The District of Columbia bar (DCB for its acronym in English) became the most recent and published an ethical statement that says so Lawyers in the country’s capital can accept crypto as a method of payment provided the fees are reasonable and objectively fair to customers. According to the DCB, any lawyer who accepts cryptocurrency for payment must also “take competent and reasonable safeguards to protect that property.”
Other associations accept payments in digital currency
The DCB currently has approximately 100,000 members, making it one of the largest US bar associations to claim this “It is not unethical for a lawyer to accept crypto.”
The New York Bar Associationissued a statement in July 2019 calling these payment methods “trade deals” while DCB called them “payment in goods” instead of “payment in fiat”.
Law schools in Nebraska and North Carolina were the first organizations to make statements about the use of cryptocurrencies for lawyers in 2018. The Nebraska Bar Association He specifically pointed out Bitcoin (BTC) and highlighted the illegal use of digital currencies. He cited the Silk Road, the internet smuggling market, which is known for its connections to this currency as an example.
The North Carolina Bar Association may have given the most skeptical opinion so far, if question the ethics of crypto as a means of payment. Although he finally agreed that cryptocurrency is a form of property, he recommended not to invest it in virtual currency:
“Most people we know see Bitcoin as ‘shady money’ and they see lawyers who accept Bitcoin as ‘shady lawyers’. Will Bitcoin be legitimized one day in the eyes of ordinary people? Time, but not for now. “
Because right now?
Although DCB views cryptocurrency as a “volatile alternative currency” that “presents an ethical challenge for lawyers”, it also acknowledges that the digital currency can be everyone’s future:
“Lawyers can’t stop the waves of change no matter how much they want, and digital currencies are increasingly accepted as a form of payment by providers and service providers, including lawyers […] The rules are flexible enough to protect customers’ interests and property without rejecting advances in technology. “