Bitcoiners should work with FATF – Bitcoin Magazine
This is an opinion editorial by Kevin Murcko, CEO and Founder of Coinmetro.
On October 12, 2022, I was honored to speak at Bitcoin Amsterdam’s panel session entitled “FATF And The Threat To Bitcoin Privacy.” Along with my fellow speakers, we delved into the evolving role of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and its relationship to Bitcoin. It is so important that we understand both sides of the argument if we are to create a world where both the ideological and the practical implementation of Bitcoin will match the original intentions outlined in Satoshi Nakamoto’s now famous White Paper.
As an overview, the FATF was created in 1989 by the G7 to collect data on money laundering, almost 20 years before the birth of Bitcoin. As time went on, the FATF evolved into a police agency that tackles all illicit money movements. During this time frame, Bitcoin was created and moved into the mainstream with the launch of regulated exchanges and wallets. The coexistence of the FATF and Bitcoin throws up one of the most recurring and contentious debates surrounding cryptocurrencies: whether they should be regulated.
The conference brought together less-than-popular arguments for working with lawmakers and regulators, with arguments from a technologist describing the solutions evolving to solve regulatory problems, and welcoming insights from ideologues, arguing that the regulation of cryptocurrency service providers goes against the core concept . of sovereign currency and privacy.
Seeing such a diversity of opinions in one room made me reflect on the evolution of Bitcoin conferences myself. I myself have been on stages and at meetups since the beginning of Bitcoin, and I notice how the dialogue within the sector has expanded. In their early days, conferences were about ideology. Bitcoin was far less financially valuable and had very few use cases. So the discussions had to be guided by the ideology of the change makers who wanted to improve the financial markets and give people back the sovereignty when it comes to their money. It is a wonderful ideology, and it is an ideology that has not been lost.
But beyond ideology, to get to where we are today, bitcoin and the Bitcoin network have matured and taken on multiple use cases. They have become full-fledged platforms and businesses with loyal consumer bases. And with this comes an increased duty towards the customer and the economic landscape in which they exist.
Hosting Bitcoin Amsterdam today, at a time when Bitcoin prices are not at an all-time high, is an important reminder of the beliefs of the average Bitcoin user. If Bitcoin had record value, we would have unanimous support for the ideology of self-sovereignty. Many of the people speaking on Bitcoin Amsterdam have not experienced losses recently – they have been in the game much longer and are therefore still in profit. But most users are not in this position and the average consumer is still very aware of the volatility that comes with the currency. The “crypto winter” initiated an assessment of what is hindering the global mass adoption of bitcoin, and how this can be overcome to attract a new wave of bitcoin users. This decline has led to discussions about the business, regulatory and technological side of the digital currency, looking at practical ways to improve these facets.
But given ideology is so central to Bitcoin, conversations are rarely conducted without returning to the core principles.
When I sat on the panel at Bitcoin Amsterdam, I sat in the middle of these different speakers, literally and figuratively. For me, all stakeholders want the same result. We all believe that there should be a choice between using state-controlled currency and centralized means of payment and choosing channels operated by a consensus model, where users have self-sovereignty and are able to operate outside the traditional power centers that run the world. In this world, there still needs to be oversight, because at the end of the day, nobody wants to see funds move into the hands of illegal, violent actors.
My own perspective is that change must start from within, not from the outside. Many players, in the larger cryptocurrency space and in traditional finance, may see the regulator as an obstacle. But we live in a world that demands law and order. And even if the regulatory system is flawed, the only way to fix it is from within, after experiencing the pain points firsthand.
To make a compelling case for deference to traditional global finance, the Bitcoin community must prioritize unity. All market players, be it exchanges, wallet providers or DeFi products, big or small, need to make their voices heard by engaging with regulators and legislators to educate them directly. With our shared end goal in mind, it is far easier to fight from within by sitting in one room with a dozen regulators than to try to educate every single person on the planet about the virtues of Bitcoin and drive mass adoption that way.
Overall, the panel was a great opportunity to share my thoughts and views on the industry as it is today. Yes, the Financial Action Task Force will continue to do everything it can to combat money laundering and illicit transactions, but if it continues to dictate the rules without the Bitcoin community at the table, the end result will not be what any of us want, ideologically or on another way.
This is a guest post by Kevin Murcko. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BTC Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
