Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Bitcoin Advocates Oppose New PARITY Act Over Mining Tax

Published

on


Bitcoin advocates are questioning a newly drafted bipartisan tax bill, arguing the legislation aggressively penalizes miners with prohibitive tax structures.

The draft legislation, known as the PARITY Act, was circulated by US Reps. Max Miller and Steven Horsford. The bill aims to overhaul the Internal Revenue Code to clarify the taxation of digital assets in the United States.

Why Crypto Leaders Against the PARITY Act?

However, the proposal has instead ignited dispute within the broader cryptocurrency industry.

At the center of the controversy is the bill’s divergent treatment of different blockchain consensus mechanisms. The draft intends to classify earnings from cryptocurrency production as gross income, calculated at fair market value upon receipt.

Advertisement

Crucially, the legislation allows participants in proof-of-stake networks, such as Ethereum and Solana, to defer these taxes until the asset is eventually sold.

Bitcoin, conversely, operates on a proof-of-work system that requires substantial upfront capital for specialized hardware and substantial ongoing energy costs. Under the current PARITY Act draft, Bitcoin miners are excluded from this tax deferral.

Conner Brown, managing director of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, stated that the draft retains double taxation on Bitcoin mining while providing targeted relief to staking operations. Brown argued the proposed legislation arbitrarily picks economic winners and losers.

“[The bill] creates a two-tier tax regime, offering deferral to stakers while leaving miners stuck with the same phantom income problem that both parties acknowledged needed fixing,” the Bitcoin Policy Institute argued.

Furthermore, the draft legislation would ease tax treatment for the use of certain GENIUS Act-defined payment stablecoins in everyday payments.

Advertisement

The Bitcoin Policy Institute said the provision would make it harder for consumers to use Bitcoin for small retail purchases. It said those transactions could still trigger capital gains reporting requirements, adding a tax burden to everyday spending.

“[The draft] provides a $200 de minimis exemption for payment stablecoins but not bitcoin, which alone represents 60% of the market cap of all digital assets. This means that a person who buys a cup of coffee with bitcoin still faces a capital gains calculation. A de minimis exemption for everyday bitcoin transactions is necessary for the digital asset’s maturation as it grows into a global medium of exchange. Any legislation serious about promoting parity must include it,” the think tank added.

Industry Experts Highlight Room For Improvements

While Bitcoin purists push back against the exemptions, broader industry lobbying groups are attempting to leverage the draft as a starting point for wider legislative reform.

Cody Carbone, CEO of The Digital Chamber, welcomed the PARITY Act legislation but emphasized the need for significant revisions to prevent the industry from moving overseas.

“We’re excited to see a bipartisan digital asset tax discussion draft. We have been prioritizing tax clarity for this entire Congress – hence the excitement the draft was out so we can begin truly advocating in a public forum,” he stated.

While expressing excitement that a public discussion draft is finally available, he noted that the current iteration requires major improvements.

Advertisement

Against that backdrop, Carbone outlined several core revisions his organization is demanding. These include taxing both staking and mining rewards only upon sale or disposition, establishing a broader de minimis exemption beyond stablecoins, and shielding basic technical actions, such as moving crypto between personal wallets, from taxation.

He also called for simplified tax forms to avoid duplicative reporting and clearer guidelines for lending and donating digital assets.


The post Bitcoin Advocates Oppose New PARITY Act Over Mining Tax appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Friday’s eth.limo Hijack Caused by Social Engineering on EasyDNS

Published

on

Friday’s eth.limo Hijack Caused by Social Engineering on EasyDNS

Ethereum Name Service gateway eth.limo has revealed that the domain hijacking on Friday was caused by a social engineering attack directed against EasyDNS, its domain name service provider. 

According to a postmortem published by eth.limo on Saturday, an attacker impersonated one of its team members to initiate an account recovery process with easyDNS, granting access to the eth.limo account and allowing them to alter domain settings.

“The NS records were changed and directed to Cloudflare… Once we understood that a DNS hijack had taken place, we immediately notified the community as well as Vitalik Buterin and others. We then began contacting EasyDNS in an attempt to respond to the incident,” the company said.

Eth.limo serves as a Web2 bridge, providing access to around 2 million decentralized websites using the .eth domain name. Hijacking the service could allow an attacker to redirect users to malicious websites. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin warned users Friday to avoid his blog until the incident was resolved.

Advertisement

Mark Jeftovic, CEO of easyDNS, has publicly accepted responsibility for the incident in its own postmortem report. 

“We screwed up and we own it,” said Jeftovic on Saturday. 

“This would mark the first successful social engineering attack against an easyDNS client in our 28-year history. There have been countless attempts.”  

Both companies have pointed to the Domain Name System Security Extension (DNSSEC) in thwarting the hacker’s attempts to do further damage. 

The attacker couldn’t produce valid cryptographic signatures, so Domain Name System resolvers rejected the attacker’s forged DNS responses, causing users to see error messages instead of being redirected to malicious sites. 

Advertisement

“DNSSEC was enabled for their domain when the attackers attempted to flip their nameservers, presumably to effect some manner of phishing or malware injection attack, DNSSEC-aware resolvers, which most are these days, began dropping queries,” Jeftovic said. 

Source: eth.limo

In its postmortem, eth.limo noted that because the attacker lacked the signing keys, they were unable to bypass the safeguards, which likely “reduced the blast radius of the hijack. We are not aware of any user impact at this time. We will provide updates if that changes.”

easyDNS makes changes since the attack

Jeftovic described the social engineering attack as “highly sophisticated,” and said easyDNS is still conducting a post-mortem on how the breach occurred, and has already begun rolling out changes to prevent a recurrence.

Source: easyDNS

“In eth.limo’s case, we will be migrating them to Domainsure, which has a security posture more suited toward enterprise and high-value fintech domains, TLDR there is no mechanism for an account recovery on Domainsure, it’s not a thing,” he added.

“On behalf of everyone here, I apologize to the eth.limo team and the wider Ethereum community. ENS has always had a special place in our heart as the first registrar to enable ENS linking to web2 domains and we’ve been involved in the space since 2017.”

Related: RaveDAO denies manipulation as Binance, Bitget probe RAVE trading activity

Advertisement

The eth.limo incident is the latest in a series of domain hijackings targeting crypto projects. Days earlier, decentralized exchange aggregator CoW Swap lost control of its website after an unknown party hijacked its domain. 

Steakhouse Financial, a DeFi advisory and research firm, similarly disclosed at the end of March that it had lost control of its domain to an attacker.

Magazine: Will the CLARITY Act be good — or bad — for DeFi?