Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gst 1367 days ago
> the U.S. person must deny all parties access to that virtual currency

With Bitcoin that would be relatively straightforward: Just ignore the UTXO because the incoming funds are clearly separated from any preexisting funds.

But with Ethereum that's different due to the account-based approach: What's the impact if those funds are intermingled with preexisting funds on the same Ethereum address? Is it now unsafe to spend any of those funds or can existing funds be spent as long as the minimum balance doesn't fall below the amount of sanctioned funds?

Also what's the impact in terms of taxes: Could there be a situation where Redox OS needs to pay taxes on those 299 Ether but at the same time is not able to disburse them? Due to the high crypto volatility this could become a headache quickly: Imagine having to pay taxes for this year, but then due to the sanction only being able to actually sell those Ether in a later year when the price could be potentially a lot less than the tax liability.

1 comments

The OFAC is just looking for the money to be blocked. At least, that's what it sounds like:

https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/...

I don't think that sanctioned money is income, but these are all good questions that I'd be asking my lawyer/IRS/treasury if I got a donation like this.