Transcription
In today's press conference, Lars Klingbeil spoke about general financial crime and changes that are supposed to happen there. And in that context, it was then also speculated that he would possibly talk about crypto taxation at this point, because it was not included in the plan that was presented yesterday. Frank Schäffler also viewed this rather positively, or rather, it is viewed that it will now be more difficult to introduce the holding period, as if they had presented it there with it. Therefore, the expectation was also high that he would naturally communicate this today in this press conference. And exactly that happened indirectly, but only in the question and answer session. And we will now take a look at what was said and, above all, how it is to be interpreted and whether the CDU/CSU will keep their word at this point, because they have actually been signaling all along that they are against a change in the tax situation and actually the statements from many members of parliament, the emails you requested or wrote and the answers you forwarded to us, but also partly what the parliamentary group has described to us on Blocktrainer.de, that no change is desired there and that they are actually even refraining from it. And the big question that everyone is asking themselves in the end is: will the Union keep its word or will it change its mind? Yes, and I have heard so many things. I have also heard things from internal sources. I will say cautiously, I cannot name anyone, but who have allegedly already decided long ago and that the CDU/CSU is communicating this externally to keep everything a bit flat and that they have internally already changed their minds. But I have also heard the opposite, that CDU/CSU members of parliament want to use this topic precisely to make it clear, hey, just because Lars Klingbeil from the SPD is our Finance Minister, we will not do everything they want. We are still the more strongly elected force and accordingly we will also oppose this in this case. So it can be seen a little as a tool of revolution within this parliamentary group. So now a little bit the question of where all this is going, but the statements that Lars Klingbeil has made once again are extremely confident on this topic, that the holding period will fall. And this is not a new appearance, I would say, in this regard, and sometimes one wonders a little, because the SPD itself is no longer necessarily a very strong political force in Germany, if one looks at the poll numbers, and one should not forget one thing as a politician here. We are talking in Germany, and this does not only concern Bitcoin, but crypto in general, about something between 13, 14 or even 18 million people who have had contact with it or are invested there, whom one could potentially alienize as voters, and the abolition of the holding period, and that is the next point, will probably not even bring truly significant tax revenues. We have listed the reasons for this countless times here. And that is precisely what is also interesting, because it will be addressed again in a moment. Until now, they have always thrown around relatively large numbers, where we have already said that they are not true by far, so they cannot be true, and we would like to know how the federal government arrives at such expectations, i.e., how much tax can be collected, because that is actually not sustainable, and here too, something has changed a bit. I would say, in this context, in this context, let's first look at the statements that Lars Klingbeil has made. It is a question of justice that we expand privileges for a few at the expense of the enormous consolidation task to be managed, we also expand the state's revenue base. The tobacco tax has already been extensively reported on today. The Ministry of Health will also introduce a sugar tax. What is meant here is that this is not to close gaps, but it helps to strengthen health prevention. The Ministry of the Environment will introduce a plastic tax, and we will, and this is then the responsibility of the Ministry of Finance, also ensure that state revenues are strengthened by letting less escape. So we say, we fight tax evaders. We want to advance the fight against financial and tax crime. We want to tax cryptocurrencies differently. it is about the protection of all those who adhere to the rules, who, to quote him, it is a question of justice and it is about the protection of all, and he uses the reference to financial crime. In the same breath, he makes this reference to cryptocurrencies and says that in the end it is only good for all those who adhere to the rules. And he acts as if there are no rules at all. There is a tax regulation. Many people pay very high taxes when they trade crypto assets annually, and sometimes even at the income tax rate, which is extremely high. Advantage for the federal government, if you sell with a loss or profit, it does not have to be taxed with other income. This means that the federal government can, in case of doubt, even if this regulation changes now, collect less tax overall, because if someone perhaps had to pay a lot of taxes because they made a profit with stocks, they could sell their Bitcoin negatively in the year of the new regulation, i.e., in the bear market year, and thus reduce the overall tax burden and thus, of course, the revenue that the government has. And all of this, in the end, to actually only create this additional effort for the federal government with an additional effort, to have no revenue. And the topic of justice, it is extremely unjust to tell people, this is the taxation, which has been judicially established for many, many years. People act according to it in good conscience, if the parliamentary group, which actually represents the strongest force at the moment, says, we will not change that. People invest in it in good conscience and try to provide for their old age, and then one goes afterwards and says, now everything is completely different, we are still taking your money away. And that has nothing to do with justice either. And that does not affect the super-rich who are enriching themselves here, but it affects the small savers, the people who are trying to provide for their old age with small amounts every month, also, as I said, in good conscience. Overall, it was also said that they want to advance against financial crime with tax blockchain analysis tools in this area. Also, financial crime in the crypto sector is incredibly low. It is one of the financial sectors that has by far the lowest crime rate. Analysis tools prove this for years, companies like Channelis, for example, which cooperate with tax authorities and financial authorities, prove that almost nothing in the area of financial crime takes place in this sector. So really far below 1% of the transaction volume compared to dollar and euro fiat currency, we are at 3 to 5%. So it is really crazy to even associate this area with financial crime. Then there was a follow-up question from the audience later, and I would like to play that for you here as well. Perhaps you can clarify what is new in the crypto sector regarding law enforcement, technically and legally. And a taxation of cryptocurrencies was announced. How should that look technically, given the decentralized exchanges, anonymous crypto assets, complex transaction chains with unregulated areas? So, secondly, indeed, we have agreed in the coalition that we will advance taxation in the crypto sector, and I also think it is a central question of justice that work is taxed, that stocks are taxed, and that it does not happen with crypto. Therefore, we will close this justice gap now. And yes, um, we see, and you also see this in the proposals, that we say there should be a future tax laboratory where we exchange closely with science, where we want to recognize early trends. This was also one of the clear signals at the roundtable we had with civil society, that this exists in other countries, that scientific expertise is drawn upon to see very early on where new areas of crime might emerge and to be able to act there. And crypto and blockchain are these areas, and here we will first ensure technical upgrades. So the FIO, which is also located at customs, is currently in the process of procuring crypto analysis software, for example. It is about training and sensitizing employees, training experts, and that is exactly what we need to investigate more strongly in these areas and to get to the bottom of those who try to exploit new technical possibilities, and we see the obfuscation very actively in blockchain and must act against it, and this happens through technical equipment, but also through trained personnel. So in the end, he criminalizes the users. That's what he says. They are now essentially putting everything into the criminal area. So he doesn't even address the question of how they want to reconcile all this. Exchanges, or brokers, that now deduct taxes for the user because they know the entire tax framework. How do they want to reconcile that with self-held Bitcoin, with Bitcoin that were also acquired at some point, now coming into the other area, and so on. So effort for the user, but also for the tax authorities of immeasurable amounts, and then also simply to say, yes, but we have great analysis tools. That means, in other words, anyone who cannot comply with this, as it sounds to me, will be criminalized. will then be considered a financial criminal, and then we can proceed against them with our analysis tools. Yes, and with that, they are also destroying this field, the innovation location Germany, for this area where Germany is still good due to the holding period situation. They will drive away those who are truly wealthy from the country, and they will make it difficult for companies to offer cost-effective products in Germany because they have to take all of this into account. They are destroying a lot with this regulation. So, the last statement I want to show you from Lars Klingbeil and then an assessment on Twitter. We will look at that too, but listen to this, Mr. Klingbeil, a few months ago, in May, I believe, it was about taxing cryptocurrencies, i.e., profits from cryptocurrency sales. Not taxable after one year, that was supposed to be changed. What is the status of that? We are currently working on it in the ministry, it is also part of the decisions for the 2027 budget, and the goal is that we will soon go into early coordination and then there will be a concrete law, I cannot anticipate that today. Should we assume that the deadline will be abolished? I have already clearly stated that we want justice and we want the crypto income to be taxed just like others. So it's about justice for him. For him, it is actually already a done deal, as it sounds. However, the law does not seem to be there yet. And there is still hope. It is up to us to continue to exert pressure and to signal, hey, this would be a fatal mistake what you are doing. Um, I will now also read something that has recently come from the CDU/CSU. They officially still maintain their view that nothing should change. in this tweet. I will quote a few things. Um, there are some formulations, and the CDU/CSU's toolbox has been expanded, um, that in the end the following was said: "Anyone who wants to abolish the holding period must therefore clearly explain why Bitcoin should be treated differently from gold, art or classic cars." Completely correct at this point, I underline that, because Bitcoin is treated tax-wise for exactly this reason. Then it is interesting, constitutionally doubtful are the only vaguely described plans, because the mere generation of revenue is not sufficient, according to the Federal Constitutional Court, to justify a specific deviation from a consistent tax system decision, especially since it is not foreseeable that there will be more revenue. Completely correct, really good answer here. And, um, this is also interesting again. Lars Klingbeil has slightly changed his wording from, yes, we need more money, that was the wording in the initial key points, to, we want justice. Yes, and this term justice is, of course, very flexible and in the eye of the beholder. And then they say, whoever takes crypto profits out of Paragraph 23 of the Income Tax Act and subjects them to a flat withholding tax, reduces the tax rate for top earners from up to 45% to 25%. You can do that. But then it should not be sold as a major justice reform. Also completely correct. And that was also what I already said. Additionally, one could also offset profits from one area against losses from another, and that could also mean that in good phases, i.e., if the market allows it, no taxes will be incurred at all for one or the other, where taxes would have been incurred until now. So the difference must also be taken into account for the top earner who sells during the year, who will do so in the future. It further states, we will therefore examine the pending draft very closely. The criteria for us are simply: consistent, enforceable, and innovation-friendly. And if one hears these words here, it means, with everything we have just heard, that they want to stick to the holding period. A corresponding law would require the approval of the Union to come into force, it is stated from our side. And accordingly, I also believe that we do not necessarily see the fight as lost here and that making a bit of a fuss might still achieve something in this regard. As you can see, I am currently in a hotel. Today is the Terrahash Summer Festival. I will soon post some things on my personal Instagram, maybe also on the Blocktrainer Instagram, feel free to follow. You will find the link in the video description below, and as always, if you want to buy Bitcoin, take a look at Coinfinity. You can do that with them. It is a fully regulated broker from Austria. With the code Blockchain Spartier you get a discount, support our work, and especially if you haven't already, write to your members of parliament, signal that you want the holding period to remain, find various ways to be heard, make waves, but above all, share our content and ensure that it gets many views so that politicians get the signal that this issue is serious and we as citizens absolutely do not want any change to take place. And yes, I believe each of us also knows that what is being planned right now is anything but just. In that sense, I wish you a wonderful day. Thank you for tuning in, and I look forward to a like and a subscription if you don't want to miss anything, and goodbye everyone.