Bitcoins banned in Thailand

[wwex]

Quite right, a ridiculous stupid concept which is a hackers paradise.

+1

care to explain? I fail to see how its different from current banking which is mostly digital these days, all the worlds banks, atms etc are connected digitally via the internet and use the same encryption as bitcoins use, do you consider them to be a hackers paradise too and if not why?

[Cuban]

....humming away mining bitcoins. Have it for almost a year now, made some good cash out of it, lucky with the value shooting up a while ago, cashed some in already.

Care to say how profitable - give the profit after paying electricity costs for running the PCs and then cooling the room down, do you play video games any more or are you just raking in the coin?

For those interested in the numbers http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/

[geordieman2]

....humming away mining bitcoins. Have it for almost a year now, made some good cash out of it, lucky with the value shooting up a while ago, cashed some in already.

Care to say how profitable - give the profit after paying electricity costs for running the PCs and then cooling the room down, do you play video games any more or are you just raking in the coin?

For those interested in the numbers http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/

Today it ain't worth it unless you managed to get your hands on the asic equipment. And you can't simply go buying asic's, because by the time you get them, they might not be very profitable anymore.

But I did wrote I started doing this a year ago, when difficulty was so low (along with the price of the bitcoins), that you were indeed raking in bitcoins at a high rate.

Then people who held onto the coins they mined instead of selling them straight away made a killing! I have mined a total of just over 100 bitcoins, the majority of them when a bitcoin was valued around 10$.

If I would still have them, they'd be worth around 10,000 US$ today, mined at a cost of less then 2000 US$ including electricity and equipment. I'd probably still get an easy 500$ for the equipment on the second hand market here in Thailand.

Unfortunately, to be honest, I have to admit I sold most of them when they hit around 50 Baht in I think March this year, and stuck around that price for awhile, thinking they had topped out.

If I had sold them for over the 200+ US$ they reached just amonth after I sold mine, I could have bought a car from the the profit the mining would have made me.

Anyway, since it's illegal to exchange them for Thai money now, or to exchange them for goods, I will be jailed if I try to do anything with them

[CitizenSmith]

Link to official source please, not the bitcoin.co.th website which all news reports are quoting from. This is not an official statement.

[chiangmaisurprise]

Cost me half a bitcoin in bungs this morning when I got caught speeding on the Chonburi Expressway..

Anyway, if you believe they can ban bitcoins then you believe there is gold in Fort Knox!!

As an American, this made me laugh!! We all know there is nothing but dust on those shelves!! BTC > USD

[Time Traveller]

Quite right, a ridiculous stupid concept which is a hackers paradise.

IT's got nothing to do with soundness of bitcoin currency or protection of consumers and businesses. It's all about protecting the Thai elite and their ability siphon wealth out of the economy to the top hierarchy of Thai society and their ability to print money.

Don't believe it? Then why is it that I can sell something and exchange it for almost any other thing, even monopoly money or anything of no value. That's not banned, but bitcoins are. Likely because they are the first legitimate threat to the Bank of Thailand's monopoly on the control of money and wealth.

But it's not the first time Thailand has shown to the world they are still living in a medieval feudal society.

[hawker9000]

It'll be interesting to see the first case brought up under this new prohibition (if that's what it really is). Maybe somebody who confesses to it or implicates somebody else as part of a bigger prosecution effort... I just can't see a successful investigation being initiated and resulting prosecution based specifically on the illegal trading in bitcoins. Are you guilty per se if they confiscate your PC & find a wallet app on it?

[Time Traveller]

In Thailand, the illegal drug trade thrives. Counterfeiting thrives. Human and animal trafficking thrives. Money laundering thrives. Corruption thrives. But if you attempt to buy or sell anything without using the "official" cash - you're a criminal.

The country really is a shining example of totalitarianism by a more and more desperate ruling class.

Like when stock markets announce bans on short selling, such action by the BoT only gives more confidence in bitcoins and less confidence in the Thai currency itself.

[Cuban]

Let's assume I am a Thai worker in London, UK and want to send GBP 600.00 to my Krungsri bank account in Bangkok, Thailand.

Let's assume you can read and type on a computer?

Answers:

Option 1: Western Union

1.1-5 = http://www.westernunion.co.uk/gb/Home.page

Option 2: Bitcoins

2.1-7 = https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ

Option 3: SWIFT transfer from my NatWest bank account in London

3.1-4 = http://www.natwest.com/personal/travel-international/g2/international-payments/send-money-abroad.ashx

[technologybytes]

Call me cynical but I am beginning to suspect that there are paid bots on internet forums pumping this bitcoin thing. Note the way that anyone who asks for info or says anything slightly negative about it, is personally attacked rather than debated with facts and figures.

You make a good point, people tend to be polarized for or against alternative currencies.

People who have bought, and used Bitcoin (this includes myself) tend to get annoyed when people who know nothing about bitcoin start to go on about it being for criminals and hackers. I guess it's a natural reaction, but it's counterproductive to start attacking people.

The truth is that Bitcoin is not for everyone. I use it to take payments, to make occasional payments and I keep some bitcoins back as a kind of investment incase they increase in value again. I'm not a hacker and I'm not a criminal so It's a bit annoying when some ill-informed people suggest it's for hackers and criminals.

For me, the security of bitcoin is the appeal (when i have been paid I do not have to worry about chargebacks or account limitations), the absence of fees (actually there are fees but they are incredibly low, so low as not to matter).

I also use regular credit cards and paypal, of course, but an increasing number of customers like to use bitcoin.. and they are NOT hackers or criminals.

There is a CHANCE (perhaps a low one, but still a chance) that in a few years time bitcoins will be worth 100X their current value, of course it could also crash. Friends ask me if they should buy some as an investment... my advice, yes but no more than you can afford to lose, like buying lottery tickets but with a MUCH better chance of winning!

Some people will only ever trust a currency that they can touch and hold, I respect and understand that but so little of that exists today.

PS I'm really NOT a bot

[beb]

It'll be interesting to see the first case brought up under this new prohibition (if that's what it really is). Maybe somebody who confesses to it or implicates somebody else as part of a bigger prosecution effort... I just can't see a successful investigation being initiated and resulting prosecution based specifically on the illegal trading in bitcoins. Are you guilty per se if they confiscate your PC & find a wallet app on it?

I don't think anybody is going to be going into anybody's wallets. What this probably entails is not allowing exchanges to operate for now. I could be wrong but I don't see them cranking up a bitcoin division in the police departments.

[johnkypri]

This is journalism at it's worst;

A) You can't have a meeting with Bitcoin it's a peer to peer network.

A meeting took place with Bitcoin.co.uk a small bitcoin exchange with a million Baht capital (20k pounds and I believe the minimum amount you can start a Thai company with)

3) The source of this information is mad as a brush and suggests foreigners boycott purchasing goods from Thailand.

4) Title should read; Butthurt Thai Bitcoin Exchange makes wild claims after getting refused bank account.

If you're going to make a story relating too a law change quote a government source not someone that's upset he's been refused banking!!!

The source of this information, ie of the news article in the first post of this topic, is, as the article says in the first sentence, a statement on the website of Bitcoin. If you click on the link at the end of that first post you will see the article in The Telegraph and there is a link to the mentioned statement. For easy reference, I copy that sentence from the article with the link here:

In a statement on its website, Bitcoin said it had given a presentation to the Bank of Thailand about how the currency works in a bid to operate in the country.

Therefore, when you say that "The source of this information is mad as a brush" you are saying that the management of Bitcoin Co. Ltd., a company with a mailing address in Thailand and presumably registered in Thailand, is mad as a brush, thus exposing yourself to the risk of an accusation of libel and defamation. Hopefully, they will not understand this Irish slang.

No you're not getting it, it's not a statement on the website of Bitcoin;

Bitcoin is a peer to peer network with a market cap at the time I'm writing this of over 38,175,290,572 THB (thirty eight billion, 175 million 290 Thousand and five hundred and seventy two Baht!).

Both you and the source article are wrong in referring to "mad as a brush" Dave007 the pioneer who last month created a website to sell a few bitcoins with a million baht startup capital as Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is a peer to peer network with a market cap at the time I'm writing this of over 38,175,290,572 THB (thirty eight billion, 175 million 290 Thousand and five hundred and seventy two Baht!).

"mad as a brush" Dave007 who tried to start a small trading business buying and selling bitcoin last month but failed at the first hurdle this month by getting refused by his bank (BoT), as is very common when people try and set up Bitcoin exchanges in all countrys, Does not represent Bitcoin or the governing laws of this country in any shape or form.

If you look at bitcointalk.org forums you'll see that I'm going to be pretty far down the list of people that Dave007 might want to sue for legal, it might happen but then again Bitcoins might even become illegal!

This is the most unbelievable nonsense that I've ever seen get blown up by the media with no credible source (hence my initial comment about Journalism at it's worst!), It's not just the Telegraph all the papers are running with it. Although No ones bothered to check a credible source such as the Thai Penal Code (no mention of Bitcoin) or contacting the Bank of Thailand directly (who aren't to my knowledge law makers)

[Cuban]

If a person tried to pay a police bribe by BitCoin is that one crime or two?

[pancakeman]

http://asiancorrespondent.com/111332/has-bitcoin-been-banned-from-thailand/

[johnkypri]

http://asiancorrespondent.com/111332/has-bitcoin-been-banned-from-thailand/

Good bit of Journalism there, settles the debate!!

[Naam]

If a person tried to pay a police bribe by BitCoin is that one crime or two?

three crimes!

[Puccini]

Some posts have deplored the fact that the news article in the first post of this topic uses the announcement made by Bitcoin Co. Ltd (BCL) in Thailand as the only source, without reference to an “official source” such as a statement published by a government agency. Searching the web I found that there seem in fact to be no other sources available at all.

In my few years as the manager of a company in Thailand I had more than one occasion to seek and receive the advice of one government department or another and in none of these cases did the government department in question publish the advice given to me, respectively to the company I represented, nor would I have expected them to do so.

In the case of BCL this company chose to publish a summary of their discussions with a department of the Bank of Thailand and they explained their decision to do this, namely “to give information to our users about our choice to suspend our services”. I see nothing wrong with that, nor do I see anything wrong with a news reporter to write an article based on BCL’s published announcement.

If I wanted to find any fault with the news article it would be the use of the word “banned” in the title but I would not blame the journalist for this because most likely it was an editor in the back office who wrote that title, and we all know that it is a catchy headline that sells newspapers.

[johnkypri]

Some posts have deplored the fact that the news article in the first post of this topic uses the announcement made by Bitcoin Co. Ltd (BCL) in Thailand as the only source, without reference to an “official source” such as a statement published by a government agency. Searching the web I found that there seem in fact to be no other sources available at all.

In my few years as the manager of a company in Thailand I had more than one occasion to seek and receive the advice of one government department or another and in none of these cases did the government department in question publish the advice given to me, respectively to the company I represented, nor would I have expected them to do so.

In the case of BCL this company chose to publish a summary of their discussions with a department of the Bank of Thailand and they explained their decision to do this, namely “to give information to our users about our choice to suspend our services”. I see nothing wrong with that, nor do I see anything wrong with a news reporter to write an article based on BCL’s published announcement.

If I wanted to find any fault with the news article it would be the use of the word “banned” in the title but I would not blame the journalist for this because most likely it was an editor in the back office who wrote that title, and we all know that it is a catchy headline that sells newspapers.

Have you read the last post?

[Acutus]

It seems that Thai authorities understand this BitCoin too well.

By making it illegal, they can make money by hassling expats who are using it or just claim that expats are using it. As Thai authorities don't really have to prove whether expats are using it or not but it is expats who need to proof that they are innocent.

Of course, they probably don't care 1-bit about stoping it. They possibly love to have expats using it as much and often as possible so that they can arrest expats and demand a large sum of money. Similar to how they arrested expats on the charges that they hardly did to Thais.

You just can't help admiring them on how they know the ways to maximize their earning from nothing!

[Puccini]

Have you read the last post?

No, the last post before I started drafting my own post was your post “No you're not getting it, it's not a statement on the website of Bitcoin…”. It took me a long time to make my post because English is not my mother tongue and I made efforts to write sufficiently clearly to be understood correctly.

The article http://asiancorrespo...-from-thailand/ to which you linked confirms what I understand from my reading of the statement on the website of Bitcoin Co. Ltd. (BCL), a company registered and operating in Thailand, ie BCL initially asked the Bank of Thailand (BoT) if they needed any particular license, for example a money exchange licence, to be allowed to trade in Bitcoins and the BoT told them that based on the information presented by BCL, Bitcoins was not a currency and thus no license could be issued for trading in it, or perhaps the BCL actually applied for a money exchange licence and the BoT kept the application pending while pondering the question whether or not Bitcoins are a currency.

The reference to “capital controls” being mentioned in BCL’s statement seems to indicate that there probably is a Thai law about capital controls and that there are regulations issued under the authority of that law. The law will have a section defining some terms used in the law and one of these definitions will be for “currency”. The BoT must have arrived at the conclusion that Bitcoins is not a currency as defined by the law and for this reason the BoT was unable to issue a money exchange license to BCL.

Comes step 2, where after some more pondering the BoT invites representatives of BCL to a meeting on 29 July. BoT’s opinion that Bitcoins is not a currency remains unchanged, but since the Thai Baht (THB), which BCL pays when buying Bitcoins and receives when selling Bitcoins, is a currency these Bitcoin trading transactions fall under “capital controls” and thus are illegal without BCL having an exchange license. This puts BCL between a rock and a hard place: BCL cannot get a licence because bitcoins are not a currency, but trading in Bitcoins does not conform to the laws and regulations about “capital controls” because THB used in buying and selling Bitcoins is a currency.

To conclude, my understanding is that the BoT has not banned Bitcoins in Thailand, but in response to a request by BCL for advice has advised BCL to suspend trading in Bitcoins while the BoT continues to examine the matter and if necessary will make recommendations to the Minister of Finance about amendments of existing laws and/or regulations which should ten enable the BoT to arrive at a definite decision on an application for trading in Bitcoins, ie whether to approve or deny it.

[farang000999]

In the future they are going to have to make two lists down at Forbes for the richest people. One for people like Bill Gates and the Koch brothers and another for Bit Coin investors because in a couple of years, maybe by the end of this year, BitCoins are going to appreciate to between $130,040,304 to $194,540,300 per Bitcoin. These projections were made in the BigC food court by three very intelligent backpackers slash expats slash teachers slash ebayers slash Renaissance men. How do you know how much a Bitcoin is worth? Just like gold, you have to take all the currencies in the world, both the physical M-something money and then all the other M-something credit and bank deposits and then add up the current value of collectibles like Pogs and Wayne Gretzky's rookie card value and after some intense algebra we reached the figures stated above. BitCoin will change the world and topple governments around the world as the global population laughs at their make believe FIAT paper money. They will not be able to tax us AT ALL and so they will lose the fuel to their global oppression. Long Live Ron Paul!

[johnkypri]

Have you read the last post?

No, the last post before I started drafting my own post was your post “No you're not getting it, it's not a statement on the website of Bitcoin…”. It took me a long time to make my post because English is not my mother tongue and I made efforts to write sufficiently clearly to be understood correctly.

The article http://asiancorrespo...-from-thailand/ to which you linked confirms what I understand from my reading of the statement on the website of Bitcoin Co. Ltd. (BCL), a company registered and operating in Thailand, ie BCL initially asked the Bank of Thailand (BoT) if they needed any particular license, for example a money exchange licence, to be allowed to trade in Bitcoins and the BoT told them that based on the information presented by BCL, Bitcoins was not a currency and thus no license could be issued for trading in it, or perhaps the BCL actually applied for a money exchange licence and the BoT kept the application pending while pondering the question whether or not Bitcoins are a currency.

The reference to “capital controls” being mentioned in BCL’s statement seems to indicate that there probably is a Thai law about capital controls and that there are regulations issued under the authority of that law. The law will have a section defining some terms used in the law and one of these definitions will be for “currency”. The BoT must have arrived at the conclusion that Bitcoins is not a currency as defined by the law and for this reason the BoT was unable to issue a money exchange license to BCL.

Comes step 2, where after some more pondering the BoT invites representatives of BCL to a meeting on 29 July. BoT’s opinion that Bitcoins is not a currency remains unchanged, but since the Thai Baht (THB), which BCL pays when buying Bitcoins and receives when selling Bitcoins, is a currency these Bitcoin trading transactions fall under “capital controls” and thus are illegal without BCL having an exchange license. This puts BCL between a rock and a hard place: BCL cannot get a licence because bitcoins are not a currency, but trading in Bitcoins does not conform to the laws and regulations about “capital controls” because THB used in buying and selling Bitcoins is a currency.

To conclude, my understanding is that the BoT has not banned Bitcoins in Thailand, but in response to a request by BCL for advice has advised BCL to suspend trading in Bitcoins while the BoT continues to examine the matter and if necessary will make recommendations to the Minister of Finance about amendments of existing laws and/or regulations which should ten enable the BoT to arrive at a definite decision on an application for trading in Bitcoins, ie whether to approve or deny it.

Good Summary, I'm ashamed to admit your English is better than mine and that it is my mother tongue!!

[hawker9000]

Some people will only ever trust a currency that they can touch and hold, I respect and understand that but so little of that exists today.

...but they DO trust a currency that's in and of itself nothing more than worthless paper, ginned out by govts that have every reason to print whatever and whenever they want. 'Not sure why something like bitcoins aren't actually the more credible currency.

[rubberduck]

Haha funny grumpy people on high horses. There is no way they ever could ban the use of bitcoins. Do they really have wet dreams of controlling the internet ? Silly nitwits they are

Actually I just opened an account today and downloaded the software.

[hawker9000]

Have you read the last post?

No, the last post before I started drafting my own post was your post “No you're not getting it, it's not a statement on the website of Bitcoin…”. It took me a long time to make my post because English is not my mother tongue and I made efforts to write sufficiently clearly to be understood correctly.

The article http://asiancorrespo...-from-thailand/ to which you linked confirms what I understand from my reading of the statement on the website of Bitcoin Co. Ltd. (BCL), a company registered and operating in Thailand, ie BCL initially asked the Bank of Thailand (BoT) if they needed any particular license, for example a money exchange licence, to be allowed to trade in Bitcoins and the BoT told them that based on the information presented by BCL, Bitcoins was not a currency and thus no license could be issued for trading in it, or perhaps the BCL actually applied for a money exchange licence and the BoT kept the application pending while pondering the question whether or not Bitcoins are a currency.

The reference to “capital controls” being mentioned in BCL’s statement seems to indicate that there probably is a Thai law about capital controls and that there are regulations issued under the authority of that law. The law will have a section defining some terms used in the law and one of these definitions will be for “currency”. The BoT must have arrived at the conclusion that Bitcoins is not a currency as defined by the law and for this reason the BoT was unable to issue a money exchange license to BCL.

Comes step 2, where after some more pondering the BoT invites representatives of BCL to a meeting on 29 July. BoT’s opinion that Bitcoins is not a currency remains unchanged, but since the Thai Baht (THB), which BCL pays when buying Bitcoins and receives when selling Bitcoins, is a currency these Bitcoin trading transactions fall under “capital controls” and thus are illegal without BCL having an exchange license. This puts BCL between a rock and a hard place: BCL cannot get a licence because bitcoins are not a currency, but trading in Bitcoins does not conform to the laws and regulations about “capital controls” because THB used in buying and selling Bitcoins is a currency.

To conclude, my understanding is that the BoT has not banned Bitcoins in Thailand, but in response to a request by BCL for advice has advised BCL to suspend trading in Bitcoins while the BoT continues to examine the matter and if necessary will make recommendations to the Minister of Finance about amendments of existing laws and/or regulations which should ten enable the BoT to arrive at a definite decision on an application for trading in Bitcoins, ie whether to approve or deny it.

Good Summary, I'm ashamed to admit your English is better than mine and that it is my mother tongue!!

So, could BCL (legally) exchange THB for some other currency, and then do its bitcoin buying & selling using the other currency? Or, if bitcoins aren't a "currency", then just treat them as a commodity. Treat all transactions involving bitcoins as just private barter. Seems like the BoT determination that bitcoins are not a currency works in BCL's favor. "Hey there, do we need a license for this?" "Nope, they're not currency. Just like bags of rice as far as we're concerned." Is there some legal definition of "capital controls" under which bitcoins fall, even though they've been determined to NOT fall under the definition of "currency"? Many websites, such as some media sites that sell movie downloads, allow you to buy "credits" for use on them. I know a website that sells aeronautical data via subscriptions that are also obtained using such "credits". In Vegas, you buy & redeem "chips". Frequent flyer "miles" are another example: these days some programs promote ways for you to use them to purchase products directly, or use them to be reimbursed for travel you buy with your own money (CapitalOne's "Purchase Eraser"). Except for all the crypto involved, are bitcoins really any different?

[rubberduck]

'In recent months, Bitcoin.co.th tried to register with the Thai authorities to comply with all regulations. One of those activities was also the approach a bank or Thailand for advice on the conditions to which exchange rates they had to meet to buy and sell legally. Bitcoins Initially they had gotten the message that Bitcoin was no money and that they had to ask a license. However, on July 29, they were invited again to the bank or Thailand and they were told the bad news.'

The dodo's made it a local co.ltd hahahaha

http://www.bahtcoin.com/

http://coinmill.com/BTC_THB.html

are still online.

You cannot forbit bitcoins, like you cannot forbid file sharing. That's how the internet works.

At most they can forbid to use it in physical shops, dodos. Bitcoin in Thailand will never disappear, just move to the dark alleys totally beyond control of the bank of Thailand.

Here in europe it's only growing and growing and growing and growing and growing and growing and growing and growing

[NeverSure]

Currencies are created by governments by the issuance of promissory notes. If you or I sell goods or services and receive say, Baht, the Central Bank is the debtor and you or I are the creditor. The 2 sides of the double-entry system are satisfied.

Quite simply, if you or I hold Bitcoins, we again are the creditor but who is the debtor if there is no central bank?

I am sorry I need somebody to answer this fundamental question regarding this 'currency'.

How about gold or silver? There is no central bank but rather only a marketplace. It's worth what someone will pay for it and it can go way up or down. You have to find your own buyer.

Now of course I'm not comparing bitcoins with PM's per se, but the principle is there. It's market driven, not government driven.

[PoodMaiDai]

LOL More like they can't control and manipulate it, or even understand it for that matter, so they must ban it.

[beb]

Can we finally change the heading of this thread or something? It appears that the headline is wrong and so a lot of the discussion here is based on facts that simply don't exist.

[hawker9000]

Oh, I don't know. CNBC is carrying the exact same headline. And to be honest, it's not clear from any source that I can find online whether they've actually been declared illegal in Thailand or not. BCL has apparently released a statement saying that they're "suspending operations". Why would they do that unless that wasn't their understanding as well? I think the headline is as good as any other, at least for now. What it doesn't make clear is just exactly what the prohibitions are, if any, for the average joe.

What I'm thinking though is that if bitcoin gets effectively tarred with the "used by terrorists & drug networks" brush, it won't just be the BoT trying to shut it down... Or digging into who's been using it...