Another word for confiscation is steal. We all know stealing is wrong..
Crown Prosecution Service is coming for crooks' cryptocurrency
"If criminals believe they can hide their ill-gotten assets online they are very much mistaken." That was the warning from Nick Price, head of the UK Crown Prosecution Service's proceeds of crime unit, who told The Register the agency had "already secured" a confiscation order for digital currency assets and "would expect more …
COMMENTS
-
-
Friday 1st December 2017 11:47 GMT phuzz
It's pretty much the same as if someone had used their ill-gotten gains to buy US dollars or any other foreign currency, the values of which go up and down compared to the pound.
It's not about the government gaining someone's money, it's about depriving a criminal of the proceeds of their crime After all, it's not like you'd expect a thief to be locked up, but still allowed to keep the things they'd nicked when they get out, is it?
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 15:33 GMT Zippy's Sausage Factory
So what happens if they get a confiscation order for some bitcoin the day after they are sold to, let's say, a pension fund? Surely at that point they can't still confiscate the bitcoin as the pension fund would be out of pocket?
I don't have a point here, just wondering what would happen if they confiscated from an innocent third party who bought the cryptocurrency in good faith.
-
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
Illegal goods are illegal goods, the law does not care who owns them now and they would still confiscate the cryptocurrency.
So you are saying that the law can confiscate real money from anyone because some lowlife may have held it for some time before it moved on.
If that is the case we are all in danger of having any cash we have being taken from us at any time.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 21:36 GMT Aitor 1
Not in Spain
In Spain and many other countries, having stolen goods is illegal IF you know they are stolen or have/should have reasonable grounds to suspect that.
BUT if you adquire it in good faith and with an onerous transaction, the authorities cannot confiscate it in those grounds.
As far as I know, the same happens in the US, one of the reasons that they can buy stolen art at auctions and not return it.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 19:19 GMT Mark 85
:If that is the case we are all in danger of having any cash we have being taken from us at any time.
In certain states here in the US... yes, be afraid, be very afraid. The local cops are taking cash from people they pull over on a regular basis using the "unknown origin" claim or "possible illegal activity". And it's damn hard to get the money back. A quick Google or two on "cops seizing money", "police seizing money" and the like should keep you busy for several hours.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 18:54 GMT Cynic_999
"
Illegal goods are illegal goods, the law does not care who owns them now and they would still confiscate the cryptocurrency.
"
Does that mean that if a criminal bought a car from his ill-gotten gains, the police could demand that the car dealer hand over the money that was used to pay for the car? Could they chase around every shop the criminal bought something and demand the return of the money used for the purchases?
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 19:10 GMT WolfFan
"Illegal goods are illegal goods, the law does not care who owns them now and they would still confiscate the cryptocurrency."
Does that mean that if a criminal bought a car from his ill-gotten gains, the police could demand that the car dealer hand over the money that was used to pay for the car? Could they chase around every shop the criminal bought something and demand the return of the money used for the purchases?
They could. They won't, it's far too much trouble, and would cause far too much ill-will among far too many people. But they could, if they really wanted to stick it to someone.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 12:50 GMT phuzz
"Does that mean that if a criminal bought a car from his ill-gotten gains, the police could demand that the car dealer hand over the money that was used to pay for the car?"
No, they'd confiscate the car from the criminal (and potentially sell it at a police auction if the crim was convicted).
-
-
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:03 GMT Lee D
This is why you don't handle stolen goods.
It's not only opening you to a charge if you're doing so knowingly, but even done unknowingly, you can lose out big time.
No different to buying a car only to find out it still has finance / is stolen. That car technically belongs to someone else and you shouldn't be in possession of it at all. Even if you paid a million pounds for it, you lose it all and the owner gets the car back.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 21:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
So what happens if they get a confiscation order for some bitcoin the day after they are sold to, let's say, a pension fund?
They'd confiscated the proceeds of the sale of those bitcoin, i.e. dollars, stock, art, whatever. The confiscation order is against the criminal to get at the proceeds of the crime. If a criminal gets $1 million in a suitcase for selling some drugs, and then gives me that $1 million in a suitcase to buy my house, then the criminal would surrender my house which has become the proceeds of that crime.
The only way I have to surrender the $1 million is if I was involved in a crime myself - i.e. they deliberately overpaid for the house because I was going to launder that money through a cash business, or I reported the sale for $500K and planned to avoid taxes on the other $500K.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 13:03 GMT Anonymous Coward
>So what happens if they get a confiscation order for some bitcoin the day after they are sold to, let's say, a pension fund?
Not how it works - in the Surrey case the Bitcoin had already been seized and transferred to a police wallet - then there was a hearing to determine if they would be confiscated or returned.
[Crim in question had done an Eccles with his recovery phrase]
-
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:11 GMT JimmyPage
Legal may not be possible ...
The only way to remove funds from a blockchain is to give the correct cryptographic details needed to get it agreed by the network.
If the person slapped with the order simply cannot access those details (say they are multi-part, and require people outside the jurisdiction to act) then the authorities simply can't have.
I presume there would have to be a change in the law which would allow he authorities to then pursue the operators of the blockchain, at which point you start to realise why blockchain *is* different. As in good luck finding the operators of the blockchain. You can find individual nodes. You may even be able to jail those who are in your jurisdiction for "not assisting". But you *still* won't get your money.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:13 GMT JimmyPage
also of note: UK burden of proof.
When it comes to property confiscation, it's up to the citizen to prove they are the legal owner, not the state to prove illegality.
If you car caught with a plastic bag with £10,000 pounds in it, and have no way of proving it's yours, you can kiss goodbye to it. One of the handy by-products of the War on Terror/War on Drugs.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:34 GMT Commswonk
Re: also of note: UK burden of proof.
f you car caught with a plastic bag with £10,000 pounds in it, and have no way of proving it's yours, you can kiss goodbye to it.
IIRC the "critical mass" is rather less than that - something like £500. And again (IIRC, but not from experience!) if you are caught and convicted of drug dealing* then your bank account can be examined and contents confiscated following an Order of the Court.
I think it has as much to do with "money laundering" as anything else, which is something of a catch - all.
* Other offences are available.
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 16:23 GMT amanfromMars 1
Keep IT Simple is Complex Enough ..... and a Loded Virtual Mind Mine Field/Mine Mind Field
Cryptocurrencies are the medium of value exchange and shared wealth of virtual worlds in which extant establishment regulation authorities have no jurisdiction nor prior knowledge with which to subvert direction and/or influence growth/further future development and progress.
Or do they imagine that they would command and control such a futures derivative in order to benefit themselves and disadvantage others who would Pioneer Pay to Play Players/Greater IntelAIgent Gamers in ...... well, they are CyberIntelAIgent Space Places and Live Operational Virtual Environments for Global Operating Devices, are they not?
That is surely Alien Territory, and with AI Systems and Services, a SMARTR Virtual Team Terrain? And IT does not Tolerate or Promote Fools in Any Such and All Similar Fields that Work both at Rest and in Play via Remote Virtual Transactions/Quantum Instruction.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 15:06 GMT amanfromMars 1
Re: Keep IT Simple is Complex Enough ..... and a Loded Virtual Mind Mine Field/Mine Mind Field
They just can't stop themselves from trying to help themselves to anything which has a rewarding value, can they? ...... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-01/bitcoin-jumps-above-10k-after-cftc-approves-futures-trading-first-trade-take-place-d
New Different Game and Leading Players ..... New Different Rules and EMPowering Titans?
-
Friday 1st December 2017 16:10 GMT amanfromMars 1
Re: Keep IT Simple is Complex Enough ..... and a Loded Virtual Mind Mine Field/Mine Mind Field
And whenever you think to regulate, do you imagine an exclusive in-house command and remote executive control facility which naturally creates a competing opposition/a them and us division which is fraught with all manner of unnecessary difficulties with phantom hurdles to invent.
Given the right hash and increasingly catastrophically vulnerable state of extant fiat currencies, which be currently regulated and administered to by the same authorities as would now be floating themselves as honest brokers for cryptocurrencies, one wonders at their proposed direction of future travel for such as are Advanced Progressive Utilities ...... for surely it is easily recognised that cryptocurrency is but one initial program be introduced for AIdVentures in Virtually Realised Productions for Live Operational Virtual Environments with Global Operating Devices Servering Support/Advanced ACTive Mentoring and Super Dynamic Monitoring.
And quite why anyone sane would wish to invent unnecessary difficulties is a leading question to be answered, not least by those and that proposing adding hurdles.
It sure aint smart, and is to boot real stupid.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 16:58 GMT amanfromMars 1
Re: Keep IT Simple is Complex Enough ..... and a Loded Virtual Mind Mine Field/Mine Mind Field
It has been, and continues to be, a wild, uncontrolled and incredibly speculative asset - one that has the potential to either change the financial world for all time, or possibly be the greatest scam we have seen since the Tulip mania.
I lean towards the former, but remember this always: there are powerful forces actively working against Bitcoin and its success - forces that will not take this change and threat to their fiat power lying down. .... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-30/bitcoin-rockets-higher-then-crashes-lower-then-repeats
Where stand El Regers on that fence? Are you ACTively for IT or strangely against it?
Or neither and none of the above with a resigned indifference and complicit acceptance of what will be, will be, resulting in one not being interested or bothered to venture an opinion/position?
-
-
-
-
Thursday 30th November 2017 22:31 GMT mark l 2
The UK proceeds of crime act is AFAIK the only UK law where the burden of proof means you have to prove you are innocent rather than the CPS prove you are guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
As others mentioned the threshold is about 500 quid in cash where the cops can confiscate the money and then its up to you to prove you didn't steal the money or make the money from criminal activity.
Its a slippery slope when you have one law that switches the burden of proof onto the defendant, before you know it that creeps into other laws and you end up with you law being guilty unless you can prove your innocent.
-
Friday 1st December 2017 09:00 GMT Justin Case
We're all guilty now
the threshold is about 500 quid in cash where the cops can confiscate the money
Outrageous and utterly predictable. Still this must be the world we want. Thanks to Michael Howard, Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke, John Reid, Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson, Theresa May, Amber Rudd. A roll call of shame, if ever there was one. Chisellers and oppressors they are to a (wo)man. Is there one decent, uncorrupt name on that list?
-
Friday 1st December 2017 14:14 GMT Anonymous Coward
>AFAIK the only UK law where the burden of proof means you have to prove you are innocent
This is actually the case with most summary prosecutions - notably camera evidenced motoring offences. IAATI estimate 1 in 12 UK vehicles have cloned number plates, nonetheless they have essentially the same legal status as fingerprints when it comes to conviction.
-