Subnostr

I'm navigating - or fighting - that right now. I think an IRA should be held in a multi-sig with the owner having 2-of-3 keys. That allows the custodian to still have visibility into whether those BTC move, but "your keys/your coin" so you can't get rug-pulled.

My IRA is with Swan, and they dodged bullets with both Prime and Fortress Trust. I know they have other partnerships now, but it is all 3rd party risk.

However, it is Swan's opinion they must hold all the key to keep the IRS from defining it as having "unfettered access" to move the BTC...even if you have auditability via the timechain. Unchained does allow the multi-sig...but they might be making assumptions, based upon no perfectly aligned legal precedent...that the IRS will not view the Bitcoin like they did the gold in the McNulty case.

Having said that, I think Swan will now support the "checkbook IRA" setup...but they basically say if the IRS comes for their 10% penalty + capital gains, that is the risk we take to have the quorum on the multi-sig keys to prevent rug pull.

Marinatin 2y ago

Careful with SWAN. I did some recon earlier in the year and smelled the issues with their Trust, as well as their process overall. I don’t believe their qualified account structure has the same compliance and/or a determination letter from the IRS that Broadfinancial has. Also, when you flip into that kind of structure, you have to do the custodial work like Form 5500. SO many people are gonna get rekt because they didn’t do the compliance work. Having spent over a decade in transactional processing and banking, I promise that’s what’s coming next. Not some big rug pull that most people here suggest. It’s the frog in the boiling pot method….compliance/regulatory enforcement > institutional push > tax to the max > make examples of people like nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx who think they’re gonna live in a black market economy ;)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

BitcoinBadger 2y ago

I appreciate you adding that insight. And the cautions regarding SWAN have come from a number of folks. I've appreciated their education focus and they do strongly encourage self-custody...even if you can't do it for the IRA product. They also have a lot of thought leaders I respect that contribute their knowledge to their efforts (Lyn, Livera, Breedlove, Callahan, Boyapati, etc.).

SWAN feels that it will be Unchained customers who will get rekt because of the lack of regulatory clarity and the "precedent" set by the McNulty case.

One of the biggest x-factors is the IRS/government/Congress/Elizabeth Warren's of the world. They could always change the tax code and have a bunch of boomer Congress people put it into law. That is one reason why I never converted to a Roth IRA and pay taxes up front. I just never trusted them to not change the rules, so I've deferred tax payment as long as possible.

Marinatin 2y ago

Yup. Same. I have several other high networth friends trying to ahead of this. It’s something I thought OnRamp might be able to help with but when I talked with Michael he was very dismissive and gave off an arrogant corporate hustler vibe. It was odd considering they spent about 30 minutes gaming out scenarios and discussing multi-jurisdictional solutions on the TFTC product announcement with nostr:npub1guh5grefa7vkay4ps6udxg8lrqxg2kgr3qh9n4gduxut64nfxq0q9y6hjy.