Infrastructure bill passes US Senate — without clarification on crypto

Published at: Aug. 10, 2021

The fight for lawmakers to clear up the language used to define brokers in the crypto space may be moving to the United States House of Representatives soon after a failed attempt in the Senate.

In a 69-30 vote, the Senate passed HR 3684 this morning, a bipartisan bill that proposes roughly $1 trillion in funding for roads, bridges and major infrastructure projects. However, the bill also suggests implementing tighter rules on businesses handling cryptocurrencies and expanding reporting requirements for brokers, mandating that digital asset transactions worth more than $10,000 are reported to the IRS.

Though initially split on the best course of action to amend the language in the bill, a group of six senators — Pat Toomey, Cynthia Lummis, Rob Portman, Mark Warner, Kyrsten Sinema and Ron Wyden — proposed a compromise amendment on Monday. The amendment would have exempted software developers, transaction validators and node operators as brokers, while suggesting that tax reporting requirements “only apply to the intermediaries.”

Despite the lack of an amendment clarifying the crypto language in the bill, Portman, Warner, Sinema and Wyden all voted in favor of the infrastructure deal, with only Lummis and Toomey voting nay. The Pennsylvania senator, Pat Toomey, said the legislation was “too expensive, too expansive, too unpaid for and too threatening to the innovative cryptocurrency economy” in his reasons for not voting in favor of the bill.

"This legislation imposes a badly flawed, and in some cases unworkable, cryptocurrency tax reporting mandate that threatens future technological innovation,” said Toomey, following the bill’s passage in the Senate.

After a single senator, Richard Shelby of Alabama, objected to the introduction of the compromise amendment to the infrastructure bill on Monday, it failed to be added to the legislation prior to a final vote. However, lawmakers in the House still have the opportunity to amend the language on crypto before a full vote in the chamber and the bill being signed into law by President Joe Biden.

Related: Rep Tom Emmer introduces bill to provide certainty for digital assets

The bill likely won’t be taken up in the House until later this year. Representatives and co-chairs of the Blockchain Caucus including Tom Emmer, Darren Soto, Bill Foster and David Schweikert have sent a letter to all House members urging them to amend the forthcoming bill to “clearly exempt noncustodial blockchain intermediaries and ensure that civil liberties are protected.”

Tags
Law
Related Posts
Crypto community concerned over impact of infrastructure bill on DeFi
Members of the crypto community have been up in arms recently about the $1 trillion infrastructure bill that the United States House of Representatives was expected to vote on this week. The legislation includes a crypto-tax reporting provision, along with the establishment of a definition for the term “broker.” House lawmakers stated that a vote for the infrastructure bill would take place on Thursday, Sept. 30, yet Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi announced on Sept. 29 that the infrastructure bill vote would be delayed beyond Thursday. Media sources have since noted that the infrastructure bill could be voted on during Friday, Oct. …
Adoption / Oct. 1, 2021
BREAKING: US lawmakers behind crypto amendments to infrastructure bill introduce compromise
United States Senators putting forth differing amendments for provisions in the infrastructure deal that apply to crypto have reached a compromise after a legislative setback. In a press conference on Monday, Senator Pat Toomey said there was now a bipartisan agreement on an amendment to infrastructure bill HR 3684, backed by Cynthia Lummis, Rob Portman, Mark Warner, Kyrsten Sinema and Ron Wyden. The Pennsylvania lawmaker said the new amendment would exempt software developers, transaction validators and node operators, while tax reporting requirements “should only apply to the intermediaries.” “We came together to provide greater clarity on the rules for who …
Regulation / Aug. 9, 2021
Some US lawmakers want Bitcoin miners to be exempted from proposed crypto taxes
Lawmakers in the United States have called for caution regarding implementing a proposed tax policy that could have significant implications for America’s crypto space. As previously reported by Cointelegraph, an expanded crypto taxation regime was a last-minute addition to the $1-trillion infrastructure deal currently being debated in Congress. According to the proposed amendments, tighter rules on crypto reporting requirements could provide $28 billion in additional funding for the government. However, Senator Patrick Toomey is among a group of senators who have warned of the broad language used in the expanded crypto tax policy. According to a Washington Post article, Toomey …
Bitcoin / Aug. 3, 2021
No precedent: IRS court settlement doesn't clarify crypto staking taxes
In May 2021, a Nashville couple known as the Jarretts filed a lawsuit against the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) over taxes they had paid on unclaimed and unsold Tezos (XTZ) staking rewards. At the beginning of February, news broke that the lawsuit filed by the Jarretts had come to an end, resulting in the IRS issuing the couple a tax refund for $3,793. Confusion among crypto holders Not long after this news made headlines, confusion among the crypto community piqued. One crypto media publication sent a tweet from its official account on Feb. 2, 2022, saying, “BREAKING: IRS …
Bitcoin / Feb. 8, 2022
Has New York state gone astray in its pursuit of crypto fraud?
The Empire State made two appearances on the regulatory stage last week, and neither was entirely reassuring. On April 25, bill S8839 was proposed in the New York State (NYS) Senate that would criminalize “rug pulls” and other crypto frauds, while two days later, the state’s Assembly passed a ban on non-green Bitcoin (BTC) mining. The first event was met with some ire from industry representatives, while the second drew negative reviews, too. However, this may have been more of a reflex response given that the “ban” was temporary and principally aimed at energy providers. The fraud bill, sponsored by …
Adoption / May 2, 2022