- From: Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 23:09:42 +0200
- To: Jeffrey Cliff <jeffrey.cliff@gmail.com>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-webpayments@w3.org
Jeffrey Cliff <jeffrey.cliff@gmail.com> wrote: > > His main pitch was that you provide the hooks for the regulators > > into > the protocol in a way that notifies all of the parties in a > transaction when a particular action would result in a "regulatory > side effect", like the reporting of a transaction (or set of > transactions) greater than $10K (anti-money laundering regulatory > requirement in the USA). > > Suppose instead of the USA this occurs in Crimea. Does the > transaction get reported to Kiev or Moscow? Or both? This would still be decided by whoever does the reporting (or not), most likely because of regulatory demands for such reporting. The point is that the parties to the transaction would get informed, in advance, about whether the transaction gets reported to Kiev or Moscow or both. Greetings, Norbert
Received on Monday, 28 April 2014 21:09:54 UTC