Connect with us

Published

on

Australian court ruling could lead to 0M in Bitcoin tax refunds

A court decision in Australia could open the door to as much as $640 million in capital gains tax (CGT) refunds on Bitcoin transactions after a judge ruled that crypto should be treated as money rather than a taxable asset. 

On May 19, the Australian Financial Review (AFR) reported that the decision arose within a criminal case involving federal police officer William Wheatley, who allegedly stole 81.6 Bitcoin (BTC) in 2019. At the time, the assets were worth roughly $492,000. At current market prices, the tokens are valued at more than $13 million.

In the case, Judge Michael O’Connell of Victoria ruled that Bitcoin qualifies as a form of money rather than property, likening the digital asset to Australian dollars rather than to shares, gold or foreign currency.

The interpretation could set a legal precedent, potentially placing Bitcoin transactions outside the scope of Australia’s current CGT regime.

New court ruling challenges Australian crypto tax laws

In an AFR interview, tax lawyer Adrian Cartland said the verdict “totally upends” the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) current position. 

Since 2014, the ATO has classified crypto assets as CGT assets. This means that users must pay tax when selling or trading them. Under the ATO’s guidance, any disposal of Bitcoin, including selling it for fiat, exchanging it for another crypto or using it to purchase goods or services, constitutes a CGT event. 

This framework has been the basis for taxing cryptocurrency transactions in Australia for over a decade. However, the recent ruling challenges the approach by suggesting that Bitcoin functions more like money than property. This potentially exempts it from CGT.

Related: Australian feds seize mansion, Bitcoin allegedly linked to crypto exchange hack

Tax refunds could reach $640 million

Cartland said it was held that Bitcoin is Australian money. “That is, it is not a CGT asset. Therefore, acquisitions and disposals of Bitcoin have no tax consequences,” the tax lawyer added. 

If the ruling is upheld on the appeal, Cartland estimates that there could be potential tax refunds totalling 1 billion Australian dollars ($640 million). 

However, while Cartland thinks there could be up to a billion in refunds, the ATO said there were no official figures that confirm the amount to be potentially refunded if the case changes how Bitcoin is taxed in Australia. 

Magazine: Binance Wallet ‘killing’ MetaMask and airdrops, Chinese RWA tokens: Asia Express

Continue Reading

Politics

Prediction markets bet on Coinbase-linked Hassett as top Fed pick

Published

on

By

Prediction markets bet on Coinbase-linked Hassett as top Fed pick

Prediction markets Polymarket and Kalshi view Kevin Hassett, US President Donald Trump’s National Economic Council director, as the favorite to replace Jerome Powell as the next Federal Reserve chair.

The odds of Hassett filling the seat have spiked to 66% on Polymarket and 74% on Kalshi at the time of writing. Hassett is widely viewed as crypto‑friendly thanks to his past role on Coinbase’s advisory council, a disclosed seven‑figure stake in the exchange and his leadership of the White House digital asset working group.​

Founder and CEO of Wyoming-based Custodia Bank, and a prominent advocate for crypto-friendly regulations, Caitlin Long, commented on X:

“If this comes true & Hassett does become Fed chairman, anti-#crypto people at the Fed who still hold positions of power will finally be out (well, most of them anyway). BIG changes will be coming to the Fed.”

Source: Polymarket Money

Related: Crypto-friendly Trump adviser Hassett top pick for Fed chair: Report

Kevin Hassett’s crypto credentials

Hassett is a long-time Republican policy economist who returned to Washington as Trump’s top economic adviser and has now emerged as the market-implied frontrunner to lead the Fed.

His financial disclosure reveals at least a seven‑figure Coinbase stake and compensation for serving on the exchange’s Academic and Regulatory Advisory Council, placing him unusually close to the crypto industry for a potential Fed chair.​

Still, crypto has been burned before by reading too much into “crypto‑literate” resumes. Gary Gensler arrived at the Securities and Exchange Commission with MIT blockchain courses under his belt, but went on to preside over a wave of high‑profile enforcement actions, some of which critics branded as “Operation Chokepoint 2.0.”

A Hassett-led Fed might be more open to experimentation and less reflexively hostile to bank‑crypto activity. Still, the institution’s mandate on financial stability means markets should not assume a one‑way bet on deregulation.​

Related: Caitlin Long’s crypto bank loses appeal over Fed master account

Supervision pushback inside the Fed

The Hassett odds have jumped just as the Fed’s own approach to bank supervision has received pushback from veterans like Fed Governor Michael Barr, who earned his reputation as one of Operation Chokepoint 2.0’s key architects.

According to Caitlin Long, while he Barr “was Vice Chairman of Supervision & Regulation he did Warren’s bidding,” and he “has made it clear he will oppose changes made by Trump & his appointees.”

On Nov. 18, the Fed released new Supervisory Operating Principles that shift examiners toward a “risk‑first” framework, directing staff to focus on material safety‑and‑soundness risks rather than procedural or documentation issues.

In a speech the same day, Barr warned that narrowing oversight, weakening ratings frameworks and making it harder to issue enforcement actions or matters requiring attention could leave supervisors slower to act on emerging risks, arguing that gutting those tools may repeat pre‑crisis mistakes.​

Days later, in Consumer Affairs Letter 25‑1, the Fed clarified that the new Supervisory Operating Principles do not apply to its Consumer Affairs supervision program (an area under Barr’s committee as a governor).

If prediction markets are right and a crypto‑friendly Hassett inherits this landscape, his Fed would not be writing on a blank slate but stepping into an institution already mid‑pivot on how hard (and where) it leans on banks.