[contingencies]

HN darling but ... thumbs down. Seemingly no insight. Long read (skipped most). IMHO largely valueless opine and supposition. I think we already know bankers bank, corporations can't innovate, and regulations are abused for protectionism.

[theendisney]

I had a funny chat in the 90s with soneone in charge of a bank. The thing was, they wanted me to supply a business plan. I know how to write those but find it mysterious that they want me to write it for all completely unorriginal businesses. If one wants to start a shoe store one should simply investigate the demography and map the varous shoe stores nearby. The bank is in a position to do that cheaply for their entire service area. Innovation would be to put the opportunities in the window display. Their standard plan can have everything they look for. No need to complaint that the guy who hapoens to be good at baking bread forgot something. If the data checks out you can give much larger lones with more interest. If there are many holes in the coverage you sell someone a lone for a franchise. It was a funny chat because everything was impossible, even a bank director should not submit ideas.

[omcnoe]

The bank isn't so interested in whether it's a good idea to open a shoe store or not, but in whether you as the person asking for lending has the skillset to actually execute on that plan. Asking the person who wants lending to write the plan is the easiest way to check this.

[Danieru]

The business plan is not about the business plan.

It's only even half about the business. Instead it is about the businessman making the pitch.

If someone is good at baking bread that suggest they are qualified to to bake bread. Running a bakery is a super set of that skill. The business plan request is a fantastic method to give such a person a chance to show they have the right resources, enough experience, and reasonable expectations and strong commitment.

[EGreg]

Well of course. That’s how most gatekeepers act.

Why does every employee in the US need to pay an accountant to file their corporate payroll taxes, when the corporation knows how much they paid and can just use THEIR accountant to report this same information? It would be standard across many employees. And in Europe that’s largely what’s done. But in USA this creates many “bullshit jobs”. The IRS just closed their free file under Trump admin, and even when they had it, you had no way to electronically submit business taxes, and even if you mailed those to the IRS (still allowed) some states have NO WAY for you to file taxes without an accountant!

To open an LLC in NY you must announce it in a specific newspaper they tell you. And that newspaper charges $700. Same thing — they lobby to keep this going.

[eadmund]

> Why does every employee in the US need to pay an accountant to file their corporate payroll taxes, when the corporation knows how much they paid and can just use THEIR accountant to report this same information?

How would my employer know how much money my savings, chequing and investment accounts make? I owe taxes on all of those as well as on my income.

How would my employer know what interest I pay on my mortgage, how much I contribute to charity and my other deductible expenses?

> some states have NO WAY for you to file taxes without an accountant

Which ones?

[lotsofpulp]

>Why does every employee in the US need to pay an accountant to file their corporate payroll taxes, when the corporation knows how much they paid and can just use THEIR accountant to report this same information?

You don't need an accountant, and employees do not pay "corporate payroll taxes", they usually just pay income tax to the federal government.

And if you think tax liability is based solely on amount of pay received from an employer, then I think you must not have any experience with paying income taxes in the US.

>The IRS just closed their free file under Trump admin

Free Fillable Forms is still available for electronic submissions. What closed was the government provided alternative to guided tax preparation software like TurboTax.

> some states have NO WAY for you to file taxes without an accountant!

I doubt this. Please provide an example.

[EGreg]

HN anathema: crypto and blockchain — can and does trivially solve the issues Patrick writes about. You can easily make sure the account has enough money, without knowing whose account it is. Crypto is “buyer beware”. The traditional fintech system is “seller beware”. But crypto is programmable and in theory you could easily make use of arbitration, resolution of disputes, and periodic payouts etc. All without being forced into the bundle of services you don’t control, that banks saddle you with.

[ranger207]

Crypto and blockchain by itself does not solve any of these problems. It's merely a payments system that happens to be on a computer natively. There's nothing technical preventing banks from getting together and making Open Banking a well-supported thing like they're supposed to be doing; it's all just code and contracts in the end. It's not that they can't, it's that they won't, and they won't for business and political reasons. Crypto is subject to the same pressures but doesn't have the same regulations to constrain their actions. Crypto's better ability to eg do international payments is not because of any technical reason but simply because they don't have the same regulations and inertia of the traditional banking system. While the traditional banking system has problems with its regulations making things too hard to do, many people prefer it to the easier to screw up wild west of crypto payments. Lots of people like the FDIC making sure their savings aren't wiped out if the bank lies on its balance sheet, or the ability to claw back money transfers if someone breaks into their account. Crypto could certainly provide those services and backstops, but they haven't yet, and based on the prevailing attitude amongst the major participants, it's unlikely they will anytime soon. The only real difference between crypto and banks as a payments system is whether or not you want to start from scratch and build up, or start with the existing morass and tear down. The latter is the safer option which many people prefer when it concerns their money

[toenail]

The idea that I’d need anybody’s permission or a regulation to allow me to give my money to somebody else is the problem.

[fragmede]

As an honest person, that makes sense. Unfortunately, the world is filled with people who are not. If I have to give my money to Alice to give it to Bob because Alice is the only person with a way to get it to Bob, I'm trusting Alice to just do that. But Alice is a business woman and is doing this for lots of people. One day, Alice just disappears with everybody's money. All of the people that relied on Alice to get money to Bob just got screwed. So then they make a bunch of rules and regulations so that doesn't happen again.

MTLs, money transmission licenses exist to say you can’t legally handle other people’s money without proving you’re trustworthy, solvent, and compliant with anti-crime laws.

[victorbjorklund]

Who's permission do you need to be allowed to accept $10 in cash? I mean there are regulations but that is usually not related directly to the cash payment itself but rather that you know you might need to pay taxes or there is regulation that you can't commit terrorist acts and you know that could be the blocker but then it's not really the cash payment that is needing permission. And again, nothing that Bitcoin or other crypto is solving because you still would have to have the same kind of permission or just not care about the permission but you can do that with cash too.

[zihotki]

You still can - make a wire transfer or give them cash. Or what is your actual problem?

[toenail]

My actual problem is that the central bank devalues the money I earned. I'm glad to hear that the financial system works for you, and that you have zero problems making transactions to anybody on the planet. That's not true for a lot of people.

[astrange]

The second law of thermodynamics devalues the money you earned. There's no way you can have $10 that always and forever buys the same things $10 currently does.

Central banks keep its value higher than the alternative, as anyone who doesn't have oppositional defiance disorder would notice from the fact that we haven't had a Great Depression lately. Because it really gets devalued if there's an economic collapse and all the businesses you trade with cease to exist.

[ryanackley]

Anytime I've tried to buy something with crypto, the fees have been an order of magnitude higher than interchange (credit card) fees. And unlike credit cards, the cost is put on me not the merchant.

[afroboy]

There one Blockchain is used for memes, but it's actually very efficient one and the fees are very low. Where i live we use to move USDC between accounts very easily.

[astrange]

You can't be sure of anything just because a crypto wallet appears to have a number in it, because the legal system exists, and judges don't care what you think a number means if they think something different.

Mainly this comes up during bankruptcy, but they can also just order you to return stolen funds you've received even if you would prefer not to do that.