[nprz]

The bill expands the definition of broker to include anyone who facilities the transfer of crypto: miners, wallet providers, smart contract devs. These people are now made responsible for collecting transaction records for the IRS. That's just not how cryptocurrency works. Miners, smart contract devs, don't know who is transacting with who. It's effectively a ban on cryptocurrency.

[zonethundery]

You're not wrong, that is a maximalist interpretation of the language. Portman has tried to clarify, but there is always a gap between legislative intent and what the rulemaking process (i.e. Treasury) ends up doing with the statute. It's terrible language but not the end of the world (yet).

[SpicyLemonZest]

I don't want to sound unsympathetic, because the situation really does suck for cryptocurrency devs, but it's not obvious to me that they should get to unilaterally decide how it works. The bill defines a broker as "any person who (for consideration) is responsible for regularly providing any service effectuating transfers of digital assets on behalf of another person", and it seems reasonable that anyone who's transferring assets on behalf of someone else should know who that someone else is.

More broadly, if you've ever wondered how industries can go to Congress with a straight face and argue for crazy regulatory exemptions, this is what it feels like from the other side. I like crypto devs a lot more than I like, say, Exxon, but I still don't think we should have carveouts just to protect their business model.