My Opinion

In China, the Bitcoin trade has already been pushed into the underground - the Hong Kong protests are partly financed with Bitcoin. The Russian central bank is now examining how it they are able to censor BTC.

Even though Russia and China are not directly on the drip of the US dollar, the ruble and yuan are based on the same Fiat principle. And so these two nations have an immense interest in censoring free decentralized alternatives like Bitcoin.

In Russia it is being discussed how Bitcoin could be banned. Especially for trade against goods and services a censorship is considered, which is already well advanced. However, there is still a ban on the official definition that applies to the BTC in Russia. Because Cryptocoins are not yet clearly classified as "Money Substitute" - only when this is done, a ban can be made.

But how successful can a ban really be? There is also an active trade in Bitcoin in China. Although this is officially banned there, there are few opportunities for the state to ban trade if it is done anonymously. The same problem will also worry Russia.

Thanks to a new money laundering law, German banks will be able to retain Bitcoin and offer crypto services in the future. An important step in the adaptation.

From 2020, it will be legal for German banks to sell cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. German financial institutions are not yet allowed to sell cryptocurrencies directly to their clients, but this could change in the future. Thanks to the planned law implementing the EU's fourth money laundering directive. This should allow German banks to keep Bitcoin and offer other crypto services in the future.

As decided last week in the Bundestag, crypto values in Germany are becoming an official, regulated financial instrument. The new money laundering law allows banks to store and offer cryptocurrencies. This could open up a new business area for German banks from 2020 onwards. Currently, no institute offers its clients virtual assets, except for the Bitwala bank in Berlin. The law has already been passed by the Bundestag and now awaits the consensus of the 16 federal states.

The German crypto community is satisfied with the bill and thinks that Germany is well on the way to becoming a crypto-heaven. If the federal states agree with the proposal, German citizens could hold their digital currencies directly with banks. In doing so, banks will provide appropriate online banking solutions for the full range of assets, including stocks, bonds and cryptocurrencies. This means that crypto owners can access their credit at the push of a button.

The final bill also provides for a deletion of the so-called separation bid. According to him, the re-regulated crypto-surplus transaction should not have been offered together with other regulated banking operations from the same legal entity. Until now, banks had to resort to special subsidiaries or external depositaries.

Interestingly, the Federal Association of German Banks (BdB) welcomes the new regulation. It is argued that lenders already have experience in storing client assets and risk management. The new law could prevent cryptographic money laundering and allow German investors access to the crypto room through domestic funds.

However, not everyone is satisfied with the bill because critics fear less consumer protection. The consumer center of Baden-Wuerttemberg fears that the banks with the new products will sell more aggressively and with all means at new customers. However, there is a risk that customers may not be sufficiently informed about the potential risks of investing in cryptos. When it comes to the safekeeping of crypto assets, Bafin¹ supervision must also intensively examine the additional IT risks, since storing Bitcoin places entirely new demands on the technical infrastructure.

The term "crypto values" will now appear and be defined in German law for the first time and is thus considered the core of the new regulation. By definition, crypto-values are digital representations of a value that has not been issued by any public authority or central bank but is used for investment purposes and accepted as a means of payment and exchange. On November 29, 2019, the Federal Council finally adopted the law, which means that the new regulation can enter into force on January 1, 2020.

¹⁾ Bafin - Federal Financial Supervisory Authority
The Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht) is a German public-law institution with legal capacity based in Frankfurt/Main and Bonn. It is subject to the legal and technical supervision of the Federal Ministry of Finance.

Facebook met with the Libra project across Europe strong resistance, whether in politics or business and the citizens of the countries. A new survey reaffirms these results, pointing to continued high levels of people's trust in traditional institutions such as banks.

Between Facebook's Libra project and Google's new Google Pay-linked checking accounts, the tech giants are showing big plans to integrate into the digital finance world of Bitcoin and Co. But not many tech and financial experts will seize the opportunity to leverage such services, according to a new survey by Blind, an app-based "anonymous social network".

The published results show that more than 5,000 professionals from various companies, including Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook and Uber, are skeptical. The study found that the overwhelming majority of professionals, around 62 percent, trusted "traditional banks" as "big tech" even earlier in their financial data. Of the tech professionals surveyed, 57 percent said they trust banks more than big tech companies, while nearly 70 percent of those working in finance said they favor traditional institutions.

In addition, some technology company employees do not even trust their own company with their financial information - least of all on Uber and Facebook. Of the 186 surveyed Facebook employees, only 21 percent said they trusted their data to the social media giants. (Uber scored even less - bleak 16 percent, though only 45 Uber employees took part in the survey.)

The results suggest that even Facebook employees would not trust Libra. Cuire Kim, Blind's brand marketing manager responsible for conducting the survey, made it clear that the survey did not specifically ask about Libra. However, given Facebook's collaboration with Libra, it is not a big leap, despite the company's efforts to separate itself and its reputation from the project.

Libra has experienced a very different response since its creation in June this year. While some saw Libra as a way to capitalize on the crypto-mainstream and legitimize the industry, others, especially the regulators, were reluctant to accept the project as the noble effort it claims to be.

Both Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, and David Marcus, head of the company's blockchain division, have been briefed by members of the US Congress on Libra and its perceived potential to combat money laundering and other white-collar crime in recent months silent about the concerns raised by the project regarding data protection.

Given Facebook's many published data scandals, including Cambridge Analytica's fiasco last year, it's not surprising that even its own employees are not too keen to pass on sensitive financial data to the company. Brad Garlinghouse, CEO of Ripple, also says that Facebook has a fundamental trust problem and that trust is actually the foundation of all further steps and actions in a sensitive market such as the financial market. Garlinghouse believes Libra's vision is good, but the company would first have to convince politicians and businesses worldwide that Libra is 100% secure and does not collect data and share it with third parties.

New storm clouds are brewing over the global digital currency Bitcoin. A study by US financial economics professors John Griffin (University of Texas) and Amin Shams (Ohio University) is now fueling the suspicion of a massive manipulation of the Bitcoin course in 2017, where the value of a Bitcoin has risen to nearly $ 20,000.

Financial professors John Griffin and Amin Shams, lecturers at the University of Texas and Ohio State University respectively, analyzed over 200 gigabytes of data about the transaction history between Bitcoin and Tether, another digital currency. Tether is an asset known as "stablecoin" whose trading value is (partially) linked to the US dollar. The study of the professors revealed that the tethers traded against bitcoins had a mysterious pattern.

"We find that the identified patterns are not present in other streams - and almost all of the price impact can be attributed to a major player", wrote Griffin and Shams. "We map this data across both blockchains and find that a large player is behind most of the patterns we document". The manipulation occurred when Bitcoin rose to an all-time high of nearly $ 20,000 in late 2017, according to the study. Griffin and Shams were able to trace the data clusters back to a source. According to the two professors, it is "a big account at Bitfinex", one of the world's leading digital currency exchanges. The Wall Street Journal first reported the results of the updated study in early November.

The study is another setback for the crypto market. Just recently, a report from investment firm Bitwise revealed that 95 percent of all trading volumes in Bitcoin exchanges are fictitious.

"Big Player" should have dominated price history with transactions

The two financial analysts had analyzed more than 200 gigabytes of transactional data, focusing on the two digital currencies Bitcoin and Tether and the trading history between them.

The trading pattern suggests, according to Griffin and Shams, that the course of the Bitcoin in 2017 in correspondence with Tehter could be assigned to a single "big player". The starting point could be a large account at Bitfinex, one of the leading digital currency exchanges, for alleged price manipulation.

As if that were not enough, other studies also tinker with digital money transactions. A recent study by the investment house Bitwise suggests that 95 percent of trading volumes on Bitcoin exchanges are not genuine.

The study comes after an analysis published in March found that 95% bitcoin spot trading is faked. The survey, created by cryptocurrency asset manager Bitwise for the SEC, found that only $273 million of about $6 billion in average daily bitcoin volume was legitimate.

Is somebody available, who can explain me the advantages of cryptocurrencies?

If I'm using inside the European Union a normal bank transfer, the transfer is free of charge and the receiver see it the next banking day on his account. If I'm transferring money from one bank account inside the European Union then I need to pay a transfer fee of € 7 and up to an transferred amount of € 1.500 € 4 (in total € 11). If I'm transferring more than € 1500 than for the amount above € 1500 will get added around 2‰ on fees.

On the other hand if I'm transferring Bitcoins I have to pay fees:

• If I'm transferring bitcoins from the left hand wallet to the right hand wallet
• If I'm buying Bitcoins
• If I'm selling Bitcoins

Why shall I use in this case Bitcoins if I'm even not able to transfer them from one wallet to another one without fees?

Please tell me, where is the mistake or my thinking error and where are really the advantages from cryptocurrencies.