Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

It boggles my mind how PayPal can again and again get away with this.

The ability of PayPal to be a bank and yet avoid being one legally is interesting. If you hold somebody else's money you are a bank, whether you call yourself that way or not.




Have you read any of the comments here before writing your own? What is PayPal getting away with? How would another bank have acted differently? What regulation do you think applies to banks but not to PayPal in this situation? They are all beholden to the PATRIOT Act, and to the IRS; PayPal is also beholden to 50 different states' Money Transmitter licensing regulations. None of them want to be a conduit for international money laundering.


I could ask you same about reading comments...

If I am not mistaken a significant percentage of them seem to agree with me and suggest sweeping funds to an actual bank periodically.

I apologize if I somehow offended you, but I stand by my statement.


1) he would not be able to get an actual US bank account without getting the legal issues in order; 2) sweeping funds would not prevent either his tax problems or visa problems, which likely are much more serious than simply the locked money.

Sweeping funds would be a nice-to-have - it would have helped, sure, but it's not really a solution.


Been thinking the same thing for a while.

We even adjusted the accounting software to tread PayPal as if it was a bank ... The amount of accounting time on PayPal went down. Because it's well ... a bank, without the legal obligations :( and that means we are screwed.


For digital goods you use bitcoin, always and everywhere. please fix this as soon as your next release, God what are you thinking? The USSA has become a beacon of INVERTED TOTALITARIANISM. google that.


Bitcoin?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: