Legislation is pending that, if passed, will end the threat:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/the-clarity-act-heads-to-house-floor-for-vote-with-protection-for-noncustodial-tools-intact
I read the text of the law (it's very short, it seems!) but I'm still not sure where Lightning ⚡ fits into this
If A pays C by Lightning, routing through channels involving B, then it could be argued that B transferred the money from A to C
Of course, Lightning was designed to make it impossible for B to steal the money; B can take the money from A if and only if they first pay C. My fear is that regulators might still abuse this
I guess I should do some research; I'm sure someone has thought of this already 😜
If A pays C by Lightning, routing through channels involving B, then it could be argued that B transferred the money from A to C
Of course, Lightning was designed to make it impossible for B to steal the money; B can take the money from A if and only if they first pay C. My fear is that regulators might still abuse this
I guess I should do some research; I'm sure someone has thought of this already 😜