"It's not digital currency. It's digital property.... The compelling use case is capital preservation for everyone in the world.... Medium of exchange is only worth a trillion dollars. Store of value is worth a hundred trillion dollars. #Bitcoin is going to embraced as property. It doesn't have to be a currency. Nobody's trying to buy a cup of coffee with a fraction of their building on 5th Avenue.... But every rich person I know owns property in London or New York City or somewhere, and none of them complain about not being able to spend their building as a medium of exchange. The killer application is capital preservation for everybody. The store of value is the killer use case. Medium of exchange is a distraction."
- nostr:npub15dqlghlewk84wz3pkqqvzl2w2w36f97g89ljds8x6c094nlu02vqjllm5m
My concern with this “digital property” classification is that it can then be taxed as other real property is. It is not difficult to imagine a property tax on digital property at the state or federal level, as opposed to the city or county level.
It would be much better to classify bitcoin as a “digital commodity” nostr:npub15dqlghlewk84wz3pkqqvzl2w2w36f97g89ljds8x6c094nlu02vqjllm5m
No replies yet.
