Tom Brady pushed FTX, then the crypto firm failed. Should he pay up?

Tom Brady pushed FTX, then the crypto firm failed. Should he pay up?

Comment

When Michael Livieratos saw quarterback Tom Brady in a commercial for the cryptocurrency trading platform FTX, he knew exactly where he wanted to put his $30,000 crypto investment.

“As a New England Patriots fan my entire life, you can imagine the influence that Tom Brady would have,” said Livieratos, a 56-year-old legal clerk who lives in Connecticut. He soon moved nearly all his money from another crypto exchange to FTX.

Then FTX filed for bankruptcy in a spectacular collapse that vaporized at least $10 billion in assets, according to bankruptcy filings, including all the money Livieratos had on the platform. Now he is a plaintiff in a proposed class-action lawsuit that seeks to hold Brady, his supermodel ex-wife, Gisele Bündchen, and nine other celebrity endorsers of FTX financially responsible for luring him into a very bad deal.

FTX CEO John J. Ray III, who is guiding the collapsed crypto company through bankruptcy, testified before the House Committee on Financial Services on Dec. 13. (Video: Joy Yi/The Washington Post, Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg/The Washington Post)

Until its collapse, FTX had been one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges — and one of the most aggressive at marketing digital currencies to the masses. The company had partnerships with National Basketball Association teams, patches on Major League Baseball umpire uniforms and the naming rights to the Miami Heat arena. It ran splashy TV ads during NBA and National Football League games, including last year’s Super Bowl, in which celebrities portrayed FTX as an exciting but safe place to invest money.

On Tuesday, the U.S. government brought both criminal charges and civil actions against Sam Bankman-Fried, the 30-year-old founder of FTX, accusing him of orchestrating one of the biggest financial frauds in U.S. history. But the odds of restitution for FTX customers like Livieratos are slim. “We’re not going to be able to recover all the losses here,” FTX’s new chief executive John J. Ray III told a House committee.

So Livieratos and his fellow plaintiffs are trying a different approach. Working with Coral Gables, Fla., lawyer Adam Moskowitz, their lawsuit seeks to shift the focus from FTX executives to what Moskowitz sees as a larger circle of complicity that includes some of the world’s most celebrated actors and athletes.

Bankman-Fried gave $40 million in political donations. Here’s who benefited.

Moskowitz argues that FTX’s interest-bearing accounts were a security, which would require Brady and other promoters to reveal the details of their payments from FTX. The complaint claims “they have never disclosed the nature, scope, and amount of compensation they personally received in exchange for the promotion.” Instead, they appeared in ads featuring such moments as an enthusiastic Brady dialing up everyone in his contact list to pitch crypto trading on FTX, asking again and again: “You in?”

“You have very rich people we all love telling us that they checked this out, and it was okay,” Moskowitz said in an interview. “Why shouldn’t they be held responsible?”

In part, Moskowitz’s lawsuit reflects the reality that wealthy celebrities are likely to have large amounts of money left — perhaps unlike Bankman-Fried, who has said he has $100,000 in the bank and only one working credit card. Celebrities also may be inclined to settle quickly to avoid the bad publicity of a protracted court proceeding.

But there are significant legal hurdles to holding promoters accountable. Just this month, a federal judge in California dismissed a lawsuit from investors accusing reality-TV star Kim Kardashian, boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. and others of touting an obscure crypto token known as EMAX as part of a plan to artificially inflate the coin’s value. Though the celebrities agreed to pay millions in fines to the Securities and Exchange Commission for failing to disclose that they had been paid to promote the token, Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald said investors are partly responsible for what happens to their money.

While the case “raises legitimate concerns over celebrities’ ability to readily persuade millions of undiscerning followers to buy snake oil with unprecedented ease and reach,” Fitzgerald wrote, investors should “act reasonably before basing their bets on the zeitgeist of the moment.”

Post Reports: The downfall of FTX

Moskowitz, who specializes in class-action lawsuits, didn’t set out to become a crypto watchdog. But as Miami has become a hub of crypto investment — and as case referrals came to him from consumers who’d lost money from various digital-currency scams — he started scrutinizing the industry.

“It seemed like a lot of investors were getting hurt and no one was really looking out for them,” said Moskowitz, who has also brought prominent lawyer David Boies onto his lawsuit.

If FTX’s accounts are ruled to be securities, Moskowitz argues that the celebrities could be responsible for investor losses under many states’ strict “blue sky” laws that ban the promotion of unregistered securities — and hold promoters liable even if they didn’t understand what they were endorsing.

FTX and most of the crypto industry has maintained that digital assets are not securities. But citing a standard that emerged from a 1946 Supreme Court case, Moskowitz’s complaint argues that they are, saying they fit the definition of a public investment in which the investor benefits from the efforts of others.

Demonstrating that the interest-bearing accounts FTX offered were in fact unregistered securities won’t be simple, given how contentious and unresolved the issue remains among regulators. Moskowitz has separately filed a state class action in Florida against Brady and two others and asked the judge, Michael Hanzman, to rule on that question.

Even if the judge rules FTX interest-bearing accounts were not securities, Moskowitz says, he will argue that celebrities should be liable under a strict Florida consumer protection law, which bans “unconscionable, deceptive, or unfair acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.”

All of the defendants in Moskowitz’s federal class action — including tennis champion Naomi Osaka,NBA star Stephen Curry and entrepreneur Kevin “Mr. Wonderful” O’Leary from the business reality show “Shark Tank” — hyped the brand. In a video posted to his website less than a month before FTX filed for bankruptcy, O’Leary said he had total confidence in the exchange. “If there’s ever a place I could be that I’m not gonna get in trouble, it’s going to be at FTX,” O’Leary said.

Moskowitz argues that such comments make his case extremely persuasive — especially coming from someone like O’Leary, who is regarded as a savvy businessman.

“O’Leary is someone people trust because he’s on ‘Shark Tank,’ ” Moskowitz said. “Who doesn’t love ‘Shark Tank’?”

Spokespeople for Brady, Bündchen, Osaka, Curry and O’Leary did not reply to requests for comment. A lawyer for Brady did not provide a comment for this story.

Is crypto a house of cards?

Sunil Kavuri, a 42-year-old crypto investor from Britain and a plaintiff in the case, said O’Leary’s endorsement was the reason he put a seven-figure sum into an FTX account, including funds he intended to use for his 2-year-old son’s education. All that money is now gone, Kavuri said, stuck with the funds of so many others in FTX bankruptcy proceedings. Kavuri said he thought that, since O’Leary ran a successful investment fund that’s regulated by the SEC, he would be familiar with the legal limits of undue promotion.

In an interview last week on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” O’Leary said he was paid just under $15 million to be a spokesman for FTX, much of which is gone. (He says he put the bulk of the money into crypto through the exchange, and prices have since plummeted. About $4 million went to taxes and his agent’s fees, and $1 million went to equity in FTX, which is now worthless.)

Asked about an August 2021 statement that FTX met his “own rigorous standards of compliance,” O’Leary said he and other institutional investors “relied on each other’s due diligence.”

Now, “we all look like idiots,” he said.

In testimony before the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday, O’Leary said he plans to use his own funds to conduct a forensic audit of what happened at the company. “The truth of this situation will be discovered by following the transaction trail after obtaining the records,” he said. He applied for membership on the FTX creditors’ committee in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings, because he feels “obligated to pursue the facts on behalf of all stakeholders.”

Moskowitz’s pursuit of A-listers actually began with a separate case against Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, O’Leary’s co-star on “Shark Tank,” who promoted Voyager, a now-bankrupt cryptocurrency lender.

In October 2021, Cuban held a news conference with Voyager co-founder Steve Ehrlich announcing a five-year partnership with the Mavericks that would, as Cuban put it, “come up with new ways to introduce Mavs fans to cryptocurrency and help them understand it.”

In a widely circulated YouTube video, Cuban offered $100 in bitcoin to anyone who downloaded the Voyager app and made a trade worth at least $100. “I think Voyager is going to be a leader among sports fans and crypto fans around the country,” Cuban said. American Airlines Center, where the Mavericks play, soon displayed Voyager ads.

FTX’s Bankman-Fried donated about $40M this political cycle. Here’s who benefited.

But then crypto prices collapsed and Voyager filed for bankruptcy, leaving many customers unable to access money they thought they could easily reclaim. In August, Moskowitz and Boies filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in federal court in Miami, arguing that Cuban’s endorsement was a big factor in creating that false sense of security.

Litigants are waiting for the judge to rule on Cuban’s motion to dismiss, with experts divided on the odds of it being granted. In the meantime, Moskowitz is gathering depositions from several NBA veterans, including former Mavericks general manager Donnie Nelson, in a bid to show Cuban’s deep involvement with Voyager.

In a brief email to The Washington Post, Cuban said that as a sponsor of the Mavericks, Voyager was “supported by the team as we would any sponsor.” A lawyer for Cuban and the Mavericks, Stephen A. Best, said Moskowitz has not demonstrated that Cuban’s statements prompted anyone to do business with Voyager.

“Mark Cuban and any comments that he made were part of an announcement of a sponsorship whereby Voyager became an official sponsor of Dallas Mavericks,” Best said, adding: “You’ll find that … there’s a question as to whether any comments were relied upon by the named plaintiffs in this case.”

The FTX case makes similar claims against defendants including basketball stars Shaquille O’Neal and Udonis Haslem, quarterback Trevor Lawrence, baseball players David Ortiz and Shohei Ohtani, and comedian Larry David. A representative for Ortiz declined to comment. Representatives for O’Neal, Haslem, Lawrence, Ohtani and David did not respond to requests for comment.

There is precedent for celebrities paying up after pushing failed investment schemes. In 1990, the actor Lloyd Bridges settled a case for an undisclosed sum after he made a commercial touting A.J. Obie & Associates, a Detroit-based company whose executive was sentenced to jail in a mortgage scam.

Jeff Greenbaum, a New York advertising attorney, said celebrity endorsers can be held liable in false-advertising claims, but the Federal Trade Commission has typically been the main enforcer. It’s far less common for a private plaintiff to bring legal action against an endorser, he said, adding that courts have generally been hesitant to hold spokespeople responsible when investments go bad.

In the FTX case, “what we’re all going to be watching really closely is: What standards are the courts going to apply?” Greenbaum said. “In other words, what level of involvement does the celebrity need to have? What level of knowledge does the celebrity need to have” to be found responsible.

To be found liable under Florida’s consumer protection law, Moskowitz will have to offer evidence that the celebrities knew FTX may have been deceiving investors, said Florida attorney Daniel Lustig, which is tough to prove. He said that it’s likely no one, including Brady, expected FTX to collapse.

Moskowitz acknowledges the case’s difficulties. But he notes that the celebrities neglected their responsibility to their fans, who lost large sums of money. They lost other things, too.

After the FTX bankruptcy, Livieratos took down a photo of Brady that had hung on his wall for years.

“I can’t look at it anymore,” he said.

correction

An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified Donnie Nelson as the Dallas Mavericks’ general manager. He’s the Mavericks’ former general manager. The article has been corrected.

Ripple Lawyers Should Feel Confident in XRP Lawsuit Summary Judgement, Says Crypto Legal Expert

Ripple Lawyers Should Feel Confident in XRP Lawsuit Summary Judgement, Says Crypto Legal Expert

Well known XRP-supporting attorney John Deaton claims that Ripple Labs’ typical counsel has explanation to be self-confident as the corporation moves to conclusion its lawsuit with the U.S. Securities and Trade Commission (SEC).

The SEC sued Ripple Labs in late 2020 under allegations that the payments organization issued XRP as an unregistered protection.

Ripple Labs not too long ago submitted for a summary judgment on the fit, which is when an entity asks the court to dispose of the situation with no a complete trial having put.

Ripple’s common counsel Stuart Alderoty said,

“My sizzling consider – after two several years of litigation, the SEC is unable to discover any deal for expenditure (that’s what the statute needs) and are not able to satisfy a single prong of the Supreme Court’s Howey check. Anything else is just noise.

Congress only gave the SEC jurisdiction around securities. Let us get back again to what the regulation claims.”

In a new interview with Eleanor Terret, Deaton suggests he was shocked by how weak the SEC’s filings had been, saying that significantly of their case contained irrelevancies.

“I assume there is a explanation for Stu to be confident. I have to explain to you anything, I was confirmed incorrect by now by these briefs for the reason that if people go back again to my tweets a couple of weeks ago, I tweeted out that when we see the summary judgment motions and they’re unredacted, that we’re going to see evidence that we had been unaware of. I stated I most likely predict that there will be some evidence towards Ripple that is additional harming than some people today think… 

[But] it’s missing. I was surprised that the SEC did not have much more precise proof. All the distinct evidence that they pointed to was to institutional investors and accredited traders. They built no relationship to XRP holders, the retail holders, you or me or men and women out there.”

Deaton signifies 67,000 XRP holders in the lawsuit right after U.S. District Choose Analisa Torres granted the crypto traders “Amici Curiae” position very last yr.

“Amici Curiae” suggests “friend of the courtroom,” in accordance to Cornell Law College. Amici curiae can post paperwork regarded as amicus briefs on problems suitable to the case as extended as the courtroom approves the briefs in advance.

 

https://www.youtube.com/observe?v=gtj1u7qQc-M

Never Overlook a Beat – Subscribe to get crypto e mail alerts sent straight to your inbox

Test Price Action

Comply with us on Twitter, Facebook and Telegram

Surf The Everyday Hodl Blend

Verify Latest Information Headlines

&nbsp

Disclaimer: Views expressed at The Day-to-day Hodl are not financial investment assistance. Buyers ought to do their thanks diligence just before earning any superior-chance investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital belongings. You should be advised that your transfers and trades are at your have risk, and any loses you may incur are your obligation. The Daily Hodl does not advocate the obtaining or offering of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an financial investment advisor. Be sure to take note that The Each day Hodl participates in affiliate promoting.

Highlighted Impression: Shutterstock/Andres Sonne

UK Commission Clarifies The Crypto Property Law

UK Commission Clarifies The Crypto Property Law

The U.K Regulation Fee has now proposed variations with an intention to explain what particularly crypto property guidelines are. In the center of the crypto restrictions, U.K. Law Fee wishes to educate about how particularly property legal guidelines implement to cryptocurrencies in England and Wales.

The Regulation Fee of England and Wales’ session paper had disclosed the proposal to situation digital property and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) beneath the U.K. residence laws.

The U.K. govt is planning to variety and initiate a regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies which is not available at the instant.

Owning an established and “robust” authorized basis in a “conducive” setting will be fitting for all crypto stakeholders and it is an agenda for the Fee.

Business and Typical Legislation Commissioner, Sarah Environmentally friendly has mentioned,

Electronic belongings these kinds of as NFTs and other crypto-tokens have advanced and proliferated at terrific velocity, so it’s important that our rules are adaptable ample to be ready to accommodate them.

Crypto Tokens And NFTs Enjoy Significant Job In The Modern society

The U.K Regulation Commission has talked about that electronic property such as crypto tokens and non-fungible tokens which are special blockchain tokens have specifically essential roles in the modern-day society. As for every a article by the Legislation Fee, the federal government of U.K. has been trusted with a responsibility of examining the law to make guaranteed that digital belongings are taken into thought.

This is due to the fact electronic belongings will carry on to evolve and broaden as retailers of value, varieties of payments, equity or personal debt securities. The crypto-pleasant proposal has been made in element to enable the U.K govt to obtain its mission of transforming the country into a global crypto hub.

The commission’s proposals, however, will not apply in Scotland or Northern Ireland as they cater to their person authorized techniques. In the prior 7 days, the money regulators have proposed procedures to Parliament that is meant to identify stablecoins, these are asset backed cryptos and are legal signifies of payment.

Associated studying | British isles Lawmakers Seek out Inputs On Regulation Of Electronic Assets

Authorities Intending To Variety Consultation On Crypto As Expenditure Asset

Stablecoin regulation is on the desk for U.K. and the govt is also planning a session on crypto as investment decision property by the end of 2022. With this session paper, it shall welcome thoughts and viewpoints from legal and tech experts.

The commission will continue to be absent from cryptocurrencies that are just utilized as a signifies of payment. The space of emphasis shall lay on electronic belongings which can be traded and they are employed to signify other assets and also act as a shop of benefit.

The consultation paper also mentions that the current property rules can’t sufficiently be inclusive of digital property as they have “many unique features” and “unique qualities” as in comparison to standard physical property.

The fee offers that,

The regulation ought to consequently go additional to accept these exclusive features, which in flip would provide a sturdy legal foundation for the electronic assets market and for end users.

To fit in digital property, the Legislation Fee is suggesting the development of a new classification named “data objects”. These would retain in account for issues composed of knowledge in an electronic sort like databases, application, electronic information, area names and also crypto.

There is meant to be a third classification which will have a additional thorough account of new, approaching and idiosyncratic things as for every the document.

Instructed Looking at | Stablecoins To Become A Payment Instrument In UK, With Regulation Becoming Labored Out

Crypto
Bitcoin was priced at $23,900 on the four-hour chart | Source: BTCUSD on TradingView
Highlighted graphic from Sygna Bridge, chart from TradingView.com

 

Opendoor Hires Winklevoss-Backed Crypto Firm’s Top Lawyer (2)

Opendoor Hires Winklevoss-Backed Crypto Firm’s Top Lawyer (2)

Sydney Schaub left her work as chief legal officer for Gemini Believe in Co., a cryptocurrency exchange launched by the Winklevoss brothers, to join on the net serious estate enterprise Opendoor Technologies Inc. as top law firm.

Schaub invested practically the previous 4 several years at the enterprise begun by bitcoin billionaires Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss. Gemini just lately get rid of 10{c024931d10daf6b71b41321fa9ba9cd89123fb34a4039ac9f079a256e3c1e6e8} of its staff members amid a downturn in the electronic asset sector.

Opendoor, which went public in late 2020 by merging with a specific function acquisition corporation, is hunting to reinvent the home-acquiring system. The business, whose organization is concentrated on so-known as iBuying know-how, expanded earlier this calendar year into the suburbs surrounding New York City.

Schaub “has been instrumental in earning organizations that are disrupting previous means of executing business enterprise into house names,” Eric Wu, Opendoor’s co-founder and chief executive officer, explained in a statement.

A Gemini spokeswoman claimed the corporation promoted deputy common counsel Niels Gjertson to common counsel and he will oversee authorized, compliance and regulatory affairs. He joined Gemini in 2019 soon after just about five yrs at Square Inc., a Jack Dorsey-led economical companies enterprise now regarded as Block Inc.

Gemini, valued very last 12 months at $7 billion, hired Schaub in 2018 just after she put in a lot more than a 12 months as common counsel for e-commerce fashion retail system Hire the Runway Inc. Prior to that Schaub put in practically six yrs at Sq., wherever she was named co-acting general counsel in 2016 upon the exit of former legal chief Dana Wagner.

Schaub also labored for just about five years at Alphabet Inc.’s Google, which recruited her specifically out of Harvard Legislation College in 2007. She did not answer to a ask for for comment about her departure from Gemini.

Schaub, in a assertion July 26 on her LinkedIn profile, thanked her former colleagues at Gemini and claimed she was “looking ahead to a new challenge disrupting however another controlled field.”

Opendoor Function

At Opendoor, Schaub moves into a job earlier held by Elizabeth Stevens, a previous head of authorized and brokerage at the corporation. Stevens left in September to develop into typical counsel for One particular, a monetary technology application backed by Walmart Inc.

Opendoor gave Stevens nearly $5.9 million in total payment throughout fiscal 2021, the business disclosed in a proxy statement filed in April. However, Stevens forfeited 75{c024931d10daf6b71b41321fa9ba9cd89123fb34a4039ac9f079a256e3c1e6e8} of the roughly $5.6 million in inventory awards when she still left Opendoor.

The San Francisco-primarily based firm went public in December 2020 just after combining with Social Cash Hedosophia Holdings Corp. II, an entity backed by enterprise capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya, a serial dealmaker in the SPAC space.

Latham & Watkins suggested Opendoor on that offer, when Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom took the guide for Palihapitiya’s SPAC. Opendoor has designed a $9 billion war upper body as it seeks to shake up the US residential real estate market by getting and offering houses, Bloomberg documented previous 12 months.

Schaub is a founding member of TechGC, a personal, invitation-only neighborhood of law division leaders and in-property legal professionals in the technologies sector that share best tactics, network with one particular a different, and exchange job assistance.

UK Commission Aims to Clarify Crypto Property Law

UK Commission Aims to Clarify Crypto Property Law

As worldwide authorities carry on to wrestle with how to control cryptocurrencies, the U.K. Legislation Fee on Thursday proposed improvements to make clear how property legislation use to electronic belongings in England and Wales.

The 57-yr-aged commission claims electronic assets like crypto tokens and non-fungible tokens—unique blockchain tokens that signify ownership that are superior recognized as NFTs—play an significantly vital part in present day society.

“Electronic property this kind of as NFTs and other crypto-tokens have advanced and proliferated at excellent speed, so it can be critical that our legal guidelines are adaptable plenty of to be in a position to accommodate them,” explained Professor Sarah Environmentally friendly, the Law Commissioner for Industrial and Popular Regulation, in a assertion.

According to a write-up from the Legislation Commission, the U.K. federal government tasked the body with reviewing the law to make sure that it can accommodate digital assets as they keep on to evolve and expand as merchants of value, forms of payments, or fairness or debt securities.

To improve this method, the agency suggests recognizing a new group of particular residence named “data objects.”

“We provisionally conclude that crypto-tokens satisfy our proposed requirements of details objects and are suitable objects of property legal rights,” the fee wrote.

Among the the implications of this classification is the risk of location awards or fines in cryptocurrencies.

“We provisionally conclude that there is an arguable case for legislation reform to deliver courts with the discretion to award a cure (where by historically denominated in dollars) denominated in specific crypto-tokens in proper circumstances.”

The fee suggests the new proposal aims to provide broader recognition and legal protections for electronic property, allowing for a far more various selection of people and providers to interact on-line and advantage from them.

“When the law of England and Wales has long gone some way to accommodate the rise of new systems, the fee argues that there are several vital locations that have to have regulation reform, to realize and defend the rights of users and optimize the possible of digital assets,” it wrote.

The commission is now looking for enter from technologists and buyers to enable look at how existing individual home legislation apply to crypto, stating the non-tangible mother nature of electronic assets is why quite a few do not fit simply into current private property legislation definitions.

The new proposal explicitly acknowledges “data objects” as a class of personalized residence less than the law, choices for how the governing administration could acquire this distinct home, the regulation about possession and manage, and the legislation all over transfers and transactions involving electronic belongings.

“It can be important that we target on establishing the suitable lawful foundations to assistance these emerging systems, fairly than rushing to impose buildings that could stifle their growth,” Eco-friendly continued. “By clarifying the legislation, England and Wales could enjoy the probable rewards and placement by itself as a international hub for digital assets.”

In an unrelated circumstance, a U.K. judge ruled persons and entities can now be served lawful documents by way of NFTs, showcasing a shift to adopt blockchain technologies.

 

 

Remain on best of crypto news, get each day updates in your inbox.

Keeping Records Of Crypto Currency: A Canadian Tax Lawyer’s Guide – Fin Tech

Keeping Records Of Crypto Currency: A Canadian Tax Lawyer’s Guide – Fin Tech

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has identified that
cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solona, and Ripple (XRP)
are taxable assets. The technology behind cryptocurrency is the
blockchain. The blockchain includes a permanent end eligible ledger
which records and stores records of all cryptocurrency
transactions. This replaces the need for a financial institution to
validate transactions. This is why many cryptocurrencies are
generally referred to as peer-to-peer systems.

As more individuals and business adopt cryptocurrencies, the
need for clear tax guidelines have become more apparent. While
legislation and case law have not yet distilled Canadian taxation
guidelines, there are several key ways in which taxpayers can
protect themselves in order to minimize tax problems.

Why Keep Records?

Our top Canadian crypto tax lawyers’ stress that one of the
most important ways to protect yourself from Canada Revenue Agency
(CRA) tax audit problems is to keep a record of all
aspects of your cryptocurrency transaction history. Because
trading, selling, and mining cryptocurrency coins and tokens have
significant tax consequences, keeping detailed records is essential
in any dealings with the CRA. For example, one key area of dispute
between the CRA and individual taxpayers concerns whether a
particular transaction is considered a capital gain or business
income. Because of the capital gain inclusion rate – only half of capital gains are taxable – if there
is a gain, it is likely tax advantageous for the taxpayer to report
the gain as a capital gain rather than business income. It
is also tax advantageous to report losses as business
losses because they can be fully utilized to reduce your overall
taxable income. On the other hand, only half of capital losses
(just like capital gains) are included as taxable capital
losses.

In a dispute about whether a particular transaction should be
reported as a capital gain or business income, evidence is used to determine
the outcome. Without proper record keeping, it will be
significantly more challenging to prove that your interpretation is
correct, and the CRA may disallow your characterization to your
detriment. This could potentially force the taxpayer to pay a
larger tax amount than is required. Had the taxpayer kept detailed
records, this would not be the case.

Because multiple transactions may be necessary to purchase or
sell a crypto coin, the number of transactions can create the
appearance of artificially increasing the volume of trades. Because
of this, detailed records indicating the purpose of each
transaction is important to provide an accurate picture of the
nature and purpose of all trades.

For cryptocurrency, keeping records is especially critical
because of the unclear characterization and regulatory
circumstances surrounding cryptocurrencies. For example, in 2020,
the US Securities and Exchange Commission, commonly referred to as
the SEC, filed a complaint against CEO, Brad Garlinghouse and
Chair, Christian Larsen of Ripple Labs. The filing argued that XRP,
the cryptocurrency created by Ripple Labs, was a security rather
than a commodity. This distinction has significant regulatory and
potentially taxation consequences for investors of the
cryptocurrency. Because of the inchoate nature of cryptocurrency
and therefore regulation, keeping in-depth records is a key
protection for traders, miners, and stakers.

Keeping Records

Recently, the CRA provided a long list of important details that
a person trading cryptocurrency should keep. For cryptocurrency
traders, the CRA has outlined that it is essential to record:

  • the date of the transaction

  • the cryptocurrency addresses

  • the Transaction ID

  • receipts for the purchase or transfer of cryptocurrency

  • value of the cryptocurrency in Canadian dollars at the time of
    the transaction

  • a description of the transaction

  • exchange and wallet records

  • accounting and legal costs

  • fees incurred to trade the cryptocurrency

  • software costs related to managing you tax affairs

It is important to note that this list is not comprehensive.
Moreover, for individual “hobby” traders, the list of
important records to keep is likely shorter than for professional
miners or those who trade cryptocurrency as their primary
business.

For those who mine cryptocurrency, it is also essential to keep
records of:

  • receipts for purchasing cryptocurrency mining hardware

  • receipts to support your expenses associated with the mining
    operation

  • the mining pool contracts and records

  • any other records on the mining activities

  • the disposal of cryptocurrency earned through the mining
    activities

For those who use cryptocurrency as a medium of exchange, the
first list applies. The CRA has characterized Bitcoin and other
cryptocurrencies (such as Ethereum and XRP) as a commodity for
medium of exchange purpose. This means that the purchase of sale of
goods and services using Ethereum, for example, is considered a
“barter transaction”. In a barter transaction, the cost
and sale price of the goods or services is the value of the goods
and services, in Canadian dollars. So, if a kilogram of apples is
normally worth $4.00, and one “Applecoin” is used as a
medium of exchange to purchase the kilogram of apples, the cost and
sale price is $4.00. In the case of a barter transaction, such as
purchasing a good or service, it is likely that sales taxes such as
GST, HST, PST, or QST may apply. These too, must be recorded, and
for the service provider, remitted and paid to the government.

Section 230 of Canada’s Income Tax Act

Section 230 of the Income Tax Act imposes a requirement
on Canadian taxpayers to keep adequate books and records. Thillis
record-keeping requirement applies to all persons who are required
to pay tax or collect income tax and includes those who are not
Canadian tax residents but carry on a business in Canada. Section
230 requires that the books and records be sufficient to determine
the amount of income tax payable. The records and books must be
kept at the persons residence or place of business.

T1135

Another important reason to keep records of your cryptocurrency
is the foreign property requirement. Taxpayers who
own more than CAD$100,000 in specified foreign property has an
obligation to fill out a Form T1135. In April 2015, the CRA took the
position that cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solona, and
Polkadot constitute “funds or intangible property”. As a
result, if the cryptocurrency is held, situated, or deposited
outside of Canada (and not use or held in the course of carrying on
a business), it is considered specified foreign property. Hence, if
Canadian tax resident has cryptocurrency with
a cost base at $100,000 or above, they are required to report it on
the T1135 Form. It is important to note that the $100,000 is an
aggregate value. So, if the taxpayer holds foreign real estate
worth $95,000 and cryptocurrency with a cost of $5,000, that is
sufficient to trigger the mandatory reporting requirement.

Pro Tax Tip:

Section 230 requires you to keep sufficient books and records
for a minimum period of six years. So, if you sold Bitcoin in 2022,
you are obligated to keep the records, books, and supporting
documentation until 2028. Failure to do so may lead to a criminal
offence under Section 238 of the Income Tax Act. Contact
our expert Canadian crypto tax lawyers to advise you about the
requirements for keeping sufficient books and records and whether
your transactions should be reported as capital gains or business income.

FAQ:

1. Do I have to keep records of all cryptocurrency
transactions?

Yes, failure to do so may result in a criminal offense under
Section 238. Not to keep records may put you at the mercy of the
CRA, who have broad powers to reassess your tax owing. Without
detailed records, the taxpayer has inadequate means of
demonstrating the correct tax owing.

2. If I use a US-based crypto wallet such as Coinbase,
do I have to report my cryptocurrency holdings?

If you have over $100,000 of specified foreign property, then
you are obligated to disclose those assets using the T1135 Form. If
you fail to do so, you may incur a penalty of $25 per day up to a
maximum of $2500. There may be additional penalties if the failure
to file was done knowingly or in circumstance amounting to gross negligence.

3. How do I know which records and documents are
relevant for my taxes?

For tax reporting purposes, record-keeping is critical when it
comes to cryptocurrency. Failing to understand which records,
books, or supporting documents are relevant for tax purposes may
create more tax liability than if you have the proper
documentation. Our Canadian crypto tax lawyers have assisted
numerous taxpayers with their cryptocurrency questions. To know
more about cryptocurrency record-keeping, consult with a Toronto tax lawyer by calling Rotfleisch &
Samulovitch PC today at 647-699-4314, or email us at
[email protected].

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.