• Tag Archives steem
  • Governments Are Trapping Underbanked Populations in Perpetual Poverty

    Governments Are Trapping Underbanked Populations in Perpetual Poverty

    Those of us living in economically advanced countries can take for granted how easy and inexpensive it is to transfer money between individuals. With payment platforms like Venmo and Paypal readily available, sending and receiving payments is as simple as tapping your smartphone screen a few times.

    But for those from poor countries who have left their families and communities behind in search of a more opportunity-rich life in America, sending large sums of money back home comes with a hefty price tag. In fact, by the time the money actually crosses borders and reaches its recipients, between eight and ten percent of the funds have been lost to service fees.

    On its face this may seem like a relatively small percentage, but these fees add up quickly, a point Bill Gates recently emphasized when he said, “If the transaction costs on remittances worldwide were cut from where they are today at around 10% to an average of 5%, it would unlock $15 billion a year in poor countries.” It goes without saying that $15 billion can go a long way, especially in underdeveloped countries.

    Unfortunately, the regulatory burdens placed on the money transfer industry, known in the finance world as Money Services Business (MSB), have made service fees unavoidable. Since Money Transfer Operators (MTO) must pay extravagant costs before they are allowed to legally conduct any monetary transfers, the sector has seen an increase in the fees pushed to the consumer since these institutions are left to bear the ever-increasing burden of government regulation.

    While governments often claim they are committed to helping the less fortunate, it is precisely because of state regulations that those living in underdeveloped regions have had to pay large service fees that make access to capital more difficult, resulting in a large portion of the underbanked population being completely cut off from participating in the global marketplace.

    Fortunately, the popularity of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are revolutionizing the MSB sector and giving the underbanked populations the opportunity to get ahead economically.

    A Labyrinth of Red Tape

    The government has made it incredibly difficult for anyone to get involved in the MSB industry or become an MTO. Federal regulations set up to combat money laundering have made this particular industry a huge financial risk for the small businesses that wish to conduct cross-border money transfers and for the banks that store the money these institutions receive.

    Before an MSB can conduct any transfers, it must battle its way through a maze of costly red tape on both the federal and state levels. As paymentsviews.com notes:

    “Registration with FINCEN and development of an AML Program should cost in the lower 5 figures upfront, with ongoing administration and reporting costs being variable depending on your business. It is compliance with the state requirements that can add up.”

    While not all states have occupational licensing requirements for these institutions, many do and the fees are not necessarily a fixed price one can plan for ahead of time. In many instances, a portion of the mandated fees are dependent on the amount of time a government entity spends conducting the background check phase of the process. For those states with fixed permit fees, the costs can range from $250 (Alabama) to $3,000 (New York). But the bad news is, this is not a one-time payment. Most licenses need to be renewed annually, making the regulatory process a constant burden for MSBs and MTOs.

    New York’s laws are particularly rigid and collectivist in nature. The annual licensing fees for these businesses are based on their share of the total transaction volume among all license holders in the state. But even in the relatively “business-friendly” state like Texas, the annual fees are anywhere from $1,950 to $15,000 per license.

    And on top of all the annual licensing fees, there are other regulations that require fees based on the net worth of the company and these fees by themselves range from $25,000 to $500,000. Additionally:

    “You will be required to keep in place a surety bond, or deposit of qualifying securities in lieu of bond in all jurisdictions, dedicated to activities in the jurisdiction. This size of this bond ranges from a base of $10,000 in some small states to $500,000 in New York, with a typical bond requirement being $50,000-$100,000, with the option for the regulators in the jurisdiction to require higher amounts at their discretion. The cost of a bond can be 1-3% of the face amount, and can be higher for higher-risk entities”

    Adding insult to injury, the government also requires that you pay for the application and investigatory process, in which your participation is mandatory. Likewise, after you’ve paid all the fees you must also make sure you are complying with all the paperwork requirements, like submitting annual reports and other financial statements to regulators.

    Yet, even after you have complied with all the costly regulations, there is no guarantee that your business will be able to secure an account with a bank, something essential to a primarily cash-based business.

    Not Worth the Risk

    Since many of these businesses operate mainly in cash transactions, as many of the “senders” themselves are part of America’s “underbanked” population, the owners of such establishments are having to routinely deposit large amounts of cash into their bank accounts. While there is absolutely nothing sinister about this, the post 9/11 world has led to increased regulations, especially when it comes to dealing with cash deposits being sent outside the United States. Since banks are monitored heavily by federal regulations, doing business with companies dealing mainly, if not solely, in cash puts targets on the backs of these banks and opens them up to federal investigation.

    Fernando Lopez has been the owner of Interamericana Express, an MSB storefront in Atlantic City, for years. Dealing primarily with monetary transfers to Mexico, Lopez and his patrons have contributed to the average of around $24.3 billion that is remitted from the United States to Mexico each year. But even though Lopez has obtained all necessary permits and complied with every law and regulation on the books, Interamericana Express has routinely found that its bank accounts have been frozen or shut down altogether.

    Since cash deposits are so heavily regulated, it is not in the bank’s interest to conduct such business. In fact, even large banks like Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase have abandoned their own money transfer programs since the risk is not worth the benefits received. Additionally, Citigroup recently experienced firsthand the harsh realities of the overly-regulated MSB sector when it was forced to pay $140 million for a “failure to safeguard” against money laundering.

    Since banks cannot confirm the identity or origin of the cash deposited by these MSB institutions, it is a huge liability, which is why many banks just stopped participating in this market altogether. But for those who are still willing to work with these MSBs, they are able to raise the price since it is both a high-risk transaction on the part of the bank and, to put it frankly, the MSBs no longer have a lot of options when it comes to finding a financial institution willing to work with them.

    Luckily, blockchain technology is offering a modern solution to this outdated problem that is not only making cross-border money transfers more affordable but also giving the underbanked populations of the world a chance to become major participants in the global economy.

    Enter The Blockchain

    While governments love to claim they are committed to helping the less fortunate, it precisely because of state regulations that these underdeveloped regions of the world have had to wait so long to become participants in the global marketplace.

    But unfortunately, under the current system, the obstacles to cross-border money transfers don’t end with service fees. For those on the receiving end of cross-border monetary transfers, finding the means to actually “cash out” and physically receive the funds presents a whole separate set of issues. When living in isolated or otherwise remote regions sometimes thousands of miles away from the nearest bank, accessing these funds becomes a feat all of its own.

    Without access to traditional financial institutions, the money is often useless unless one has the means to travel to a location that can help facilitate the final phase of the transfer. But a new tech startup is addressing both the high costs and bank accessibility problems associated with cross-border transfers.  

    Boston-based startup accelerator “MassChallenge” recently announced its 2017 finalists who will be on the receiving end of funding to be used towards their respective endeavors. Among the finalists selected this year was the company “Token Labs,” a startup which utilizes blockchain technology to make cross-border peer-to-peer payment transfers both affordable and more accessible to the underbanked populations. 

    CEO and co-founder Dave Aiello describes his startup’s mission as:

    “Enabling people to easily send bitcoin peer-to-peer around the world. We also connect them with local Bitcoin exchanges in their country so they can receive their local currency for Bitcoin wherever they may be.”

    Not only is the Token platform aiming to reduce service fees from ten percent down to one percent, they are also solving the problem of underbanking in impoverished or otherwise underdeveloped regions of the world. Instead of having to worry about finding a bank in order to cash in on the sent funds, cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, are allowing those in unbanked and underbanked areas to access the money almost instantaneously.

    The blockchain has allowed for such a hassle-free transfer of money largely because smartphones are so prevalent even among the underbanked. While this may sound like a shocking assertion, a study released by the FDIC found that “more than two-thirds of unbanked households (68 percent) and more than 90 percent of underbanked households own a mobile phone. While smartphone ownership lags somewhat among the unbanked (33.1 percent), underbanked households (64.5 percent) are more likely to have a smartphone than the fully banked (59 percent).”

    Since cryptocurrency can now be purchased, managed, and transferred via smartphone apps like Token, the need for a traditional banking institution has become almost obsolete. In fact, in many regards, those in underbanked and even unbanked regions are surpassing America and other first world nations when it comes to innovating the entire banking industry. While this may sound like a stretch, the reason for this advancement is a direct result of smartphone technology.

    While those in these regions have been largely left out of participating in the global economy, the invention of smartphones has made blockchain technology and thus, cryptocurrency a major game changer. Essentially, those living in these undeveloped regions have completely skipped past the era of centrally controlled banks, and have instead sprung forward and embraced the world of decentralized cryptocurrencies made possible because of the blockchain.

    While blockchain enthusiasts like Aiello bring a great deal of hope to those wishing to liberate the world from the strain of regulation and centralization, the government still poses the same threat it always has, even if, for the time being, the blockchain remains almost impenetrable by the state.


    Brittany Hunter

    Brittany Hunter is an associate editor at FEE. Brittany studied political science at Utah Valley University with a minor in Constitutional studies.

    This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.


  • The Thrilling and Sometimes Terrifying World of Crypto-Innovation Is at a Turning Point

    The Thrilling and Sometimes Terrifying World of Crypto-Innovation Is at a Turning Point

    It’s one thing to read about cryptoeconomics and another thing to actually do it. I had been reading about Bitcoin in the abstract from 2009, but it wasn’t until I became an owner in 2013 that I began to realize the implications of this technology.

    My boots were on the ground, as they say, and I saw and experienced things I never imagined possible. A money and payment system in one application? Made entirely from code? Invented by an anonymous programmer and gradually adopted in a globally distributed system run by hobbyists? The whole thing seemed crazy.

    I wanted to know more. So I organized one of the earliest national conferences on the topic in Atlanta, Georgia, in October 2013, when the Bitcon/dollar exchange ratio had reached $100 from $14 at the start of the year. My purpose was to bring economists and technicians together to develop a better understanding of what exactly was happening.

    Last night, nearly four years later, I attended an exciting and passion-filled blockchain meetup in Atlanta. The Bitcoin price floats around $2,500, but this is off from a high that nearly touched $3,000. Many of the people who attended my first CryptoCurrency Conference were there again, but this time was different. Instead of being curious onlookers, many people in the room were part of what we might call the digital 1%: immense earnings based on speculative investments that paid off.

    The New World 



    Now times are getting serious. The biggest banks and brokerage houses are on board. Tens of thousands of blockchain startups exist. There is a crowdfunding campaign for a new digital service and token nearly every day.

    There are so many white papers being issued that no one can keep up. For all the world, it looks like Tulipmania except that this is what many people have claimed for eight years, during which time a new world has been born.

     During Tulipmania, you were right to be suspicious because tulips had always been around. They didn’t represent anything new. The blockchain is something completely new: a new technology for porting adaptable information bits into immutable bundles to move cheaply and quickly across geographically non-contiguous lines.

    With this new capability, spreading all over the world, a new class of geeks is leading a technological push to reconstruct the way we transmit money but also do contracts, property titles, and financial markets. All of this is based on a new way of commercial engagement, from dependency on intermediaries to working directly with each other.

    Block Size 

    But merely to reflect on the amazingness of all this is not what drew the group together. The topic of the night is the pressing issue of the block size, a debate that has been rumbling around for a couple of years but which now cries out for resolution. The problem is that the blocks in the chain are currently limited to 1 megabyte, which is too small to hold all the transactions (and more complex forms of information) that the network is trying to push through. This is making the use of the network more expensive and slower than it should be. For some payment processors, it is becoming an impossible situation.

    The core development team is famously conservative. In any case, merely busting the protocol with an arbitrary expansion is not a solution. What it needs is a long-term fix. Solutions were coming so slowly that a group of users acted to schedule the implementation of what amounts to a fork in the blockchain. (For more on the debate and the plan, and the difference between hard and soft forks, go here.)

    Regardless, on August 1, something big is going to happen. It will be the biggest change to Bitcoin since its inception, with the purpose of making it scalable to compete directly with conventional payment processing.

    The debate online can seem wickedly rhetorical, and forbidding to outsiders. For my own part, I’ve stayed out because I don’t have the level of technological knowledge sufficient to weigh in. Plus, having watched the community at work for years, I know by now that online sound and fury most often masks what is at the root a sober and prudent set of developers, miners, and users. Stephen Pair is most likely right: the great forking event will most likely be boring.

    The Exciting Stuff 

    If this debate is too much – and only industry insiders are really thinking and writing about it – consider another level of complication.

    Let’s talk about what used to be called alt-coins and the category of digital assets. (Incidentally, we are nearing the point where even the world alt-coin is deprecated. We now call them what they are: Litecoin, Dash, Dogecoin, and so on.)

    When I held my conference, there were a few additional coins floating around out there. Hardly anyone thought they were viable. Back then, Bitcoin was amazing when it passed the $10 mark. Today, there are 12 additional coins that float above $10, and three of those have market capitalizations above $1 billion.

    Here’s another interesting change: there are fully 18 digital assets that trade above $10. And 10 of these assets have market capitalizations above $1 billion. Most are based on Ethereum, which is a platform for the development of a new class of services running blockchain technology. At the time it was first described, it seems visionary but outlandish. A few years later, it is a reality in the making.

    I’ve been slow to get involved in the asset market, but just yesterday tried my hand at moving tokens around in the space. I can’t begin to describe to you the complications. This is not for mere mortals. As I performed the task of moving from one asset to another, switching platforms and watching for confirmations and thresholds, I felt that same sense of awe I had when I first received and sent bitcoins. If possible, it was actually more difficult.

    Why Is this So Hard? 

    There are two factors here. First, this is nowhere near ready for the mainstream consumer marketplace. For anyone but full-time code slingers, this feels like rocket science. Second, everywhere you move, you bump into evidence of government regulation of exchanges, dating from that fateful day in the spring of 2013 when the Department of Treasury decided to effectively shut down an entire class of entrepreneurial ventures.

    It’s hard enough to reinvent the infrastructure of the global exchange economy. It is too much to attempt this feat in the face of regulators who have no clue whatsoever about the structure and technology we are dealing with here. Governments are trying to retrofit a disruptive technology by trying to make them behave like the old forms they are trying to replace.

    All of this is enormously annoying. But let me say this: it is temporary. They can slow us down but they can’t stop us. You could feel it in the energetic meetup last night. These people are smart, dedicated, and they see the future. They won’t be stopped. More than that, because they are all owners and stakeholders in this new digital space, they have the passion to follow through.

    The sad fate of revolutionary technology like this is that it doesn’t gain popular enthusiasm until it is used by the average person. Even then, the period of awe only lasts a brief time until we just assume that the world was destined to work this way. It’s this way with map apps, email, electricity, flight, steel, soap, eyeglasses, or any other invention.

    Here’s to the innovators and entrepreneurs who just keep making the world better despite every barrier and despite the absence of public acclaim they so richly deserve.


    Jeffrey A. Tucker

    Jeffrey Tucker is Director of Content for the Foundation for Economic Education. He is also Chief Liberty Officer and founder of Liberty.me, Distinguished Honorary Member of Mises Brazil, research fellow at the Acton Institute, policy adviser of the Heartland Institute, founder of the CryptoCurrency Conference, member of the editorial board of the Molinari Review, an advisor to the blockchain application builder Factom, and author of five books. He has written 150 introductions to books and many thousands of articles appearing in the scholarly and popular press.

    This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.


  • Hayek and Satoshi Meet in Vegas

    Hayek and Satoshi Meet in Vegas

    F.A. Hayek is smiling, or perhaps blushing, if news has trickled up to where all great Austrian economists go. The Legends Room Gentlemen’s Club in Las Vegas has created its own virtual currency, known as LGD.



    Todd Prince broke the story in the Las Vegas Review Journal that the soon-to-be-open club is “hoping a new marketing weapon – a virtual currency – will help them wrestle tech- and investment-savvy clients away from the strip club giants.”

    Club owners are selling memberships to Legends for $5,000, which can be paid for with bitcoin as well as the US government’s legal tender or credit cards. “Members in return will receive 5,000 LGD, a virtual currency created by Legends Room, that can be used to pay for lap dances and drinks.”

    Alert readers will notice that the club’s owners have set the LGD/$ exchange rate at par. One wonders whether it will remain there. After all, the aforementioned bitcoin has taken off yet again and it takes 1,994.42 of Uncle Sam’s bucks to buy a single Satoshi bitcoin.

    A New Crypto

    Non-members will be required to buy at least one LGD to enter the club’s VIP room, so the owners hope this will create a market for their cryptocurrency. If nothing else, they are dreaming big, with plans to display the daily price of their currency along with bitcoin on video monitors throughout the club.

    Prince explains, “Members and other token-holders will be able to sell their LGD for bitcoin on the Bittrex cryptocurrency exchange or for cash through the club’s concierge to those seeking access to the VIP room.” LGD will be just one of the more than 190 cryptocurrencies Bittrex supports.

    In a vast departure from typical strip club protocol, Legends will offer a Bloomberg terminal for patrons to monitor stock and bond prices during trading hours. No doubt some dancers will take advantage of the terminal to keep an eye on their investments. (The most remembered story I’ve told to all economics classes I’ve taught is about the worst stock tip I ever received – from a dancer in a strip club.)

    A Fad No More

    By coincidence, the May 19th issue of Grant’s Interest Rate Observer devotes its front page to bitcoin with the catchy title “I own tulips at 40 cents a bulb.” The folks at Grant’s queried a few investors in the bitcoin space. None poo-pooed the cryptocurrency as a bubbly fad: “It’s a stored value, a monetary asset that’s winning its place in the hearts and minds of the world’s financially repressed,” says Murray Stahl, speaking of Satoshi’s handiwork.

     

    Stahl went from not knowing what a bitcoin was two years ago to buying 20 computer servers and beginning a bitcoin mining operation. Besides Satoshi’s technology, Stahl was impressed with the bitcoin founder’s theory. “He wanted to create a non-inflationary currency,” Stahl told Grant’s. “That is really what he wanted to do. The first one that ever existed that no government could ever tamper with, and he did it.”

    By the way, Stahl says the cost to mine a bitcoin is about $1,200, but he’s not about to sell his. “I think that something has to replace the current monetary insanity.”

    Another friend of Grant’s is buying other cryptocurrencies. The business plan of these currency creators is speculation, “and they all say the same thing,” Grant’s friend concludes. “It’s no problem, we’re just going to convert it into bitcoin.”

    For Professor Hayek, competition in currencies was not about creating speculative vehicles, but instead, “under the proposed scheme, the managers of the bank would learn that its business depended on the unshaken confidence that it would continue to regulate its issue of ducats (etc.) so that their purchasing power remained approximately constant.”

    In his book Denationalization of Money, Hayek anticipated the current monetary insanity Murray Stahl speaks of, explaining,

    And it should be in the power of each issuer of a distinct currency to regulate its quantity so as to make it most acceptable to the public – and competition would force him to do so. Indeed, he would know that the penalty for failing to fulfill the expectations raised would be the prompt loss of the business. Successful entry into it would evidently be a very profitable venture, and success would depend on establishing the credibility and trust that the bank was able and determined to carry out its declared intentions. It would seem that in this situation sheer desire for gain would produce a better money than government has ever produced.

    QR Codes

    Besides its store of value potential, bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have great advantages in ease of payment. Great wealth can be transmitted with the push of a button. Or, for the girls who will work at Legends, Mr. Prince writes, “Members would be able to scan QR bars either on the dancer’s phone or placed on her body rather than stuffing dollars into her stockings.”

    While the number of bitcoin to be produced will stop just short of 21 million, the ambitious owners of Legends are giving themselves more running room, limiting the number of LGD to 30 million. Janet Yellen and Mario Draghi have no such constrictions.

    Legends will open in June, and will be a great place for a field trip to see cryptocurrency in action during Freedomfest July 19th through July 22nd.


    Douglas French

    Douglas French is an Associated Scholar at the Johnson Center at Troy University and adjunct professor at Georgia Military College. He is the author of three books: Early Speculative Bubbles and Increases in the Supply of Money, Walk Away, and The Failure of Common Knowledge.

    This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.