Last weekend there was a lot of tension surrounding MetaMask, a popular one self custodial wallet. New ones terms of service of the wallet suggested that Consensys, the company behind MetaMask, would start collecting taxes on crypto transactions. Consensys has since denied this and provided clarification.
Consensys provides clarity
In section 4.3 of the new terms of service states the following: “We reserve the right to withhold taxes if necessary.” The news spread quickly in the crypto community and major concerns and criticism were immediately expressed. Consensys was there on Sunday through Twitter quickly and says that the concerns are unfounded:
“We are aware of the circulating tweets containing incorrect information about Consensys’ terms of service. Let’s get one thing straight: MetaMask does NOT collect tax on crypto transactions and we have not made any changes to do so. This claim is false.”
Furthermore, Consensys makes it clear that the statement in the terms of service only relation has on specific products and services. So it seems to be a classic case of misinterpretation. With the clear words of Consensys, the storm seems to blow over and calm returns.
The tax section in our terms of service falls under the “fees and payment” section, and it exclusively pertains to products and paid plans offered by ConsenSys. For example, Infura has credit card developer subscriptions which include sales tax.
— ConsenSys (@ConsenSys) May 21, 2023
Ledger also in trouble
Last week, a similar situation occurred around hardware wallet manufacturer Ledger. A customer service representative from the manufacturer caused a very big problem for Ledger. In a tweet, he claimed that Ledger would have access to customers’ private keys with certain firmware.
“Technically, it has always been possible to write firmware that facilitates key extraction. Whether you knew it or not, you always trusted Ledger not to use firmware like that.”
According to the worrying tweet. The tweet was quickly deleted and Ledger’s CTO, Charles Guillemet, tried to return the calm. In a very long and convoluted series of tweets, he tried to explain that it wasn’t as simple as the original tweet suggested. However, according to critics, the tweet was unnecessarily complex and thus did not seem to repair the damage.