Curio Cards Bot

While I appreciate that my colleagues and the White House have acknowledged their original crypto tax had flaws, the Warner-Portman amendment picks winners and losers based on the type of technology employed. That’s horrible for innovation.

The Warner-Portman plan exempts bitcoin miners, but not other transaction validators or software developers who create these platforms. What does that mean? Two identical services could receive dramatically different regulatory treatment depending on the technology used.

.@USTreasury wants maximum flexibility to regulate and tax crypto as they see fit. Congress should not allow that to happen. We need to have this debate in public and in full, especially before potentially disruptive changes are made that push crypto overseas.

We can all agree that centralized exchanges should be subject to the reporting requirement included in this bill, just like brokers would be subject to report other assets. But why rush and get it wrong?

The first principle here should be: DO NO HARM. The Warner-Portman-Sinema amendment will drive developers to create software outside of the U.S. I urge my colleagues to oppose it and join me, @RonWyden, and @SenLummis in protecting American innovation.

Now isn’t the time for the IRS to pick winners and losers with a new technology. Crypto has the potential to be the future of the internet. How foolish to crush it over a tax provision that possibly raises just $500 million per year more in a $1.2 TRILLION bill.