Bitcoin will become a bigger concern to regulators at the U.S. Treasury Department only after it becomes a truly useful currency. That was the message delivered by David Cohen, under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, at a speech Tuesday morning here at Bloomberg headquarters.
Cohen expressed concern that terrorists and people looking to avoid sanctions could make nefarious use of Bitcoin or another virtual currency. Considering this comes a day after the Obama administration announced sanctions on several Russian officials, his worries seemed particularly timely. But for now, however, Cohen sees this as primarily a hypothetical threat—and seemed hesitant to even to describe Bitcoin as a currency:
The volatility associated with virtual currency, combined with its low capitalization and liquidity, has limited its appeal to these illicit actors. Terrorists generally need “real” currency, not virtual currency, to pay their expenses—such as salaries, bribes, weapons, travel, and safehouses. The same is true for those seeking to evade sanctions.
Bitcoin has a long way to go before it becomes a dominant player in the world of illicit finance. Hundreds of billions of dollars of illicit funds flow through through the international finance system yearly, Cohen said, while the total value of all Bitcoins in circulation is about $7.5 billion. There are plenty of other effective ways to move dirty money around, including hawaladars, guys with briefcases of cash handcuffed to their wrists, or, you know, real banks.
As of now, the federal government only regulates the transfer between virtual currencies and conventional money. Treasury issued its initial guidance on these activities exactly a year ag, and doesn’t feel like it needs to go any further. As Cohen sees it, Bitcoin transactions are like cash transactions and don’t require intervention.
In fact, actual Bitcoin transactions are less regulated than cash transactions. Vendors processing over $10,000 in bills have to report these transactions, and yet there is no such requirement for virtual currencies. The only way this changes is if virtual currencies become widespread enough that people can carry on their lives totally in Bitcoin. While that idea makes for a fine premise for an article for a San Francisco-based journalist, it doesn’t make much sense for a criminal.
This doesn’t mean it will never make sense. Cohen holds open the prospect of regulating Bitcoin transactions at some point in the future, although probably only to implement the same kind of reporting requirements for large transactions.
Treasury is interested in technological innovation in the financial system, Cohen said in his remarks, and it will always choose transparency over novelty. And he even sought to smooth feathers among Bitcoin enthusiasts with a gesture of inclusion: Treasury’s advisory group for the Bank Secrecy Act will appoint “a member of the virtual currency community,” he said, to join its ranks.
