The Taxman Cometh: Court Orders Coinbase To Hand Over Information On Cryptocurrency Users

Most could see the writing on the wall: the taxman cometh.  The Internal Revenue Service has been upset that Americans are daring to make money that they cannot tax, but not for much longer.

Bitcoin’s initial big draw was that it was unregulated by the government.  Most digital currencies exist in a sort of twilight state just beyond the grasp of federal regulators, but the U.S. tax authority is starting to get upset that they cannot steal this money, so they’ve figured out how to do just that.

On Wednesday, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that Coinbase must supply the IRS with identifying information on users who had more than $20,000 in annual transactions on its platform between 2013 and 2015. After noticing that the number of tax returns claiming gains from virtual currency didn’t line up with the emerging popularity of digital currencies like bitcoin as an investment vehicle, the IRS asked Coinbase to hand over a broad swath of information on its users. Coinbase pushed back, and now the court has landed on a compromise that the company is calling a “partial victory.” –Tech Crucnch

“Coinbase itself admits that the Narrowed Summons requests information regarding 8.9 million Coinbase transactions and 14,355 Coinbase account holders. That only 800 to 900 taxpayers reported gains related to bitcoin in each of the relevant years and that more than 14,000 Coinbase users have either bought, sold, sent or received at least $20,000 worth of bitcoin in a given year suggests that many Coinbase users may not be reporting their bitcoin gains,” the court documents read.

If you are a US citizen and have been speculated /trading Bitcoin you have ordinary income gains that need to be reported…coinbase has to turn over your account records and the IRS is coming for you

— FxMacro (@fxmacro) November 30, 2017

The fact that the government couldn’t tax bitcoin was a big selling point for many. Cryptocurrency users who value the decentralization and privacy afforded by digital currencies won’t be happy, but there is a bit of good news. Coinbase succeeded in limiting the government’s initial request for information on all Coinbase users who made transactions from 2013 to 2015 to the smaller subset of high-value users.

The court narrowed the scope of documents that the IRS can request from Coinbase to taxpayer ID number, name, date of birth, address, transaction logs and account statements, deeming the rest of the documents “not necessary.” Again, these personal data requests will only apply to accounts that have bought, sold, sent or received more than $20,000 in any of those types of transactions between 2013 and 2015.

Make no mistake, the taxman cometh.

After Trump Bows to Saudis, Decision to Release Evidence of Saudis Funding 9/11 Gets Reversed

President Trump’s change in attitude towards Saudi Arabia has apparently had a trickle-down effect, as a federal judge in Miami has reversed her decision to push for the release of crucial documents revealing information on the funding of the 9/11 attacks.

Judge Cecilia Altonaga is now ruling in favor of the FBI, granting the agency’s request to keep large portions of a slide show titled “Overview of the 9/11 Investigation” secret from the public.

The presentation Altonaga is now helping to keep private, includes sections on “Funding of the 9/11 Attacks,” “Early to Mid-2001 Additional Funding,” “Early to Mid-2000: Pilots/Intended Pilots Arrive U.S.,” “Investigative Findings” regarding hijacker “Identification,” and “Financial: Ample Financing was provided.”

Advertisment

This decision is the opposite of Altonaga’s ruling from May 16, in which she stated that the documents “should be largely opened for public inspection,” given the fact that the FBI failed to establish Freedom of Information Act Exemption 7(E), which applies when the release of the information would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.”

According to Altonaga’s latest ruling, she changed her mind based on the fact that the FBI countered with a technicality. The agency insisted that the contents of “Document 22” reveal “a photo taken by a security camera, which itself does not discuss FBI techniques, but from which a careful viewer could deduce the location of the security camera at the site the photo was taken.”

The lawsuit was initiated by Florida Bulldog, a team of investigative journalists that has spent years probing the connections between the 9/11 hijackers and Saudi Arabia. According to the CIA’s database, 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and when they first arrived in the United States, nine of them arrived in Florida.

READ MORE:  Pentagon Admits to Shipping $1.29 Billion in Bombs to Saudi Arabia - to Defend Oil Reserves

Florida Bulldog sued the FBI in 2012 for details on the ties between the hijackers and a rich Saudi family that mysteriously left all of their belongings and abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota, Florida, just two weeks before the attacks. The lawsuit led to the release of materials from a 2002 FBI report, which found “many connections” between the Saudi family and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

The idea that a federal judge would go from supporting a group of investigative journalists and pushing for transparency, to supporting the FBI and insisting that protecting the location of a security camera was worth covering up the funding of the 9/11 attacks, may seem bizarre—but it is a common practice under the current administration.

As The Free Thought Project has reported, Trump also went from calling for holding Saudi Arabia accountable for its involvement in 9/11, to ignoring the idea that the country could have had any involvement at all.

After months on the campaign trail, in which he pledged that if he was elected, Americans would “find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center,” Trump made Saudi Arabia the first foreign nation he visited as president of the U.S.

Trump’s visit with Saudi King Salman occurred on May 20—just four days after Judge Altonaga ruled that the FBI should face a Freedom of Information trial in an attempt to pursue transparency surrounding the funding of the 9/11 attacks.

During the visit, Trump announced plans for a $110 BILLION weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, which adds a new level of context that should be considered when looking at why Altonaga then reversed her decision on June 29.

Federal Judge Gloria Navarro Has Appointed Herself Ruling Queen Of Her Las Vegas Territory

Federal Judge Gloria Navarro no longer acts as a Federal Judge—by her blatant disregard for the United States Constitution or the rights of the People, she has proclaimed herself Queen of her territory in Las Vegas Nevada. She considers herself, like a Queen, untouchable and unaccountable to laws or the Constitution that she swore an oath to uphold. Instead, she makes up her own laws, makes her own rules and violates and mocks the People attempting to defend themselves from corrupt federal employees. The massive list of Constitutional and legal violations in Queen Gloria Navarro’s court in Las Vegas, Nevada continue to grow on a daily basis. Particularly in the case of Cliven Bundy et al vs. United States of America.

The Peoples’ Constitutional Rights are not only being violated, the Peoples’ Rights are being mocked and disposed of by Gloria Navarro as if they are nothing more than suggestions from peasants. A court of Justice can only exist if all parties involved follow the Law. A judge is required to be an independent NEUTRAL entity in court. There is a reason Lady Justice is wearing a blindfold—she’s not supposed to know who is before her, just the facts. Queen Gloria Navarro on the other hand, is openly deciding what is a fact and what rules to follow. She has obviously gotten away with violating the US Constitution and acting as Queen of her kingdom for so long, she no longer feels any guilt about violating and even mocking the People or their “Constitution” in her courtroom. It’s as if she’s challenging the People to “stop me if you can, ha ha ha, for I am Queen of all that I see.”

This list is just a few of the treasonous violations the People of the United States suffer from inside Queen Navarros’ Court. This is not Justice:

1. Queen Navarro has forbidden The US Constitution to be visible in her court room. The only way she will allow the United States Constitution in the Queens courtroom, is if it’s disrespectfully turned backwards in the observers pockets. This is what Queen Navarro thinks about the Peoples’ Constitution.


2. Defendant in the Queens’ Court, Todd Engel, has been denied by the Queen of his Constitutionally protected right to represent himself. Why would the Queen deny one of the People their Constitutional right to defend themselves? Because Todd asked an FBI agent on the stand if the top BLM agent in the Queens territory, Dan Love, was in fact under investigation for misconduct. That question alone, caused Queen Navarro to strip Todd of his Right to self represent. Even though the defense has a Constitutionally protected right to call the corrupt agent, Dan Love, to the stand, the Queen is over-ruling Constitutional law and has decided the agents testimony is too damaging to the Queens’ agent and therefor the agents’ testimony is not necessary for the jury to hear.


3. The People have a Constitutionally protected right to face their accusers. However that is only allowed in Queen Navarros’ Court if it pleases the Queen.  FBI agent Adam Nixon took the stand and testified that he had obtained a warrant to search FBI Informant Greg Burleson’s Facebook page. Adam Nixon went through his paid informants Facebook page in Queen Navarros’ Court and NEVER mentioned he was colluding with Burleson in 2013 to create a false narrative that the Bundy’s were violent. The paid FBI informant was the only “defendant” who promoted violence and Queen Navarro did not allow any defense attorney to cross examine the Federal agent to get more information about Burleson’s time as a paid informant.


4. Queen Navarro does not believe in the Peoples’ Constitutionally protected right to self defense or the Second Amendment. She does not believe the People have a right to point a weapon at any law enforcement ever, EVEN IF we believe we are going to be killed. The Queens’ position is that the People must submit to being shot by corrupt police officers. In fact, Queen Navarro has stated that if the People have a weapon in sight of a corrupt police officer they can be killed by the police officer if he/she so chooses.


5. No where in the constitution does it regulate how many or what kind of witnesses can be called by the People. Yet Queen Navarro denied every defense witness they have attempted to call to the stand. On the first day of witnesses not a single one was allowed to take the stand by the Queen. Not only that but, the witnesses who are willing to testify are being threatened with arrest by the Queen’s federal agents. The corrupt federal agents claim this an “ongoing conspiracy”and they can indict more people any time they want. After giving the prosecution 7 weeks on the stand, the defense was not able to start their day with even one Queen approved witness. Family members who were first-hand eye witnesses, including the wives of the defendants, were denied their Constitutional Rights by the Queen for being ‘unprofessional or lay or political’ witnesses. The Queen wont allow them to discuss the cows being shot or their property being destroyed. The Queen wont allow a discussions about defendant Ammon Bundy being tazed, or defendant Dave Bundy being abused and arrested on the road for recording the activities of corrupt federal officials. The Queen won’t allow testimony about Margaret Houston being thrown to the ground and abused by corrupt federal agents. Queen Navarro won’t allow the defendants to discuss how scared they were of the unethical agents or anything that might show the jury how badly the agents acted. Queen Navarro also objects to any topic that might risk Jury Nullification.

Read more at 1776 Again

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies,  foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.

Federal Judge Ruling Orders Trump to Halt Travel Ban

February 3, 2017   |   admintam

(COMMONDREAMS) A federal judge on Friday issued a “first of its kind” ruling showing that President Donald Trump’s travel ban does not apply to legal permanent residents, in a partial victory against the controversial executive order.

U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts of Detroit reaffirmed that the order, temporarily blocking entry for immigrants and refugees from seven majority-Muslim countries, does not apply to permanent residents, including green card holders—who were among the many travelers caught up in the sweeping executive order that saw immigrants detained at airports across the country last week.

“The court orders that the United States is permanently enjoined from applying Sections 3(c) and 3(e) of the January 27, 2017 executive order against lawful permanent residents of the United States,” Roberts wrote in her decision (pdf).

Trump’s order, signed January 27, blocked entry to the U.S. for immigrants and refugees from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, and Yemen. It went into effect immediately, prompting massive protests at airports nationwide and swift action by civil and immigrant rights groups.

Nabih Ayad, an attorney with the Arab-American Civil Rights League, who co-filed an emergency lawsuit on Tuesday on behalf of several green card holders blocked from entering the country, told CBS Detroit on Friday, “It’s the first order of its kind across the nation. It makes absolutely certain that legal permanent residents — those with what we call in laypersons terms green card holders — can basically travel and leave the country as they please without hindrance by the executive order ban.”

Among the plaintiffs in the lawsuit were a U.S. citizen whose nine-year-old son was denied a visa to join his family; an immigrant who was issued a visa to enter the country as a lawful permanent resident; and the civil rights league itself, whose members have been “adversely affected” by the executive order.

The victory comes just after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other civil and immigrant rights groups filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of tens of thousands of immigrants currently residing legally in the U.S. who have been impacted by the executive order.

“These xenophobic policies do not make us safer,” said Trina Realmuto, litigation director for the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, on Thursday. “Instead, they undermine American values.”

Jennie Pasquarella, immigrants’ rights director for the ACLU of California and senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California, added, “By freezing Muslim immigrants out of the ability to become U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, the president’s unconstitutional ban now takes aim at the very system that has made the United States a pluralistic nation.”

---

This article (Federal Judge Ruling Orders Trump to Halt Travel Ban) by Nadia Prupis, originally appeared on CommonDreams.org and is licensed Creative Commons 3.0. The Anti-Media radio show airs Monday through Friday @ 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Help us fix our typos: edits@theantimedia.org