[gioele]

Bitcoin fulfils easily the definition of "electronic money" found in the European directive 2009/110/EC, art. 2 def. 1:

> 2. "electronic money" means electronically, including magnetically, stored monetary value as represented by a claim on the issuer which is issued on receipt of funds for the purpose of making payment transactions as defined in point 5 of Article 4 of Directive 2007/64/EC, and which is accepted by a natural or legal person other than the electronic money issuer;

Germany is doing nothing strange, all the EU state will have to do similar things in the future. Bitcoin may be a distributed currency without a politically backed central bank, but it is still a currency, so it is treated as such by any competent tax office.

[justincormack]

I don't see that it represents a "claim on the issuer" though. Although you could claim it as issued by the entropy of the universe in a double entry system...

[gioele]

issuer = miner

You bitcoins are accepted because they are recognized by others to be part of a block originally mined by someone.

Really not that different from how money is "printed" by central banks these days (somebody presses the "generate €1.000.000" key and that updates a value in a DB).

[justincormack]

Its not a liability of the miner though. I agree it is not much different from money printing, but there is still a balancing entry, so money is a liability of the central bank, although that is meaningless.