Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About Aislinn

  • Rank
    MF Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I appreciate those responses @Phillip Dearden, thank-you. I wasn't aware of those nuances between the UK and IOM tax law with specific legislation taxing certain capital profits as income, that's interesting. I can imagine they were passed because of a significant amount of capital was using those avenues without paying tax. But it's good to get confirmation that determining whether a transaction is a trade is independent of whether or not tax will apply. I also appreciate you sharing your impression of the likelihood of virtual currency transactions being tax liable, it's good to he
  2. I see. I fully agree with you on point 1. I was trying to go a step further and figure out the likelihood of trmpton and others on this forum are liable for income tax, instead of just keeping it at 'it depends on the circumstances'. As part of this I shared some government guidance and I thought you were dismissing its validity with your own understanding of the law. My apologies if that wasn't the case. With regards to point 2, I really don't believe that CGT liability affects the assessment of whether or not an activity qualifies as a trade. My understanding is that if an activity is a
  3. To clarify, I'm not arguing that some circumstances bitcoin activities could be taxed as income. There are many ways in which bitcoin could be involved in a trade - in that very document they talk about mining and the like. The existence of those bold underlined italic words just don't really do much to counter the case law, as well as the other guidance that suggests unless in the case of exceptional circumstances, individuals buying and selling shares does not count as a trade. So just to be sure, you are saying that the existence of CGT changes the determination of whether so
  4. In the UK profit from a trade is taxable as income not CGT. Are you saying that if something doesn't qualify as a trade in the UK (but qualifies for CGT) it might actually still qualify as a trade in the IOM because CGT doesn't exist on the IOM? That doesn't seem right. Why should the existence of another tax change the determination on whether something qualifies as a trade or not?
  5. I believe investments are solely with the intention to make a profit and, on the isle of man, are not taxed as income. https://www.accaglobal.com/uk/en/technical-activities/technical-resources-search/2011/august/badges-of-trade.html https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/business-income-manual/bim56840 http://www1.lexisnexis.co.uk/taxtutor/public/business/2a_business_tax/2a10-01(F).pdf https://www.taxjournal.com/articles/taxation-profits-cryptocurrencies-18102017 So I think it seems unlikely that trmpton buying and selling cumrocket wil
  6. I'm with you on that. (although I think you might have meant to write 'taxable' when referring to trading transactions). I was mainly taking issue to John's claim that the criteria for income tax is 'intention to make profit' which doesn't seem right. (it's more to do with what qualifies as a trade.) Of course. The question was not whether the guidance trumps law, but whether John W's extrapolation is more likely to be closer to the law than published guidance by government. While there definitely may be cases where government guidance conflicts with law, I assume they try very ha
  7. Respectfully, what have I said that makes you so sure about this? You've repeated this twice now so I assume I came across incorrectly somewhere. So I take it your extrapolation from the tax law of flipping houses trumps a document published by government? We're trying to determine whether trmpton buying and selling cumrocket coin a couple of times a day is liable for income tax, and it's clear his sole motivation for doing so is profit. According to this guidance from Jersey (IOM might rule differently) it looks like he probably won't be liable given the criteria laid out in
  8. Aren't all investments with the intent to make a profit? Are you saying that the Jersey guidance isn't relevant here? When it says, "If you are just buying and selling for yourself with your own money it is unlikely that you are trading.", I'm pretty sure they're referring to the word trade in regards to whether the profit is liable for income tax or not (and not the financial "trader" meaning of the word)
  9. I did try to look this up a while back for selling stocks but I couldn't find any information related to the isle of man. I'm assuming cryptocurrencies would fall under the same rules (disregarding the dividend component which is taxed separately to capital gains anyway) However Jersey do have some quite clear guidance on this, do you think it's likely that the IOM would rule similarly? https://www.gov.je/TaxesMoney/IncomeTax/BusinessesSelfEmployed/Pages/AmITrading.aspx#anchor-3 If so, I don't think trmpton buying CUMROCKET and selling it a couple of hours later would coun
  10. While tesco usually show that they're completely booked, during my quarantine period I was able to get a slot by just pointing a page monitor to the booking page to get alerted when new slots become available. This is the extension I used https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/page-monitor/ogeebjpdeabhncjpfhgdibjajcajepgg Both times I was able to get a slot within a couple of hours of checking but I might have been lucky I don't know. But I think they make new slots available during the day. I'd also be happy to do a shop for you in an emergency if you need, just let me kno
  11. The ultimate honeypot! Designed by GCHQ to bankrupt all the criminals in the world in one fell swoop
  12. I wonder if its so volatile because its used so much for speculation. A big online casino that somehow feels more serious and legitimate than betting on horses because the underlying thing is somewhat interesting and theoretically valuable - however no one really knows what that value precisely is.
  13. To be clear, I wasn't saying people shouldn't do their due diligence before buying it. I just think that the focus is so much on the tech when introducing the concept is all. I think the idea is permissionless internet money. But I was generally referring to the range of interesting properties that cryptos present that differ from the current money that we use.
  14. Respectfully I disagree. I think people can learn how to store it securely if they ever decide they want to own some and without being bombarded by the technical details of how blockchains work right from the start that puts them right off. By far the most interesting thing are the implications of permissionless money on society and the world at large, and it's a shame most peoples first introduction to it is poorly explained technobabble on the technicalities of public key cryptography.
  15. Whats the difference? Who cares if its not technically stored in a wallet, but the rights to it are if its functionally the same thing? Even many people who think they know the internet well do not understand the basics of TCP/IP. I think being pedantic on the technical details just puts people off and has done more harm than good. That's why so many people have tried to understand it but have given up. Imagine giving up on getting on the internet because you didn't have a good grasp of routing protocols. Sure, if you're interested in understanding how things work on a fun
  • Create New...