MiCA’s thriller over a possible Bitcoin ban has only just ended as new problems from Brussels threaten the crypto space. As BTC-ECHO reported in detail last Saturday, changes to the so-called “Transfer of Funds Regulation” (TFR) have once again sparked discontent within the crypto community.
Specifically, this time it is about clamping down on anti-money laundering for so-called non-hosted wallets, which would impose complex identification procedures on crypto service providers. For example, providers would not only have to collect information about transfer partners, but also verify it. In the worst case, this could even mean the end of self-custody in Europe, warned DeFi expert Patrick Hansen. Twitter.
The push comes from factions on the left.
According to information from BTC-ECHO, the proposal comes from the camp of leftist factions in the EU Parliament. On twitter defended the responsible shadow rapporteur, Paul Tang, the initiative of his group (S&D). The TFR is an “important tool to combat money laundering and terrorist financing,” the 54-year-old said. The concerns of what Tang calls “Crypto Bros” are harmless.
Benedikt Faupel, head of blockchain at digital association Bitkom, sees things differently. Compared to BTC-ECHO, he supported TFR’s goal of combating money laundering and terrorist financing in crypto assets.
Basically, however, it must be stated that crypto assets are extremely unsuitable to be used for illegal activities. This is due on the one hand to the open architecture of the blockchain, and on the other hand to advanced analytics tools that make it easy to track and trace transactions.
Resistance in the EU Parliament
In the EU Parliament, however, there is resistance to the push from the Left, the Greens and the Social Democrats. As BTC-ECHO learned from the inner circles, the conservative group of the European People’s Party (EPP), which also includes the Union of Germany, is said to have put forward a counterproposal. This is intended to simplify the identification process for crypto providers, for example.
Instead of collecting and verifying transaction data from non-hosted wallets, service providers should only be required to collect the data. This information would then be verified against a European Banking Authority (EBA) database containing blacklisted wallet addresses. However, a corresponding database would have to be created first.
However, unlike the MiCA thriller, there appears to be a consensus among member states and the EU Parliament on how to deal with unhosted wallets. Next Thursday, March 31, there will be a vote on the TRF.
Do you want to buy cryptocurrencies?
In our guide, we show you how you can buy and sell cryptocurrencies in just a few minutes.
to the guide