No, we contributed only crytpo and that crypto has not moved or been transferred to fiat, nor has the project been able to get to work making the protocol. Although all tax calculations are always done in fiat, there are certainly plenty of precedents under which unspent assets are liquidated and redistributed. I would have thought this obviously the correct moral position anyway, even if debatably the legal one.
As I said, if Harmen had changed it all to fiat and not gained any value or if the crypto had lost money and he failed to deliver, no one would be asking him for the ico fiat value back. No one did with n-99 or safe-fs either when they failed.
Eh, I defined the ‘value’ very clearly, the value is the value of the BTC that remains unspent (which varies every day)
That’s not conflating anything?! Harmen said $500k was more than he needed to complete decorum in 2016, so however this ends he has a lot more than he needs to do it now too. If $15m isn’t enough and he needs $20m then I’d say that was more evidence of greed than investors wanting something back. No confusion there.
No one has suggested the tax implication not be accounted for by the people doing the buy back. Personal CGT is 20% here in the UK with deduction for tax allowances. I’ve no idea what the implications are in Holland for businesses, but it’s not hard to simply be clear and state what % was lost from the buy back due to tax. Paying tax is not a reason to not offer the buy back, it’s a reason to ensure the buy back accounts for the tax due.
lol eh? I think my accountant can handle that thanks. That is a really weird statement. I feel like you had a different point to make but failed to make it?!
At no point have I demanded anything. I entered the conversation AFTER Harmen had already said he agreed that a buy back of some kind after 5 years was a fair option. Please show me any demand I have made?
The reason we’re all here David is really because of you. Either you knew in 2016 that we were still 5+ years away and you just didn’t care about investors or locking up their money on ecosystem projects that would never be able to start. Or, perhaps you really though SAFE was just months away and development is a total mess of unpredictable challenges that it might never be completed and you played that down to deceive investors. Either way, it was your selfishness and greed RE SAFE which caused this mess. You talk about me being greedy and selfish, but the fact of the matter is that I have helped fund your project to the tune of hundreds of thousands over the years and I gave away more than any other community member whilst I was here. I’m now trying to get back a small slice of the value of a tiny chunk that’s left. I’m not some greedy profiteer. If SAFE never existed I’d have a small fortune in BTC and other things. As it is I have almost nothing left, so forgive me for wanting to try and salvage half the value of a slice of the investment I made into a project that has sat idle for 5 years, to be built on a network that I don’t personally believe will ever get off the ground.
It would not be weird at all for an investor in a project to get a dividend or buy-out option when the project was sitting on a 40x gain thanks entirely to their investment. Investors are attracted by the potential to turn a profit, so people looking for investment try to offer them that option. Harmen has the luxury of being able to make his investors whole without ever having had to succeed with his business and without having to compromise his ability to deliver. That’s a luxury he should be taking advantage of imo. There is not a 40x gain because Harmen made something brilliant and people wanted it. There is only a 40x gain because we all bought and sent crypto and he didn’t move it. Whether legally murky or not, it is morally unambiguous to me.
yw