- The video features Maciej Grzygorczyk, a legal and tax advisor, as a guest on Kanga Non-Comment.
- They discuss a situation where a partner of Kanga was arrested for a transaction outside of the OTC system.
- Making transactions within the OTC system provides security and validation for users.
- The confirmation of transactions is important for tax purposes and potential disputes.
- The lack of evidence and confirmation for transactions outside of the OTC system can have severe consequences for both users and local offices.
- GIF is introducing new procedures for cryptocurrency exchanges, including reporting transactions through the MOFONET system.
- Locals do not have to make the same statements as institutions.
- The video mentions previous actions taken to clarify the boundaries of local banks' operations and the refusal of the Ministry of Finance to issue an interpretation.

- The speaker discusses the challenges faced by entrepreneurs in the cryptocurrency industry when dealing with government offices and regulations.
- They mention a specific case where the Ministry of Finance refused to provide a clear interpretation of the tax requirements for cryptocurrency businesses.
- The speaker also talks about a court case they won against a bank that tried to terminate their account due to their involvement in cryptocurrency.
- They mention that the attitude of courts and prosecutors towards cryptocurrency entrepreneurs has improved, but caution against scams and the need for awareness.
- The upcoming regulations, including DLT, MICA, and TFR, are discussed briefly, with a focus on wallet identification and transaction tracking.

- The P2P market operates within the stock exchange's accounting system and does not involve checking cryptocurrency wallets.
- The responsibility for verifying the cleanliness of wallets lies with the exchange.
- The OTC system operates outside the blockchain, providing advantages for partners.
- Clean analysis is necessary when conducting transactions with cryptocurrencies.
- There is a need for stablecoins in the cryptocurrency system to integrate with the real world.
- Cryptocurrency exchanges listing stablecoins like USDT require written consent from the issuer.
- Regulated European exchanges may not be able to list USDT if it is not regulated.
- Stablecoin regulations are expected to be implemented by June 30, 2024.
- Delegated acts are still needed to provide guidance on how to proceed with stablecoin regulations.
- The Spanish anthem is speechless, and babies can naturally swim until around 6 months of age.

- Maciej Grzygorczyk discusses the importance of making transactions within the OTC system for security and validation.
- Lack of evidence and confirmation for transactions outside of the OTC system can have severe consequences.
- GIF is introducing new procedures for cryptocurrency exchanges, including reporting transactions through the MOFONET system.
- Challenges faced by cryptocurrency entrepreneurs in dealing with government offices and regulations are discussed.
- The upcoming regulations, including DLT, MICA, and TFR, are briefly mentioned.
- The need for stablecoins in the cryptocurrency system and the regulations surrounding them are discussed.
- The Spanish anthem is speechless, and babies can naturally swim until around 6 months of age.

W tym odcinku Sławek i Maciej mówią o wydarzeniach ze świata kryptowalut i nie tylko. O czym tym razem rozmawiali?

- Bezpieczeństwo regulacji OTC
- Regulacje MiCA
- Uważaj na scamy!

To i jeszcze więcej w najnowszym odcinku No Comment!

Do zobaczenia w każdą sobotę o godzinie 19. Znajdziesz tu krótkie pogadanki, wywiady i dyskusje dotyczące takich zagadnień jak kryptowaluty, rynki, inwestycje, oszczędności i podróże.

Zapraszamy do subskrypcji kanału i włączenia powiadomień, aby nie przegapić przyszłych odcinków.

Prowadzący: Sławek Zawadzki, Maciej Grzegorczyk
____

To nagranie nie jest poradą inwestycyjną w rozumieniu Rozporządzenia Ministra Finansów. Jest to subiektywna opinia prowadzących.

Obserwuj nas również w pozostałych social mediach:
* Facebook fanpage: https://www.facebook.com/kanga.exchange/
* Facebook grupa: https://www.facebook.com/groups/kangaexchange/
* TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@kangaexchangepl?lang=pl-PL
* Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/kangaexchange/
* Telegram: https://t.me/KangaExchange
* Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kanga_exchange/
* Twitter: https://twitter.com/KangaExchange/
* Twitter Sławka: https://twitter.com/SZ_Kanga
* Twitter Łukasza: https://twitter.com/LZ_Kanga
* Kanga Exchange: https://kanga.exchange/pl

Kampania “Nie Pie(p)rz”:
https://kanga.exchange/pl/aml

Dołącz do nas! https://trade.kanga.exchange/auth/register/?refToken=D3hThbX51LMv

IN THE NEXT EPISODE KANGA NON-COMMENT KANGA NON-COMMENT

Today we have a special guest in Kanga Non-Comment, Maciej Grzygorczyk, legal advisor and tax advisor.

Maciek, without any introduction, because you are our lawyer, you know a lot of things that are happening in Kanga, but you also know a lot of things that are happening around Kanga.

I remember the event that took place a few months ago.

We found out that 1 of our office partners was arrested.

His fiancée called us and said that the matter was serious, it caused us anxiety, because we already guessed that it was probably a transaction that went beyond the canon.

We immediately started the intervention and there were some things that turned out to be.

It turned out that, first, this partner said that she would like to inform, consult, but in fact she doesn't want us to deal with this matter, because it turned out that this transaction was outside the OTC

So this lady was aware that our help as lawyers here is directed to partners who comply with the rule of making transactions within the OTC system.

Well, if this partner is making transactions outside the OTC system, he has lost the main argument that he can defend himself, that he is a partner of such and such a company, he is making these transactions within the system, and each transaction is validated and has a confirmation of this transaction.

And in this case, as the criminal case was going on, he did not have this confirmation and his security status was much lower.

He was not able to prove that this transaction was actually carried out and actually identified and were carried out due to the financial security measures.

My dear, those of you who watch us and use our offices sometimes, you probably know that there is a group of users who come to our locales or to our partners and suggest making a so-called transaction without a code.

A transaction without a code is something like We don't use all the KANGA mechanisms for this, but we do this transaction outside of KANGA.

Or we agree with the operator of the office or the local, that we will let internal flows in, and, as Maciek said, it will be done outside of the OTC system.

We will explain it to those who don't know.

The OTC system is a software written by us, which is dedicated to the operation of your cash transactions and the accountants and local people use

And the evidence, as far as the evidence is concerned, GIF requires, i.e.

The MLO agency requires the evidence to be provided and to be confirmed for the transaction.

We would like to talk about 2 perspectives now.

Let's imagine that you are the operator and I am the user and we are actually doing such a transaction.

What is my interest as a user, to make this transaction carried out by the OTC system?

Yes, see what's going on, because we will jump back to another example.

Recently, there was also a case that someone said that he made a transaction with Kanga.

People say that Zosty made a transaction with Kanga, but it turns out that this transaction was not made with Kanga at all.

Not with any office, not with any local, with no 1.

And we don't have such a transaction, so we can't do anything about it.

If it turned out that someone made a transaction as part of the OTC and there was any error, any problem, then we can take a stand.

So for the user, for his safety, because he comes with fiat or with cryptocurrencies and wants to make this transaction, having this confirmation, he has a guarantee that this obligation will be fulfilled.

So for users, it is also safe to make a transaction within the system.

And the confirmation of this transaction is a document that is printed.

This is the information that such a transaction has been carried out.

Too long words are a challenge for me, you have to forgive me.

Not only does it have a tax value for me, because this document confirms the transaction and I should be able

Well, it will be necessary for checks, especially for larger checks, because, quite honestly, for these very, very small ones, then the tax authorities often close it quickly, they don't even check it at all, but with larger ones, even with several tens of thousands of zlotys, when there are transactions, they would like to see this confirmation of

And the second thing, when we sometimes find someone who is cheating on us, if we make this transaction using our KANG wallet and OTC system, or using a BON, because we have a solution like BON and on the other side there will be an OTC system, which is confirmed by this document, then we can advertise such a transaction if it comes to some kind of injustice.

But the perspective of a local or an accountant, I think it is more interesting, I mean, not conducting such a transaction using the OTC system can have more severe consequences.

For example, the situation we talked about, that someone carried out a transaction and it turned out to be illegal and basically had no defense tools.

Someone says that he came, made a transaction, and now he was cheated, or had a transaction in connection with some money laundering.

And on the other hand, what does the office or the local office have to do?

There is no evidence, no confirmation, so it is just the word.

And having confirmation in mind and having in mind that we, as the other side, can confirm something like that, We present the whole system, how the exchange is organized within the OTC.

The criminal cases from the last year and a half, Sławek, practically all of them with great success, right?

First of all, there are very few such cases, it must be said clearly, it has been limited.

And secondly, as Maciek said, there is a big success here.

Tell us, Maciek, about the changes that are being prepared for cryptocurrency exchanges in connection with some new procedures that GIF is introducing.

Some of you have already received a list of information about it.

There is a small error in this list, it says 2024, but it is about 2023.

The point is that transactions for the fourth quarter of 2023 will have to be reported, statistically speaking, until January 18.

Everything is done through the GIF system, i.e.

You can log in there and you have to register as an institution, because so far many of you have not had such a duty until now.

Such a duty must be fulfilled in the first act.

So, the fact that you have not registered yet is not a bad thing, but in the first act, which requires such behavior, we first register in this GIF system and create a form identifying the institution.

We must have this signature qualified and within this period, until January 18, we answer the form with questions.

As for these questions, we will not be divvying up now, I will be making a separate video about it, so everyone in the group will be able to find out what information needs to be put together.

Does Locals have to make such a statement?

No, Locals does not have to make such a ruling, because it is not included in the register of virtual currencies and is not an institution.

But let's pull this thread so that it is fully aware.

About a year ago, we took such actions that we submitted a report on interpretation to the National Tax Information Agency and a report on interpretation to the Ministry of Finance in 2 separate modes.

To clearly give us the boundary where the situation is, when the local bank can operate as it operates, that is, it is not a WASP, it is not a What is a WASP?

WASP is a company that provides services in the field of virtual currencies.

This term WASP is also used by international regulators.

So it's just about whether you, as a local, can make a huge amount of transactions for a huge volume, advertise for it, have an online website, a billboard at the entrance to your city and a call center.

Yes, it definitely doesn't mean you're not a local.

Is making a large number of transactions and having a large volume without the other items also means that it can be a binding institution?

It's hard to say, but we made some assumptions about our application to the Ministry of Finance and the National Treasury.

So, to make a long story short, the Ministry of Finance refused

The Voivodeship Administrative Court, unfortunately, gave them the right to do so.

But we expected that, we wanted to get this problem out of the way.

Can you explain this issue for people who are not lawyers?

Because it is clear that if I, as an entrepreneur, feel insecure in some area, I go to the appropriate office and submit a report, and the ordinary offices often do not respond.

And the Ministry of Finance refused because it stated that we really… because this report must result from the fact that we are not sure if we have to pay a public and legal fee, which is the tax required for the entry into the virtual currency register.

And imagine, Sławek, that we found an ideal, analogous example that Someone wants to start an activity based on the sale of alcohol and wonders if he should get a concession.

There is no concession for alcohol, there is a permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages.

And we asked the same question about cryptocurrency.

Someone wants to start selling cryptocurrencies and wonders if he has to sign up for this register.

In a similar case, they issued such an interpretation of alcohol, but they did not want to issue such a thing for cryptocurrencies.

And they said that we are actually asking the AML, the Ministry of Finance, even though it is in their scope of activities, and it will not be dealt with anyway, and we have to interpret it ourselves.

But OK, in this regard, I say, all right, we let it go.

The National Treasury Information Agency is classically refusing, because the CIS is currently a very interesting body that makes a lot of refusals, because it says that the tax officer must indicate the actual state of affairs himself, whether it provides services in the field of virtual currencies or not.

We don't want them to assess the situation themselves.

We present them, we do so and so many transactions, we don't advertise, we have such and such a volume.

Tell us a wide description of the actual state, tell us if we are this WASP, if we are an institution, do we have to pay out on capital gains, or do we have to pay out as part of economic activity?

They refuse us and now we are at this stage.

Soon we will have a court ruling of the Voivodeship Administrative Court, which, attention, will not tell us whether or not, but will deflect that interpretation and will make the treasury do this interpretation.

I have done something like this many times in many cases, so I am really in a very good mood here.

I think that in a while we will have a clear answer to this in

This is what running a cryptocurrency business looks like.

There are a lot of different kinds of law, because there's administrative law, unfortunately criminal law, and civil law also happens here.

I have a question for you about 1 of the cases that we won in court recently.

Without going into details, but 1 of the banks wanted to tell us about the contract.

Yes, very ugly, from the inattention, referring to the promises that did not exist.

They were evidently simply not interested in supporting the cryptocurrency substance.

It's amazing, because after the last hearing before the court, the court ruled after 2 days.

Here, it must be said that the court acted expressly, very quickly.

The point is that there was no revocation of this publication for 2 weeks, as the courts do, but closed the case, saying that in 2 days I will issue a verdict.

What does it mean that it was beneficial for us?

I will tell you the whole story in a nutshell.

The point is that when a bank is issuing a bank account contract, such a statement, according to the civil code, can only be from an important reason, where the law is very restrictive.

And as it came to the statement, we made a security request.

The security request results in the court either issuing a decision on the security, i.e.

Ordering to maintain this account, specifically that the statement is ineffective and unimportant, or it may give us something like that.

In this case, he issued this decision, which the bank did in the course of the next few months.

Yes, he stated that we are still something there, something there,

He made a statement, but… He said, but we still

have some issues, and we will talk about it again.

This time with an additional clause that if the bank continues to do such numbers, that is, it will again issue an invoice in such a strange mode.

Then there will be financial penalties for the bank.

And finally the case that has recently ended concerns that the sentence is positive for us.

Interestingly, recently, not our case, but I read about a case where the client was also told by a non-cryptocurrency bank account that the term of the statement would be over.

Where the client, and not the cryptocurrency, was told that the bank account

The client submitted a security request, and then got the security, and the bank didn't do it because it said, unfortunately, the expiration date has expired.

Remember, as I said, that we have to make it in time, because it will be easier for us if we catch the date when the bill is still in effect.

So it is important for everyone who has such a situation, that you have to submit a security request as soon as possible, because again, the law says that the security request should be recognized within 7 days.

As soon as the judge comes back from vacation.

A few weeks, so sometimes this situation is not so good.

The bank says that it cannot do something like that, it cannot run it again, because the procedures and technical issues do not allow it.

So the client makes the next insurance claim, forcing the bank to pay the financial penalty.

And the judge also said that this is a problem of the bank as a professional.

It is often said that you can demand from a professional.

We also often heard that you can demand from a compulsory institution.

So from the bank as an entrepreneur, you can demand specialties.

And the court said in its justification that they were not interested in anything.

And what's interesting, there was an article after about a week and a half, and the bank actually launched this bank account.

The procedures and technical issues, however, were overcome.

I have such an impression, but it's just my intuition, because I don't follow these statistics.

You spend every day with these cases, but I have the impression that the attitude of the courts, or rather, I dare to say, based on our experience, that even prosecutors to cryptocurrency entrepreneurs, not those who build financial pyramids, but to such ordinary, normal ones, this attitude has warmed up a bit.

Yes, it has warmed up, but also because cryptocurrency companies have learned to function in this world of fiduciary currencies.

Even when people come to our office workers, we often say when we do training, are you a local or an office?

And yes, ask this person if he is in contact with a third party, if he is not connected by NDSK, observe him, possibly sign a statement of independence and awareness, just to be sure that this person is not misled.

Because unfortunately, when she is misled and buys these cryptocurrencies that fly to some strange investment platform, then later your bank account can be blocked.

We also had a recent situation that a police officer came to 1 partner after a few hours, right?

said that, oh, such a transaction and that they want to block these money

funds, The situation is that a few hours later, the police came to 1 of the partners and said

that they wanted to blockade the money, the money actually obtained in connection with the transaction, because this person was not aware of all this.

The office showed a statement of independence and awareness.

And suddenly it turns out that if someone signs up for this statement, that he is not in contact with a third party, is aware of the course of the course, that platforms of this type are fraud, and in a moment he runs to the police and says, oh Jesus, I don't have these cryptocurrencies, I was run by someone and now it's all gone.

And suddenly it turns out that the police also do that.

Somewhere the border of this childhood ends.

I think it ends at the moment when someone is completely unaware of what they are doing.

When you are an operator in our system, it doesn't matter if you are a local or an office, before making a transaction, you get a reminder to make sure that the person you are making a transaction with is doing it fully aware that these are her own decisions.

A topic that is a bit heated up, but it is something that occupies 80% of our thoughts at the moment.

For example, we probably don't know which of the Polish offices will, for example, control cryptocurrencies within the framework of the regulations that are to be introduced.

Yes, we don't know, but I assume it will be GIF.

I can see that after all this, that they are preparing to operate the cryptocurrency market.

But for me, it is very interesting, I will remind you, there are 3 regulations.

MICA is about cryptocurrency permissions, stablecoins, tokenization.

general, MICA, which is about cryptocurrency, stablecoin, tokenization permits.

TFR, which is about the limit of 1000 euro, cryptocurrency transactions tracking, wallet identification.

This will be another plus for our partners, so that you know how different P2P markets are.

On the P2P market, if we send funds from the X to Y wallet, it is within the stock exchange, in fact, within the accounting system.

So you see, you can't check the cryptocurrency wallet there.

And TFR, this agency, also predicted that if there is no transfer in the distributed system, so it's not blockchain.

So there's nothing to identify here, no cryptocurrency wallet.

The responsibility rests on the exchange.

Yes, this responsibility that it should verify at the entrance that this wallet is clean.

Of course, I'm simplifying a bit here, but that's the point of all this.

And now look, this is how the OTC system works.

I come, Sławek, to you with Litecoins, I change these Litecoins into OMEGA in the lot, and ultimately, a transaction is made with a partner, not on the blockchain.

Exactly, it is done outside the blockchain.

So this is an advantage for partners, which is, which will be, that it is not on the blockchain.

Standard offices will have to act a little differently, they will have increased responsibilities, and we take it on ourselves.

When you make a transaction with someone in cash and someone directly to your ledger transfers their cryptocurrencies, for example, how do you know, how are you sure, that these cryptocurrencies are clean?

There is a man in Poland who you know, there is 1 specialist for sure, who is in charge of tracking stolen funds.

Recently, you organized a conference in your office in Wrocław.

And there, in fact, the man who is tracking cryptocurrency on the blockchain, described several cases in which he participated, where he managed to recover stolen funds, not always in full, but to a large extent.

And he told about such a situation once, that the police arrested 1 of the officers in the northern Cyprus.

They arrested this fraudster, who was trying to pay this money, because the means were traced.

If we use the OTC system, our office or local system, Kanga takes care of the funds that flow in.

At a certain volume, because there is no such obligation yet, But we already have this integration done, remember, I pressed on it a lot, I said, Sławek, let's get ready for ETFR faster, at a lower level, until there are no such obligations yet, but let's start doing this analysis.

We know that the changes will affect the operations of offices and exchanges.

I think that there is only 1 stablecoin that is working well in Poland.

But generally, cryptocurrencies are stablecoins today.

I mean, a cryptocurrency system without stablecoins would not be integrated with the real world.

The stock exchange that operates in Poland, no matter what, will want to list some stablecoins.

Is it true that she will have to have the consent of the issuer of these stablecoins?

Yes, she will have to have the written consent of the issuer.

That's what Mike was talking about, that there must be a written consent.

And that this issuer must have the status of a credit status or an electronic money institution.

Notably, there is currently only 1 electronic money institution in Poland.

But I must admit, congratulations to Kraken on the cryptocurrency market.

Kraken has already obtained the status of an issuer on September 25 in Ireland.

I recently exchanged emails with Kraken on this matter.

I have positive thoughts about Kraken too.

But that means that all cryptocurrency exchanges are listing USDT.

And that means that USDT should issue a written consent for all these exchanges to be listed.

I'm not able to imagine that these exchanges are listing.

you assume that USDT will be regulated, that they will get this status.

In the opposite case, as I understand it, regulated European exchanges cannot list USDT.

I mean, look what will happen if the biggest stablecoin, in terms of capitalization and popularity, will have to be withdrawn from European exchanges.

Of course, there will be and still are Omega Złotówka, Omega Dolar, Omega Euro.

We are not going to stay behind and satisfy the needs of Mikey or Miki.

But it's just mega surprising, because we have USDT, we have DAI, which is actually an algorithmic stablecoin.

These cryptocurrencies are a security, but it still refers to the official currency course.

We'll talk about it off the air, because I have my own thoughts on this topic, and we'll see what conclusions we come to.

I still hope, and I said it recently, it's a quiet assumption that the term may be renewed, that this term may be postponed in time to give more time to get this status of EMI.

See all Kanga transcripts on Youtube

No Comment #54 | Krypto-prawo