemently that its obvious.
I've always thoughts "points" from credit cards, gift cards in shops, or virtual currencies in a game world that you can exchange directly for fiat/crypto, represent value. Its just that value is now no longer liquid and locked into some services ecosystem to make it psychologically easier for people to spend money.
In my mind, (normative statement incoming) V-bucks and similar digital practices should not be legal. They should be required to have a tradable interface, and it should be possible to put them on a marketplace.
> I've always thoughts "points" from credit cards, gift cards in shops, or virtual currencies in a game world that you can exchange directly for fiat/crypto, represent value. It's just that value is now no longer liquid and locked into some services ecosystem to make it psychologically easier for people to spend money.
AFAIK redeemed V-Bucks cannot be transferred, and thus cannot be exchanged for real money.
A V-Bucks gift card has financial value, and (if the account is allowed to be transferred) you could say the account then has financial value. IANAA, but I would expect gains from sale of either to be taxable.
AFAIK redeemed V-Bucks cannot be transferred, and thus cannot be exchanged for real money.
A V-Bucks gift card has financial value, and (if the account is allowed to be transferred) you could say the account then has financial value. IANAA, but I would expect gains from sale of either to be taxable.
I don't think a casual gamer would know if that is or isn't the case. I guess the same could be said about casual Robinhood users though; the onus is on the person to know what they're getting into.
I think the op may be asking the more general question of why it is defined like this. What makes a "digital representations of value that are recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger" so fundamentally different from an MMO currency that it becomes taxable? The fact that it's distributed? Why should that matter? What even is the definition of distributed? And isn't an encrypted database cryptographically secured?
These are important questions that I think aren't super well defined currently. Cryptocurrencies are changing so fast that it's hard for the law to keep up. It will eventually.
Seems like a great field of legal scholarship right now!
Seems like a great field of legal scholarship right now!
If you ask a congress critter, I'm sure they'd love to be able to tax v-bucks too if they were to be told of them. It at least has the ability to become things of lore like requiring a stamp-like fee for emails
MMOs have to go to extensive lengths to prevent and punish trading in game currency in the real world because it would burden them with a long list of regulations. Your WoW gold or whatever it is is not money because it only works in game and despite black markets for it, it is not allowed to be used in free exchange with other currencies.
Honestly everybody actually knows the difference, if you don’t hire a lawyer and go to court and add to caselaw to be sure.
Honestly everybody actually knows the difference, if you don’t hire a lawyer and go to court and add to caselaw to be sure.
Why not? A database is similar technology. The similarity is a matter of degree.
I would say that dollars recorded electronically are also a digital asset. The vast majority of the population should answer YES rather than risking perjury.
I would say that dollars recorded electronically are also a digital asset. The vast majority of the population should answer YES rather than risking perjury.
Quite a bit of the tax code is vague like this. Until they decide to go after them and case law sets a precedent.
I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Just assume all your transactions are taxable, as usual. Unless there is an exemption.
What I am worried about is that the government can take a two-step approach to ban ANY inconvenient mechanism from being used by the public:
1) Force the developers to declare their mechanism as an X (money transmitter, or exchange, or communication platform)
2) Then regulate X by forcing all developers of X to require their users to provide Y.
So this way they can for example ban encryption. In Monaco and Dubai, it is technically illegal to use end to end encrypted messengers except the ones with backdoors (eg BOTIM).
If you think you can stay in some offshore jurisdiction, just remember that FATCA is global and pressures all countries to comply eventually.
The only reason the public has any freedoms at all is because the makers of browsers and operating systems have not been pressured yet into banning every website that doesn’t register with the government. However, with HTTP3 we are going to see that, encryption certificates will be treated just as “official BIOS bootloaders” of OSes 10 years ago. See “the war on general purpose computing” by Cory Doctorow. It’s coming.
Update: it’s already here in China: https://www.zdnet.com/article/china-is-now-blocking-all-encr...
What I am worried about is that the government can take a two-step approach to ban ANY inconvenient mechanism from being used by the public:
1) Force the developers to declare their mechanism as an X (money transmitter, or exchange, or communication platform)
2) Then regulate X by forcing all developers of X to require their users to provide Y.
So this way they can for example ban encryption. In Monaco and Dubai, it is technically illegal to use end to end encrypted messengers except the ones with backdoors (eg BOTIM).
If you think you can stay in some offshore jurisdiction, just remember that FATCA is global and pressures all countries to comply eventually.
The only reason the public has any freedoms at all is because the makers of browsers and operating systems have not been pressured yet into banning every website that doesn’t register with the government. However, with HTTP3 we are going to see that, encryption certificates will be treated just as “official BIOS bootloaders” of OSes 10 years ago. See “the war on general purpose computing” by Cory Doctorow. It’s coming.
Update: it’s already here in China: https://www.zdnet.com/article/china-is-now-blocking-all-encr...
Why is the two step approach more of a concern than the one step approach where the government directly regulates the thing in question?
Because they first have to form a whitelist (licensing scheme) before they can put pressure. If no drone manufacturers need to register, for instance, then they can produce drones that can fly anywhere. But once they get all of them to register, then whatever unregistered drone manufacturers still make drones can be excluded from the wider ecosystem.
Thus, for example, they can't just tell browser makers to "ban websites we don't like". But if they make everyone register an https certificate, and every browser maker to register their browser, and every operating system maker to register their operating system, and every computer manufacturer to register their computer, then they can make it hard for a computer manufacturer to obtain parts for their computer, or a license to install the operating system, or vice versa, by leaning on the other registered entities.
Thus, for example, they can't just tell browser makers to "ban websites we don't like". But if they make everyone register an https certificate, and every browser maker to register their browser, and every operating system maker to register their operating system, and every computer manufacturer to register their computer, then they can make it hard for a computer manufacturer to obtain parts for their computer, or a license to install the operating system, or vice versa, by leaning on the other registered entities.
Ugh, stop giving legal advice on the internet.
My friend, you do know that everyone else can click on _your_ profile and see your previous two comments are ""giving legal advice on the internet""?
My last two comments are a statement of black letter income tax law quoting its source in the U.S.C. (not giving them advice about anything really) and some 4th amendment snark followed by advice to someone to talk to a lawyer about their interpretation of constitutional law.
Do you not see how that is different from telling someone without qualification that something is legal/illegal?
Do you not see how that is different from telling someone without qualification that something is legal/illegal?
A bit of an unkind and patronising response
I disagree, citing obvious sources for information should be a reminder that you can often actually find whatever information you’re looking for if you just to search for it.
That may be so but the degree of authority is inappropriate, as is the assumption that OP had not read that document, which leaves a lot of ambiguity.
The problem with tax rules is that they are open to interpretation and if the taxman interprets them differently then you have a real problem. The better answer would have been to ask a tax lawyer if the op is genuinely concerned about this (which they may well be, for instance because they have a substantial amount of value stored that way).
The problem with tax rules is that they are open to interpretation and if the taxman interprets them differently then you have a real problem. The better answer would have been to ask a tax lawyer if the op is genuinely concerned about this (which they may well be, for instance because they have a substantial amount of value stored that way).
The irs provides a non-exhaustive definition of digital asset which I think seems to provide the needed narrowing of definition.
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
A non-exhaustive list does nothing to narrow a definition.
A bank account representing dollars in the account is by definition storing your digital assets. Did you receive dollars in an electronic account?
A bank account representing dollars in the account is by definition storing your digital assets. Did you receive dollars in an electronic account?
Per the link:
> Digital assets are not real currency (also known as “fiat”) because they are not the coin and paper money of the United States or a foreign country and are not digitally issued by a government’s central bank.
> Digital assets are not real currency (also known as “fiat”) because they are not the coin and paper money of the United States or a foreign country and are not digitally issued by a government’s central bank.
Correct. Your local bank’s balance is none of those, either. Neither is your Venmo balance or your VISA / Mastercard balance from the issuing bank.
I don't know why you think that. The Fed's term for commercial balances is "Commercial Bank Money," and it is absolutely issued by the central bank. The fact that it's tracked on digital ledgers rather than paper ledgers and cotton bills does not change that.
I think that because it’s actually true.
Most assets in circulation that we use as money are not fiat!
The central bank issues money to banks. The treasury may mint coins or print paper money (the greenback). Those are legal tender (which btw the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Legal Tender Act as unconstitutional, but President Grant stuffed the court with two justices and they reversed this ruling in their very next session).
If your federal government issues a CBDC or mails checks to you drawn on the treasury, that is fiat.
If your local bank employe an underwriter to review your business and approve a LOAN to you, they just create a balance within the bank. The existence of the FDIC and Federal Reserve does NOT make this money fiat.
Anyway, your credit card balance is NOT legal tender. No one has to accept it as payment of a debt. The only reason it is accepted is that merchants are willing to contract with Mastercard and your issuing bank. But they don’t have to. Many merchants decline the payments.
Same with Venmo and all those other systems. Sorry but it’s NOT fiat.
You may deposit fiat into a bank, and it will give you a balance. Their terms probably state that they can lend out your money and not have an obligation convert it all back to actual fiat currency (eg cash and coins). The bank may use the Automated Clearing House system (ACH) run by the Federal Reserve to send money to, say, Venmo or PayPal or another bank. Those companies then give you a balance. But that isn’t fiat, either.
Bitcoin is just a decentralized PayPal. And the internal credits are a floating exchange rate instead of maintaining a peg. You buy some amount of a digital asset — whether denominated in dollars or bitcoins — and it is stored on a ledger. That’s all. Whether the ledger is inside PayPal or on a public blockchain is irrelevant.
If you received a payment inside Venmo, you received some amount of a digital asset. You would owe income taxes same as if you received an in-kind payment in spaghetti!
Most assets in circulation that we use as money are not fiat!
The central bank issues money to banks. The treasury may mint coins or print paper money (the greenback). Those are legal tender (which btw the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Legal Tender Act as unconstitutional, but President Grant stuffed the court with two justices and they reversed this ruling in their very next session).
If your federal government issues a CBDC or mails checks to you drawn on the treasury, that is fiat.
If your local bank employe an underwriter to review your business and approve a LOAN to you, they just create a balance within the bank. The existence of the FDIC and Federal Reserve does NOT make this money fiat.
Anyway, your credit card balance is NOT legal tender. No one has to accept it as payment of a debt. The only reason it is accepted is that merchants are willing to contract with Mastercard and your issuing bank. But they don’t have to. Many merchants decline the payments.
Same with Venmo and all those other systems. Sorry but it’s NOT fiat.
You may deposit fiat into a bank, and it will give you a balance. Their terms probably state that they can lend out your money and not have an obligation convert it all back to actual fiat currency (eg cash and coins). The bank may use the Automated Clearing House system (ACH) run by the Federal Reserve to send money to, say, Venmo or PayPal or another bank. Those companies then give you a balance. But that isn’t fiat, either.
Bitcoin is just a decentralized PayPal. And the internal credits are a floating exchange rate instead of maintaining a peg. You buy some amount of a digital asset — whether denominated in dollars or bitcoins — and it is stored on a ledger. That’s all. Whether the ledger is inside PayPal or on a public blockchain is irrelevant.
If you received a payment inside Venmo, you received some amount of a digital asset. You would owe income taxes same as if you received an in-kind payment in spaghetti!
Whether or not it's legal tender, or fiat, or "greenbacks" has nothing to do with whether it's currency for the purpose of taxation, which is the sole object of interest in this conversation.
The IRS considers the funds you have on deposit with a bank (in the form of Commercial Bank Money) to be currency for the purpose of taxation. They also consider the funds your have on "deposit" (in the form of Nonbank Money) with non-bank financial services to be currency for the purpose of taxation.
Finally, they consider your digital assets, defined above, to be property for the purpose of taxation.
Edit: to be maximally precise, digital assets are considered non-currency property.
The IRS considers the funds you have on deposit with a bank (in the form of Commercial Bank Money) to be currency for the purpose of taxation. They also consider the funds your have on "deposit" (in the form of Nonbank Money) with non-bank financial services to be currency for the purpose of taxation.
Finally, they consider your digital assets, defined above, to be property for the purpose of taxation.
Edit: to be maximally precise, digital assets are considered non-currency property.
Whether it's currency or non-currency property, the question is whether you received digital assets.
If you received a digital balance in a bank account, you've received digital assets. They are not issued by a central bank nor are they fiat. So by your definition you gave, they are in fact digital assets, and you have to check the checkmark! That's my point.
You can try to argue that digital bank balances in a database are not digital assets, but I wouldn't risk it.
If you received a digital balance in a bank account, you've received digital assets. They are not issued by a central bank nor are they fiat. So by your definition you gave, they are in fact digital assets, and you have to check the checkmark! That's my point.
You can try to argue that digital bank balances in a database are not digital assets, but I wouldn't risk it.
A non-exhaustive list can exclude things (the list from the IRS excludes fiat currency) and so obviously can narrow a definition.
If a non-exhaustive list leaves something off, that doesn't automatically mean it isn't reflected in the more general category. By definition, it's not exhaustive, so if you get the pattern wrong, too bad. Or maybe there is no "right" answer and they make it up as they go along.
Here is a non-exhaustive list of Tasty Foods: Fruits, Vegetables, Meat. If you had a Tasty Food, you have to report it. You had fish. Should you report it?
Here is a non-exhaustive list of Tasty Foods: Fruits, Vegetables, Meat. If you had a Tasty Food, you have to report it. You had fish. Should you report it?
Digital assets purchased in video games typically have a value of $0 as nearly all major video games implement a one-way “currency to item” pipeline and strictly prohibit “item to currency” in return (specifically, for example: Hearthstone, Diablo, Eve Online, FarmVille, and so on).
One could argue that exchanging in-game currency for game time is a taxable benefit of, say, $15/mo to the player; which then falls below the US 1099 reporting threshold of $600/year due to its irrelevance for taxation purposes.
If you can construct a case that an item purchased in a game can then be sold for value, and that you can then receive benefits of $600 USD or more within a single calendar year in return for your purchased item, then you have identified a possible taxation loophole that should be corrected; please do share!
(I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice.)
One could argue that exchanging in-game currency for game time is a taxable benefit of, say, $15/mo to the player; which then falls below the US 1099 reporting threshold of $600/year due to its irrelevance for taxation purposes.
If you can construct a case that an item purchased in a game can then be sold for value, and that you can then receive benefits of $600 USD or more within a single calendar year in return for your purchased item, then you have identified a possible taxation loophole that should be corrected; please do share!
(I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice.)
They appear to specifically have guidance indicating that this refers to cryptocurrency and NFTs. However, I would also point out, stuff you buy in a video game is never actually an asset: It's just an entry in that company's database that your account has an item. You never really control it in the way you theoretically control a crypto asset.
If you can resell it, and I know that’s an option in some games (or was), what’s the practical difference?
Fair point, but in most games you cannot sell out stuff you acquire back to real money.
As long as you can transfer it to someone, you can sell it. Like on localbitcoins site, people met up to make the trade.
Game terms of service will explicitly ban selling in game items specifically to avoid appearing to be trading in things which act like money.
And I agree those are not assets as they have no practical value.
You don’t own it, it’s not an asset, it’s a license to use something for an undetermined time.
You almost always can’t sell it officially.
You almost always can’t sell it officially.
That argument doesn't make much sense. You don't control your bank balance, which are just IOUs, either. It's just an entry in some centralized company's database.
That’s not how bank account balances work. My balance is an entry in a database, sure, but it’s not “just” an entry.
If a video game company decides my points are now worth half as much, or that they’ve expired, that’s their prerogative — and if I don’t like it that’s too bad. If a bank tried to do that, they’d get hit with a ton of lawsuits that they’d definitely lose.
If a video game company decides my points are now worth half as much, or that they’ve expired, that’s their prerogative — and if I don’t like it that’s too bad. If a bank tried to do that, they’d get hit with a ton of lawsuits that they’d definitely lose.
That's only true in good economic times and non-war periods and places. What you're saying is true in America right now, but not in many other countries [0], and it's also not true across time. Even in America, eventually a time will come where you can't get your money out of a bank account exactly because it's just an entry in a centralized database and because it will be in the best interest of people in power to prevent you from doing so. This, and similar restrictions, have happened several times throughout history.
The point I'm trying to make is that it's not fundamentally as different from an in-game currency as you think it is. The cycles just happen much less frequently over longer periods of time (companies go bankrupt and change faster than wars happens) so you may never see it in your lifetime if you're lucky.
[0] https://www.timesofisrael.com/lebanese-cafe-owner-hailed-for...
The point I'm trying to make is that it's not fundamentally as different from an in-game currency as you think it is. The cycles just happen much less frequently over longer periods of time (companies go bankrupt and change faster than wars happens) so you may never see it in your lifetime if you're lucky.
[0] https://www.timesofisrael.com/lebanese-cafe-owner-hailed-for...
I don't know why people think the IRS is looking to establish perjury cases against taxpayers. That's really not what they're doing (or how perjury is qualified statutorily for the tax code[1]): they'd much rather get your back taxes from you than actually go through a trial process.
In other words: the standard for perjury on your tax forms is very high, much higher than the unintentional mistakes that the IRS is aware millions of people make each year.
[1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7206
In other words: the standard for perjury on your tax forms is very high, much higher than the unintentional mistakes that the IRS is aware millions of people make each year.
[1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7206
Looks like this isn't a new requirement, just a UX change given the increasing popularity of Crypto -- using Form 8949 for Crypto transactions has been the guidance since 2014 ( Notice 2014-21, 2014-16 I.R.B. 938 ).
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
Coinbase directs its US users to CoinTracker, which you can then import into (say) TurboTax.
https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
Coinbase directs its US users to CoinTracker, which you can then import into (say) TurboTax.
Sure, why not, e.g. buy ISK in EVE for price 1X, then sell them same year for price 1.1X. Declare profits and pay taxes. It's just that the scope of token insanity is so much larger than any MMO can imagine, and price swings are so much bigger. MMO currencies and trades going on there are not even a rounding error, they probably won't even fit in the float variable precision when calculating money in the digital assets in the world.
[deleted]
[deleted]
ianaa but I think the key concept is "easily convertible to real money".
So Starbucks stars, United miles, etc don't count.
So Starbucks stars, United miles, etc don't count.
So, "liquid"? But NFTs aren't liquid, and they count...
Not “liquid” just, free to exchange for money. If you made a bunch of money buying and selling NFTs but the ones you have left nobody wants to buy, you still have to pay your taxes.
Can you trade the assets from those loot boxes for real dollars? Then report it.
Perjury requires intent.
[deleted]
The real info is in the instructions:
https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
> For example, check “Yes” if at any time during 2022 you:
* Received digital assets as payment for property or services provided;
* Received digital assets as a result of a reward or award;
* Received new digital assets as a result of mining, staking, and similar activities;
* Received digital assets as a result of a hard fork;
* Disposed of digital assets in exchange for property or services;
* Disposed of a digital asset in exchange or trade for another digital asset;
* Sold a digital asset;
* Transferred digital assets for free (without receiving any consideration) as a bona fide gift; or
* Otherwise disposed of any other financial interest in a digital asset.
And points you to fill out Form 8949, Sales and other Dispositions of Capital Assets.
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-8949
https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
> For example, check “Yes” if at any time during 2022 you:
* Received digital assets as payment for property or services provided;
* Received digital assets as a result of a reward or award;
* Received new digital assets as a result of mining, staking, and similar activities;
* Received digital assets as a result of a hard fork;
* Disposed of digital assets in exchange for property or services;
* Disposed of a digital asset in exchange or trade for another digital asset;
* Sold a digital asset;
* Transferred digital assets for free (without receiving any consideration) as a bona fide gift; or
* Otherwise disposed of any other financial interest in a digital asset.
And points you to fill out Form 8949, Sales and other Dispositions of Capital Assets.
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-8949
>Received digital assets as a result of a reward or award;
>Sold a digital asset;
It seems to me that the "Steam Achievement" cards that you can sell/give away that you get for playing a game follows this line of thinking.
My steam wallet now has $0.23 of value from the sale of these "digital assets".
It seems to me that the "Steam Achievement" cards that you can sell/give away that you get for playing a game follows this line of thinking.
My steam wallet now has $0.23 of value from the sale of these "digital assets".
[deleted]
> By October 13, 2011, agencies must:
> Use plain language in any document that: is necessary for obtaining any federal government benefit or service or filing taxes
Oh, well.
> Use plain language in any document that: is necessary for obtaining any federal government benefit or service or filing taxes
Oh, well.
I am once again asking you to read Lysander Spooner
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/spooner-no-treason-no-vi-t...
-3
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/spooner-no-treason-no-vi-t...
-3
For those who don't see the cryptocurrency question, it's section "Digital Assets": "At any time during 2022, did you: (a) receive (as a reward, award, or payment for property or services); or (b) sell, exchange, gift, or otherwise dispose of a digital asset (or a financial interest in a digital asset)? (See instructions.)"
The IRS describes the term "digital assets" here: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
The IRS describes the term "digital assets" here: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
In previous years, the question was worded "virtual currency". This year, it is worded as "digital asset". Looks like the question was broadened to include non-coin assets like NFTs.
Am I going to have to report my Trump superhero trading cards?
If you made a profit selling them, yes. If you had a loss and don’t care to realize it, no.
There is a service out there willing to buy NFTs for almost nothing to help folks realize losses if desired. A quick internet search should find it.
Edit: found it https://twitter.com/coinledger/status/1599787141844054016
There is a service out there willing to buy NFTs for almost nothing to help folks realize losses if desired. A quick internet search should find it.
Edit: found it https://twitter.com/coinledger/status/1599787141844054016
You're required to check the box if you received a digital asset, even if you didn't sell it.
Here's the IRS definition of "digital assets":
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
"Digital assets are broadly defined as any digital representation of value which is recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology as specified by the Secretary.
"Digital assets include (but are not limited to):
- Convertible virtual currency and cryptocurrency
- Stablecoins
- Non-fungible tokens (NFTs)"
I would have thought that "digital assets" existed before there was any "cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology."
For example, a record label might own the original recordings of a 1995 song as a set of files. Legally, they own the copyright in the recording, but the copyright alone isn't enough because the copyright loses its market value if the associated files get destroyed. In other words, the files are 1) digital and 2) assets, because if someone bought the recording, they would reasonably expect to get both the copyright and the files.
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
"Digital assets are broadly defined as any digital representation of value which is recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology as specified by the Secretary.
"Digital assets include (but are not limited to):
- Convertible virtual currency and cryptocurrency
- Stablecoins
- Non-fungible tokens (NFTs)"
I would have thought that "digital assets" existed before there was any "cryptographically secured distributed ledger or any similar technology."
For example, a record label might own the original recordings of a 1995 song as a set of files. Legally, they own the copyright in the recording, but the copyright alone isn't enough because the copyright loses its market value if the associated files get destroyed. In other words, the files are 1) digital and 2) assets, because if someone bought the recording, they would reasonably expect to get both the copyright and the files.
They're clearly using it as a term of art. All parties involved more than capable of understanding that "Digital assets" as defined (explicitly!) by the IRS do not necessarily encompass everything that might be plausibly described by the noun-adjective pair "digital asset."
Agreed. It's no wonder there's a whole industry built around helping people understand the semantics of the tax forms.
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” -Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” -Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
You're not wrong, but I really don't think the blame for this particular term of art can be hoisted on the IRS. As far as government definitions go, this one isn't too bad for what they have to work with[1].
[1]: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
[1]: https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi#en_US_2022_publink1...
If you purchased crypto via Robinhood but not used a self-custody wallet, it is questionable as to whether you own a digital asset. You actually own some sort of financial instrument issued by Robinhood and no control over any underlying asset.
also i wonder if dollars in a bank account are 'any digital representation of value which is recorded on … any similar technology'
You pay taxes for your interest payments from the bank on your bank account.
In this case it looks like crypto is being taxed as a security, which makes sense. Just because it's ON THE INTERNET doesn't mean the government doesn't get its cut.
In this case it looks like crypto is being taxed as a security, which makes sense. Just because it's ON THE INTERNET doesn't mean the government doesn't get its cut.
not paying taxes on interest payments doesn't seem to be part of the definition
Did you receive the security? That's income, you owe the IRS money. Did you sell the security and realize a profit? That's also income, you owe the IRS money.
At a macro level it's not hard to understand unless you want to be a special snowflake and pretend this thing you're doing is NEW and DIFFERENT and somehow not income, in which case maybe the IRS doesn't get its cut.
Chances are you're just deluding yourself or are relying on the IRS not coming after you.
At a macro level it's not hard to understand unless you want to be a special snowflake and pretend this thing you're doing is NEW and DIFFERENT and somehow not income, in which case maybe the IRS doesn't get its cut.
Chances are you're just deluding yourself or are relying on the IRS not coming after you.
you may have intended to respond to someone else, since this doesn't seem to pertain to my assertion that this definition of 'digital assets' seems to include dollars in a bank account
Does the NFT avatar reddit gave me against my will count?
Against your will? You had to manually claim it, choose among 3 or 4 different "collections" too.
Your will has nothing to do with it.
If you received a digital asset you must check the box.
If you received a digital asset you must check the box.
How would you have "received" it if you didn't manually claim it?
There are currently 1000s of free NFTs (almost all completely valueless) I could claim on random projects, if I don't manually claim them they are not a digital asset I have received. GP had to claim their reddit NFT to receive and then "own" it in their reddit vault (which is a non-custodial wallet too actually, stored on Arbitrum's blockchain).
There are currently 1000s of free NFTs (almost all completely valueless) I could claim on random projects, if I don't manually claim them they are not a digital asset I have received. GP had to claim their reddit NFT to receive and then "own" it in their reddit vault (which is a non-custodial wallet too actually, stored on Arbitrum's blockchain).
Boy am I glad I did not bother to redeem the NFT that came with my toddler's Hot Wheels race track!
Really hoping this didn’t actually happen…
yes
airdrops have evolved based on the tax regime, but you did claim this one so I would make that a yes
airdrops have evolved based on the tax regime, but you did claim this one so I would make that a yes
That feels right, I guess I just check yes, and as long as I never sell it, it's not really an issue.
I think it's quite likely that the government will come after the ability to defer capital gains. Avoiding taxable events is a heavily exploited 'loophole' by the very rich. In an effort to harmonize capital gains and income there will be some sort of mark-to-market wealth tax / property tax. So you may end up having to pay property tax on your NFT if you want to keep it. At least if it's valuable you can sell it to cover the tax incurred. The government doesn't have to value the property at sale price (see Chicago housing) so you could, however unlikely, end up owing more on taxes than you could sell it for - if this were to happen the government considers that more your problem than their problem.
I think that is unlikely because its not really about the state’s revenues, its about money circulating in the economy
they simply penalize people that try to hoard dollars and not circulate, via tax and inflation
so it doesnt matter to the government that rich people borrow against appreciated assets, if they spend the borrowing then vendors sell stuff and also pay tax on that. if they pay interest the bank gets that, usually. if they donate the loan proceeds or the assets thats fine too. if they invest it thats fine as well.
obviously almost no individual politician perceives it this way, and a law may be passed through their house, but the aggregate outcome is that risk and money circulating is incentivized by not being taxed, accumulation of just cash to hoard is disincentivized by heavy taxes.
they simply penalize people that try to hoard dollars and not circulate, via tax and inflation
so it doesnt matter to the government that rich people borrow against appreciated assets, if they spend the borrowing then vendors sell stuff and also pay tax on that. if they pay interest the bank gets that, usually. if they donate the loan proceeds or the assets thats fine too. if they invest it thats fine as well.
obviously almost no individual politician perceives it this way, and a law may be passed through their house, but the aggregate outcome is that risk and money circulating is incentivized by not being taxed, accumulation of just cash to hoard is disincentivized by heavy taxes.
My prediction is that politics will change out of necessity due to insufficient tax revenues and an increased wealth inequality will popularize tax harmonization. Rich people having more money will be of little comfort to the masses of working poor.
tax the rich always becomes raise income taxes on the upper middle class
which is palatable because the masses of working poor only relate to taxes on transactions categorized as income instead of everything else that rich people actually use
which is palatable because the masses of working poor only relate to taxes on transactions categorized as income instead of everything else that rich people actually use
Don’t disagree, it’ll probably backfire, but political expedience means they’ll still try it. Plus I include the middle class in the working poor, once the middle class are no longer able to sufficiently save for retirement I consider them poor. Most middle class don’t know how poor they are yet and when they find out they’re going to be mad.
[deleted]
Interestingly, this does not seem to apply to you if you just HODL and never sell. Also, it's not exactly clear if "fake bitcoin" that some companies offer - where you buy "something" that tracks, say, BTC but there's no real BTC behind it, you can not take custody of any BTC and the only thing you can do is to exchange it back for dollars - qualify as "digital assets". They are certainly not recorded on chain, for example.
Focus on the little fish while the big fish continue to not pay
ITT: Blatant tax evasion!
This has been on for a few years, but is better worded now. I remember reporting “bitcoin” gains in 2012 when there was no guidance from the IRS so I was sure I was going to get audited. I did not.
I can see the anti-crypto types in glee over the tedium of having to record every Reddit community points transaction a user receives.
"The oppressor no longer uses his own force directly upon his victim. No, our conscience has become too sensitive for that. There is still the tyrant and his victim, but between them is an intermediary which is The State—the Law itself. What could be better designed to silence our scruples and—more important—to overcome all resistance? Thus do all of us, by various claims and under one pretext or another, appeal to The State" - Frédéric Bastiat
"The oppressor no longer uses his own force directly upon his victim. No, our conscience has become too sensitive for that. There is still the tyrant and his victim, but between them is an intermediary which is The State—the Law itself. What could be better designed to silence our scruples and—more important—to overcome all resistance? Thus do all of us, by various claims and under one pretext or another, appeal to The State" - Frédéric Bastiat
Just send out 1099s already!
Nice them them to remind all the crypto people to deduct their 2022 losses!
Losses on META bigger YoY than BTC and ETH
Zuckerberg said in his presentation there would be a crypto/NFT element to his metaverse.
In AU you can only deduct capital losses against capital gains. What is the situation in the US?
Capital losses can exceed capital gains up to $3k per year with some ability to carry over losses into subsequent years. There are also some particulars about the order of deducting long/short term losses against long/short term gains IIRC.
Capital losses directly offset capital gains, but if you have excess losses, you can deduct a relatively small amount of them from general income: a few thousand dollars. And if you have more than that limit you can carry them over to later tax years.
Same
cryotopippto(6)
Are there any laws in this space that would give the IRS authority to do anything about crypto earnings/losses?
Well, the definition of income in the USA includes [1]:
> income means all income from whatever source derived
Then it only proceeds to except certain things. So the better question, from the perspective of tax laws are: "are there any laws in this space that takes away the IRS's very clear authority to treat crypto earnings/losses like any other income"
[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/61
> income means all income from whatever source derived
Then it only proceeds to except certain things. So the better question, from the perspective of tax laws are: "are there any laws in this space that takes away the IRS's very clear authority to treat crypto earnings/losses like any other income"
[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/61
Existing tax code already covered crypto to a large extent.
If you buy a boat for $100k and sell it for $150k, you've always had to pay taxes on the difference.
Crypto works the same way.
If you buy a boat for $100k and sell it for $150k, you've always had to pay taxes on the difference.
Crypto works the same way.
Unlike with digital assets, you don't have to tell the IRS you acquired a boat unless you sell it and owe tax.
[deleted]
If you bought or sold a thing for profit, or were paid in a thing, or won a thing in a contest, they can tax you on it. Even if it's illegal.
You owe the IRS taxes for everything, including profits from crime.
yes, always were
income is income
capital gains is capital gains
dividends are dividends
the asset type that any of this was received in was never a factor, the nature of the transaction was the only factor
its nice that the crypto space is maturing on this matter now
income is income
capital gains is capital gains
dividends are dividends
the asset type that any of this was received in was never a factor, the nature of the transaction was the only factor
its nice that the crypto space is maturing on this matter now
For the purposes of taxation, cryptocurrencies are considered securities. You have to pay capital gains taxes on them (or, as appropriate, deduct your losses).
cryptocurrencies are considered property not securities. The IRS has been very clear on this for nearly 10 years.
I think you are conflating capital gains with securities, but there are in fact many asset classes besides securities.
I think you are conflating capital gains with securities, but there are in fact many asset classes besides securities.
Sorry, you're right[1]. I was confusing the IRS with the SEC.
[1]: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
[1]: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
Are actual traditional currency holdings still taxed in the US on unrealized gains and losses each year? The rules in question would seem to clarify that crytos are not mere currencies.
digital assets are not taxed on unrealized gains and losses, unless by realize you wish that meant “to dollars in my bank account”, asset to asset trades are taxed on their notional dollar amounts
and nobody is conflating the currency aspect of crypto, that misnomer is so last decade. if someone starts a conversation with that word, I’m not going to correct them until a reply like yours tries to read too deep into it
and nobody is conflating the currency aspect of crypto, that misnomer is so last decade. if someone starts a conversation with that word, I’m not going to correct them until a reply like yours tries to read too deep into it
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f1040--2020.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f1040--2021.pdf