×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

India Suspended From PayPal For "At Least a Few Months"

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the keeping-the-money-out dept.

Government 186

More details have come about about what was behind PayPal's decision to suspend personal payments to any user in India, as we discussed on Sunday. In a blog post today, PayPal revealed that payments to India will remain in suspension for at least a few months. Customers in India will be able to pull rupees out of the service into their bank accounts within a few days. The suspension came about when Indian government regulators raised questions about whether PayPal's service was enabling remittances (transfers of money by foreign workers) to Indian citizens. "The problems may have been triggered by a marketing push that promotes PayPal as a way to send money abroad, a source familiar with the matter said. The campaign — which reads 'As low as $1.50 to send $300 to countries like India' — may have caught the attention of Indian regulators, the source said."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

186 comments

State vs Internet (2, Interesting)

drDugan (219551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082012)

Stopping money flow and financial services innovation is, like Internet censorship,
a symptom of the fundamental conflict between the traditional role the state has expanded
to cover (ie governments) and the transparent, open and global nature of the Internet.

When everyone on the planet can communicate directly and immediately, through
fully automated translators, to any other connected person or to large groups
- why exactly do we need massive percentages (10-50%) of our resources funneled
to maintain the state and state-run defense and services? To preserve the old lines
on maps and control the access to major geographic regions? In almost every single
case, Internet connected people and services will do a better job.

The necessary reasons for countries as they exist today mostly go away when the
Internet fully connects individuals.* Obsolescence is a terrible thing for
bureaucracy, but can be framed as the primary driver of most "issues" governments
have with the Internet.

* physical defense and security being the only notable exception.

Re:State vs Internet (5, Insightful)

kai_hiwatari (1642285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082040)

Stopping money flow and financial services innovation is, like Internet censorship,

Its not about stopping money flow, but rather money flow in a regulated manner. I don't think its even legal for PayPal to have the services they offer without registering itself as a bank. As another someone said earlier, "The problem is PayPal wants to do the functions of a bank but does not want to be registered as a bank".

Re:State vs Internet (4, Informative)

ImNotAtWork (1375933) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082094)

You don't have to be a bank to transfer funds from one point to another. Western Union can send money across international boundaries. It isn't a bank either, it's a financial service.

Re:State vs Internet (4, Informative)

_merlin (160982) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082100)

Western Union doesn't hold funds in accounts for you, and doesn't do short-term loans.

Re:State vs Internet (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082188)

And don't forget, India was mostly unaffected by our recent economic downturn because of their draconian economic laws. For decades they were criticized for their over regulation of their financial markets but after the fall, India was seen as a model for how markets could survive wide-scale economic collapse.

Re:State vs Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082304)

Canada's banks did well too.

Re:State vs Internet (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082442)

Eat my balls, ball-eaters.

Re:State vs Internet (2, Interesting)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083140)

Canada's banks did well too.

Yeah, and for exact same reasons - strict government regulations on how much and who they can credit.

Re:State vs Internet (-1, Troll)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082420)

after the fall, India was seen as a model for how markets could survive wide-scale economic collapse.

You mean India was seen as a model for how lumbering, stagnant markets could ride through a temporary downturn.

I don't think you understand what "wide-scale economic collapse" means. 2009 wasn't it.

Re:State vs Internet (5, Interesting)

metlin (258108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082706)

You mean India was seen as a model for how lumbering, stagnant markets could ride through a temporary downturn.

Only an idiot would consider an economy with almost 7% growth [finmin.nic.in] in a global downturn to be a lumbering, stagnant market.

I don't think you understand what "wide-scale economic collapse" means. 2009 wasn't it.

Apparently, neither do you.

Re:State vs Internet (1)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082742)

When you look deeply enough, all financial indicators are relative. There is no universal archetype of value against which things can be assessed. If everyone else is going down, and you tread water, then by most measures you have grown.

To even have a hope of getting a real sense, you have to take a longer view than just one year, and you have to subtract costs like environmental damage and the accumulation of negative social factors. It takes a long time and a lot of hard work to even approach quantifying this stuff, and a quick glance at one indicator is barely scratching the surface.

I have a lot of faith in India but at the moment the country is not living up to its potential and the government is a big part of the reason why.

Re:State vs Internet (3, Insightful)

1s44c (552956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083054)

You mean India was seen as a model for how lumbering, stagnant markets could ride through a temporary downturn.

Only an idiot would consider an economy with almost 7% growth [finmin.nic.in] in a global downturn to be a lumbering, stagnant market.

If I'm wondering the streets wearing rags and staving with only 100 cents in lose change that I found by digging though bins and begging and some kind soul gives me 7 cents am I then well off?

Have you seen the poverty in India? There are endless armies of people with nothing who sleep on the streets, beg, and dig though mountains of garbage for anything of value. I have seen it myself.

It's not hard to add 7% to very nearly nothing.

Re:State vs Internet (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082730)

One time I sucked six in a row
One time I sucked six dirty dicks in a row
One time I got my kicks with joe
And I sucked his dick and five of his friends in a row

Re:State vs Internet (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082870)

There are a lot of ways to remit money - western union, traditional banks, and non traditional means like Hawala which is used a lot in the subcontinent.

So if some one wants to fund terrorists in India, Paypal becomes a very useful conduit -with almost no documentation needs. This is the same reason US has tried to destroy the Hawala network - there are not good records. Traditional banking arrangements atleast provide some idea of the financial flows.

Generally US does the blocking of financial institutions etc. and Americans in general are used to accepting such laws since the 'terrorism' word is leveraged. I think India is just doing the same. If the only documentation you need to receive money is an email address....

And... there are a few higly regulated markets out there. India is one - but another significant one is Canada. Not many banks lost much in Canada. What you call innovation in banking is basically a cool way for banks to enrich themselves.
  * Use customer deposits to gamble - and have so many customers, that you know if you fail, the government will have to step in.
  * Use the governmental funds to then again gamble and pay yourself.
  * Laugh at the fools on the sidelines who think the banks tried their best.

Re:State vs Internet (0, Troll)

1s44c (552956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083008)

And don't forget, India was mostly unaffected by our recent economic downturn because of their draconian economic laws.

India was mostly unaffected by the recent economic downturn because you can't lose what you never had.

Re:State vs Internet (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082374)

Western Union also does not permit transfers from India to USA -- a customer just tried this and it was not available to him in India. He used PayPal, but ran into a USD500 limit and only sent me a partial payment. Eventually, he had a friend in the USA send me a check for the balance (I'm in the USA). They will work out the personal loan between themselves later.

I'll be keeping an eye on my PayPal account to see if his partial payment stays around!

Re:State vs Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082456)

Did his friend in the USA by any chance accidentally make the check out for $5000 too much?

Re:State vs Internet (5, Informative)

iammani (1392285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082196)

FYI, not in India. Western union cannot be used to send money from India. It can be used to send to India though, where the recipient can furnish necessary documentation (identity proof, name address, reason for transfer) and collect it.

Re:State vs Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082236)

Correctamundo! Mod parent UP!

Re:State vs Internet (2, Insightful)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082392)

FYI, not in India.

Exactly. For once, it does not seem to be PayPal that is the baddie here. Although there have been many cases where PayPal has essentially snatched or frozen customers' funds, this doesn't seem to be one of them.

Re:State vs Internet (2, Insightful)

zemblue (1404121) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082334)

It is about stopping money flow. Somebody has purposefully done this to restrict our ability to help each other. (conspiracy alert) Artificial barriers have been put in place to restrict our movements in nearly all ways. Getting money overseas should be easy, but it has been made difficult to keep the poor countries poor. If India were able to access more resources I am sure the whole world would benefit, there are so many talented people being put through financial hardship in India. If information, communication and resources (including money) flowed more easily then nations and people could co-operate with each other more efficiently.

Re:State vs Internet (4, Funny)

TheLink (130905) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082530)

That's so true. Because of such artificial barriers I need your excellent help to transfer 40 million US dollars from Nigeria to Malaysia. :).

Re:State vs Internet (2, Informative)

prayag (1252246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082592)

Actually money transfer to India is not difficult at all. I use bank and wire transfer and it works fine to transfer money to and from India. The problem is that Indian government wants to keep a full track of where and how money crosses border. It always had. Transfers through PayPal, unless it registers itself as a bank, are difficult to track. That is why the problem.
BTW, for this reason, hawala [wikipedia.org] transfers are illegal in India and have come under heavy fire.

Re:State vs Internet (1, Troll)

Rocketship Underpant (804162) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082896)

"The problem is PayPal wants to do the functions of a bank but does not want to be registered as a bank"

Whoever said that doesn't know what a bank does. It's not about holding money for you (everyone from your mutual fund advisor to escrow services to pre-paid cell phone vendors does that) or enabling financial transactions (any retailer can do that) or enabling currency exchanges (any hotel can do that).

When Paypal says you have $100 in your account, they actually have that money somewhere waiting for you to withdraw.

When a bank says you have $100 in your account, they actually take your money and spend it on champagne, Vegas hotel rooms, politicians, and investments of dubious value. When you go to withdraw it, they borrow $100 from someone else or even create it out of thin air.

That is the difference, and that's why banks face a host of regulations and insurance requirements that Paypal does not.

Re:State vs Internet (4, Insightful)

ColaMan (37550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082164)

why exactly do we need massive percentages (10-50%) of our resources funneled
to maintain the state and state-run defense and services

So that people who are envious of your physical resources don't all band together, drop by your house one day, and proceed to hack you to bits with machetes? So that there's a semi-controlled environment to enable the provision of services - like power, water and maybe even a little internet?

* physical defense and security being the only notable exception.

And a very big fucking exception they will remain, too.
Dreams, meet reality. Watch out for reality's sucker punch, it can really catch you unawares.

Re:State vs Internet (3, Informative)

Dalambertian (963810) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082270)

Out of curiosity, what percentage of our wealth would you say is required to provide for the common defense?

a) 0-10% b)10-50% c) > 50%

If you answered (a), then you and dugan might be in agreement.

Re:State vs Internet (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31083138)

The white man emasculates you
because you assume he will emasculate you.
The black man steals from you
because you assume he will steal from you.
The brown man slows you
because you assume he will slow you.
The yellow man trumps you
because you assume he will trump you.

We kill others
because we assume they will kill us.
We lie to others
because we assume they will lie to us.
We horde from others
because we assume they will horde from us.
We help others...

Self-fulfilling stereotypes can only be stopped at the source: You.

Re:State vs Internet (3, Insightful)

avilliers (1158273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082228)

The necessary reasons for countries as they exist today mostly go away when the Internet fully connects individuals.* Obsolescence is a terrible thing for bureaucracy, but can be framed as the primary driver of most "issues" governments have with the Internet.

* physical defense and security being the only notable exception.

Can you give one example of a core role that becomes obsolete? I assume there must be something. The post? That was a core role a couple centuries ago, I guess.

Most state funds go to transportation infrastructure, "physical defense" (ie, military), law enforcement & prisons, education, health care, retirement pensions and other social safety nets (not in that order). Research funding, parks, civil courts, disaster recovery aid & regulatory enforcement and the like are a few of the other less-expensive things that get money.

*None* of those vanish when the internet connects individuals. [I understand that some will pick their least favorite (the military, or the social safety net) and say the government shouldn't be doing it anyway, but that desire's independent of 'connectivity'.] A few clerks may lose their jobs due to on-line requests being filled, but I'm not even sure what people are imagining when they think the internet will somehow obsolete governments--let alone why a state bureaucrat would be living in existential dread.

I assume this particular case boils down to people evading taxation, which is going to be an issue as long as the government spends any money at all. It'll be, unavoidably, the very last state function that becomes obsolete.

Re:State vs Internet (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082278)

Stopping money flow and financial services innovation is, like Internet censorship, a symptom of the fundamental conflict between the traditional role the state has expanded to cover (ie governments) and the transparent, open and global nature of the Internet.

I've had all the innovation in financial services I can stand for a decade or so, thank you.

There is nothing inherently open and transparent about the Internet. Traffic can be encyrpted or disguised in any number of ways, some more successful than others.

Re:State vs Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082546)

Yes this is true but until terrorism and the funding of it by these means is stopped you will never have a world system. What makes one person believe that they have more right to live than another is beyond me.

Re:State vs Internet (3, Interesting)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082610)

?

1- PayPal is a poster case of why governments are needed: freezing, canceling, hijacking accounts with no rhyme, reason, nor customer service. Just imagine if banks where free to keep your cash 'coz they no longer like you. I'll use PayPal once it is regulated, meself.

2- In some countries, the government is not only about regional control and protection. Education, Health, Retirement, Social Security... To my unprofessional eyes, governments do not seem to do much worse than the private sector in those domains, on average. I'd rather study, be sick, retire or be on the dole in France than in the US.

3- Countries exist because it is easier to feel close to people with the same language and culture.

Have you traveled at all ? Not as a tourist, but staying for moth than a month in a different country, working with locals ?

Re:State vs Internet (2, Insightful)

nmos (25822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082636)

For as long as there have been people they have been forming groups in order to advance their own interests at the expense of others. That's part of human nature and I don't see it changing any time soon.

Re:State vs Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082670)

only notable exceptions are physical defense and security? How about the rule of law?

As of this very day, there has never been a time on this planet where communication between individuals has been cheaper or more widespread. Yet xenophobia, racism and religious intolerance has not waned.
  You should get out of your mothers basement more often.

Re:State vs Internet (2, Insightful)

AnotherUsername (966110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082690)

- why exactly do we need massive percentages (10-50%) of our resources funneled to maintain the state and state-run defense and services?

Because, believe it or not, there is life outside of the Internet.

not State vs Internet, world vs paypal. (1)

1s44c (552956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082998)

You are right in what you say but you are missing the story here. Paypal isn't a money transfer service like it pretends to be, it's a bunch of crooks pretending to be a bank.

Paypal deserves to go bust and its management thrown in jail for the very many instances of theft they have committed over the years.

Anyone that hasn't seen the near endless stories about paypal closing accounts and keeping the cash for the most flimsy reason should exercise their googling skills.

Re:State vs Internet (1)

Kris_J (10111) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083106)

Paypal specialises in dodging regulation and being an arsehole. There may well be times when you can sing the praises of the wondrous capitalist market and how it solves everything, but this is not one of them.

Paypal is a mess (5, Insightful)

Seriousity (1441391) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082016)

I hope they get in the crap with even more countries and are forced to do stuff like this, maybe eventually they'll have to declare themselves as an actual bank and give their users rights over their money for a change. There is so much dubious crap buried in the terms and conditions that none save a seasoned lawyer would figure out, and so many stories of people being royally screwed over by paypal (eg bank accounts being wiped out for no apparent reason)...

Re:Paypal is a mess (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082340)

My IP, name, address, phone number, etc. are banned on paypal and any variation thereof and they tried to send a collection agency after me for 2 accounts I had. I told them to fuck off and they can't do jack since I, as a precautionary measure, changed my bank account numbers as soon as they limited my accounts. Just because some buyer decides to do a chargeback on his credit card 120 days after purchase does not mean I am responsible for the money. Paypal is not a bank. I did not borrow from them. I do not owe them anything, and they can't touch my credit. The paypalsucks website is living truth of what they can do to their customers. Some people lost $5K plus, and most are scared into cooperating by the collection agency. I at least didn't lose anything except for the account I opened in 1999 and my ability to use ebay, but they can lose the business. I use craigslist instead now and don't have to pay to put up auctions or pay transfer fees.

Re:Paypal is a mess (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082472)

"There is so much dubious crap buried in the terms and conditions that none save a seasoned lawyer would figure out, and so many stories of people being royally screwed over by paypal (eg bank accounts being wiped out for no apparent reason)..."

As someone who worked at PayPal and saw the horror first hand over the years, I cannot possibly agree more. The Terms sheet is a deck that is stacked against the user at every opportunity.

I remember first hand seeing an employee (with a reputation for incompetence) award $30,000 to a fraudster from a legitimate business account. This is a common error, and PayPal sets aside a budget to fix these mistakes. But because of the dollar amount, upper management decided to hide behind some vague language in the terms sheet and screw the good user.

I don't know how the story ended out exactly. Legally they may have gotten away with it. But just because it was legal doesn't mean it was moral.

Bullshit (3, Interesting)

digitalunity (19107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082020)

Isn't this in direct contradiction to something PayPal said a day or two ago? Something akin to "golly gee we're not sure what happened but we're looking into it".

On another note, this applies to private transactions only, not commercial ones. This directly affects any freelancers who aren't operating as a company though, such as Rent-A-Coder, et. al.

Re:Bullshit (2, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082042)

On another note, this applies to private transactions only, not commercial ones. This directly affects any freelancers who aren't operating as a company though, such as Rent-A-Coder, et. al.

According to TFA it applies to personal payments, not purchase of goods or services, regardless of whether they're operating as a corporation or not.

If this was a payment for a purchase of goods or services, you should contact the sender and have him or her resend the payment as follows:

(a) click the Send Money tab, and

(b) select “purchase.”

If this was a personal payment, then the sender will need to find another payment method until we restore the service. We’re sorry about this.

Oh.. but since it must be sent as a purchase, the recipient must have an account enabled for selling things, and PayPal will of course charge a transaction fee on the transfer.

Re:Bullshit (1)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082436)

According to TFA it applies to personal payments, not purchase of goods or services

Most freelancers in India are receiving their money as personal payments.

Re:Bullshit (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082112)

> This directly affects any freelancers who aren't operating as a company though, such as Rent-A-Coder, et. al.

Ahhh, we can finally raise our rates to American ones, thanks...

You know it takes a lot of money to live here, don't you ?

I am not saying this really seriously of course ;-))

Re:Bullshit (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082144)

There was a miscommunication when the person called PayPal. The call was forwarded to a call-center in India, and they couldn't understand the person's accent...

Re:Bullshit (1)

GoochOwnsYou (1343661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082194)

Something akin to "golly gee we're not sure what happened but we're looking into it".

Mr Bean works for PayPal? Well I guess that explains alot

Analog tech... (1, Informative)

eparker05 (1738842) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082050)

While PayPal may be convenient, shutting down paypal will not stop remittences. People can simply place a check in an envelope and mail it. Money orders are also an option.

Why limit incomming remittance? (1)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082114)

What I don't get is why India wants to stop remittances from coming into the country. Why wouldn't they want money to flow into the country which will be spent in the local economy? The foreign currency will either fund imports or will favorably affect exchange rates. I'm clearly missing something here.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1)

kabloom (755503) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082146)

Terrorism concerns, money laundering, etc... (though there's no specific concern with remittances per-se, governments do want to know where money is coming from and where it's going to look for suspicious terror.)

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082154)

I have no idea persay, but I would be shocked if it wasn't directly caused by their fear that they wouldn't be able to effectively tax such income.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082372)

Wouldn't the money be taxed when its spent? Doesn't India have some sort of VAT, Sales Tax, etc.?

This is why income taxes are stupid and taxes on spending are better. You can't hide the money because at some point in the chain the item was purchased from a store.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1)

raju1kabir (251972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082446)

Wouldn't the money be taxed when its spent? Doesn't India have some sort of VAT, Sales Tax, etc.?

India has a massive informal economy. It's not like Canada where every business does neat little books and has an electronic cash register that spits out a report for the tax man at the close of business.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082534)

Exactly. Think of the West a century or so ago. Enforcement of the law (specifically for taxes) is very difficult and most people do end runs around the government. Bribing Income Tax (India's IRS) officers is routine for most businessmen. The situation is improving but is far from ideal.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1, Insightful)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082434)

I have no idea persay, but I would be shocked...

What is more shocking is the number of people who seem to think "persay" is a word. The expression is per se, meaning "by, of or in itself".

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082162)

What I don't get is why India wants to stop remittances from coming into the country. Why wouldn't they want money to flow into the country which will be spent in the local economy? The foreign currency will either fund imports or will favorably affect exchange rates. I'm clearly missing something here.

Taxes.

They want to tax the money coming in.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (5, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082186)

1. The want to know about it so they can tax it.

2. They don't want foreign funding of domestic terrorists.

3. They don't want criminals to have yet another way to move money around.

4. They want to protect their export industry by not having that "favorable" effect on exchange rates.

Re:Why limit incomming remittance? (1)

danielsfca2 (696792) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082198)

Yeah i'm pretty confused. Remittances aren't illegal. And according to the linked wiki article India is the world's #1 recipient of remittances!

Re:Analog tech... (5, Informative)

iammani (1392285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082176)

The aim is not to stop remittances, but to permit remittances only if the required paper work has been submitted (Which is very simple one page form, asking for sender and receiver details (name, address, identity proof) and reason for transfer).

The RBI (Reserve Bank of India) mandates banks registered in India to collect these before forex transfers can be made.

In this case, paypal doesnt want to be registered as a bank and fall under RBI regulations. As a result have been banned. I am surprise it did not happen earlier.

And just to make it clear, SWIFT Transfer (also called wire transfer) and mailing checks/DDs will continue to work. There are no options send/receive money order to/from India

Re:Analog tech... (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082180)

The goal is not to stop remittances, to the goal is to enforce Indian law. This "the bomber will always get through" attitude is puzzling, to say the least. Sure, you can "fall back to analog tech" as you crudely put it. Are you really suggesting to send an instrument of financial value through India Post? Are you daft, sir?

Re:Analog tech... (1)

eparker05 (1738842) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082220)

Whatever the reasons behind the temporary shutdown of services, perhaps it could have been resolved by a less dramatic action. PayPal is obviously a great convenience for its many users. I do not see why this investigation required a complete cessation of the PayPal services when legitimate users are going to be victimized, while sneaky users will find other ways around the government.

Re:Analog tech... (1)

rmathew (3745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082564)

Indeed the Hawala [wikipedia.org] system is the biggest source of unregulated remittances in these parts. At least with PayPal the RBI can track who gives money to whom when required.
PS: It is spelt "remittance [merriam-webster.com] ".

My conspiracy theory (0, Offtopic)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082074)

All of the last 5 stories on Slashdot that portray India negatively have come from IDG news service. Sounds like the beginnings of another propaganda campaign.

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

kai_hiwatari (1642285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082104)

PayPal is the one getting bad press here not India

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082238)

PayPal is the one getting bad press here not India

Yes. But under that cover/ruse/whatever, there is a negativism. It gets reflected in the comments posted. For instance,

http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1543706&cid=31082012

http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1543706&cid=31082188

And look at the tags (0, Redundant)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082590)

Tagged as 'India', tagged as 'government'. But not tagged as 'PayPal'. Why?

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082138)

My, how our mental filters reveal who we really are! Frankly, I thought this was an article about how Paypal is a despicable scofflaw yet again, this time with the Indian government, who presumably are not bought and paid for like Western politicians and who are not putting up with Paypal's latest nonsense. But hey, you got a persecution complex, let it all hang out. Use words like 'colonialism', 'empire', and 'hegemony' for maximum effect and you'll have a crowd following you in no time.

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082206)

My, how our mental filters reveal who we really are! Frankly, I thought this was an article about how Paypal is a despicable scofflaw yet again, this time with the Indian government, who presumably are not bought and paid for like Western politicians and who are not putting up with Paypal's latest nonsense. But hey, you got a persecution complex, let it all hang out.

I don't quite get it. Are you concurring with me? or disagreeing?

Use words like 'colonialism', 'empire', and 'hegemony' for maximum effect and you'll have a crowd following you in no time.

No thanks, I wouldn't stoop to that level.

Re:My conspiracy theory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082310)

I don't quite get it.

No worries. That's pretty much par for the course.

Re:My conspiracy theory (2, Interesting)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082226)

What negative portrayal of India is there here?

Seriously, there's nothing negative at all in any of those links (well I'm sure there is in the comments on the link to another slashdot article, but that article itself isn't) or in the summary.

 

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

BhaKi (1316335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082266)

What negative portrayal of India is there here?

Seriously, there's nothing negative at all in any of those links (well I'm sure there is in the comments on the link to another slashdot article, but that article itself isn't) or in the summary.

The article is about economic regulation in India. Any regulation, at first sight, appears as bad. Isn't it?

Re:My conspiracy theory (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082422)

No. Well maybe to anarchists. And extreme libertarians.

Is regulating whether I should drive on the left or the right hand side of the road bad? Is regulating how much vinyl chloride I can dump into the public water supply bad?

Regulations on money transfers is completely ordinary and doesn't reflect on India at all, other than making the US happier with them.

Try transferring $50k into the US from India - it's not at the Indian end that that is going to be delayed and checked the longest.

Try transferring money from an foreign online casino into a US bank account.

Money laundering... (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082096)

... and tax evasion IMHO is what this is really going to be about sooner or later.

Paypal allows ones to hide funds from governments of the world as a non bank institution.

Re:Money laundering... (1)

ottothecow (600101) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082260)

Yeah but do you have any idea how scary it would be to keep any sum of money that was actually worth saving in a paypal account?

I can see something like returning a $100 ebay purchase and being too lazy to initiate the transfer back to your bank account (since you would eventually spend it anyways)..if they should randomly shut you down you are not out very much. But if you had the kind of money that is worth hiding....

So ... (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082122)

So is it illegal to transfer money into India? or do they just highly monitor all ways to do this (other then paypal)?

I fail to see how such a policy is worth the economic problems of shuting down paypal for a whole country must of caused.
And I am sure most of the people currently doing the remittances have probably been doing it for quite awhile, so why were they is such a rush that they could not have "fixed" their system without shutting down paypal in the mean time?

Re:So ... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082216)

So is it illegal to transfer money into India?

If you don't feel like following the reasonable regulations on foreign exchange transactions and submit the proper paperwork (a trivial one page form), yes.

This is basically India taking issue with paypal wanting to act like a bank without being regulated like one.

Re:So ... (1)

dakameleon (1126377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082246)

I fail to see how such a policy is worth the economic problems of shuting down paypal for a whole country must of caused.

Firstly: it's must have, not must of. Surely you're not 12 years old with that UID?

Secondly: What makes you think paypal is so integral to the Indian economy that it "must have" caused "economic problems"? Rest assured that this is unlikely to have caused more than a teeny tiny blip in the grand scheme of things.

And I am sure most of the people currently doing the remittances have probably been doing it for quite awhile, so why were they is such a rush that they could not have "fixed" their system without shutting down paypal in the mean time?

You might not be familiar with the words "financial regulator" in America, but generally speaking in the rest of the world, when they act they act immediately and don't dither or worry about a potentially infringing system not being available. The commercial entity does not have an automatic right to operate if it is potentially infringing the regulations or laws.

Re:So ... (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082352)

While I am sure it did not damage India's economy the linked article did state that some (a significant enough "some" to be worth mentioning, apparently) of them do use it to get payed for their job.
So this action by PayPal I am sure has inconvenienced many people and for any everyone that uses it as a source of income could find the next months financially challenging.
So while they might not have a right to operate, I would hope any country would think twice before doing anything that would jeopardize any of its citizens legal sources of income.

Note: I was not overly careful with my grammar so maybe you can find another mistake to poke fun of, if you find my logic/opinion to hard to counter.

Lots of questions - follow the money (1)

HBI (604924) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082142)

I'm sure it has something to do with an Indian entity, say the government and banks, being cut out of fees.

Baksheesh.

PayPal bypass the SWIFT system (1)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082200)

According to the World Bank, India is the world's LARGEST recipient of remittances. I assume the Indian government got commission out from these remittances. Having PayPal operate there will bypass the whole SWIFT system, which mean that the government will lose a huge income.

Re:PayPal bypass the SWIFT system (2, Informative)

_merlin (160982) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082974)

SWIFT doesn't actually perform fund transfers. SWIFT just provides a standard platform for sending messages between banks. It's the Indian banks (and other ForEx providers) who have to report transactions to the government, anyway.

This is a DISASTER!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082182)

How will the children of Ganesh now be able to afford to get to work at Dell-India? I won't know how to reformat my Insprion now!

OMG! (1)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082240)

God forbid that someone should give some money to someone else!

Re:OMG! (2, Informative)

tangent3 (449222) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082634)

They are not trying to stop you from giving money to someone else, but from giving money to someone else [b]without leaving a trace[/b] that can be taxed or to be investigated for illegal money laundering.

WTF?? Indian politicians are nuts, just nuts (1, Insightful)

Russ Nelson (33911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082290)

Yo! India politicians! Another word for remittances is: FOREIGN CAPITAL. They're a GOOD THING. You want your citizens to GET LOTS OF THEM. Getting foreign money into your country is a FREE LUNCH. It's the reason your EXPORT STUFF.

My god. I shake my head.

Re:WTF?? Indian politicians are nuts, just nuts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082906)

Yo! Honky! Enough with the CAPSLOCK
  From wikipedia "In February 2010, Paypal stopped or reversed all "personal" transactions in or out of India without prior notice."
This foreign capital is not very important, especially when it only affects so called personal users. I used to sell tester bottles of perfumes on ebay when I was in high school and even I had business status with Paypal, though being in Canada it's probably easier to verify.

You know, there's something like 1.2 billion people in India, and out of that Id say maybe 1.199999 billion don't even know what the fuck paypal is. Especially not politicians, unlike the USA, not everyone buys (or used to buy) cheap/random shit off ebay.

Re:WTF?? Indian politicians are nuts, just nuts (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082940)

THANK you. COME again.

Western Union (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082428)

Why not use Western Union like most Somali's do?

Paypal Fascism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082488)

1. Link your Paypal to a credit card / bank account

2. Any Fraud (not even by you!) equals locked out from your account. Instead of some kind of common sense approach where Only the FRAUD transaction gets locked up.

3. No feedback / or real communications.

4. No way to sue paypal for malfeasance and misfeasance

Full Disclosure: Yes I grudgingly have a paypal account cause I was FORCED to do it from eBay who has auctions of stuff that can't be found anywhere else.

paypal lol (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082586)

i do not know why people even use that anymore. anyone can get some form of a cc in today's world. in the 90s it had its use for those without a major cc. now any bank will give you a debit. don't have a bank acccount then go grab one of those visa prepaid cards they work anywhere on anything. PayPal just adds the ability to click an buy. but i would rather have the abilty to controle my money in case of scams and if that means filling out a order form when i buy something then well thats what i do. as its been said paypal whats to be a bank but does not what to be regulated. and theirs many reasions for that. there loan rates would have to be standard no more random locking of peoples accounts. they would need to be insured. and probly more i cant think of.

So how will they pay their employees? (1, Funny)

nmos (25822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082648)

I guess we can assume their customer service will be even more useless than usual now.

Misleading title (1)

Zebai (979227) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082748)

I think this should be titled, Paypal suspends operations in india while they figure out how to cheat people legally in that country.

"India suspended from PayPal" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082758)

Geez, talk about anglo-centrism. Some little turd of an American corporation has the power to suspend one of the world's most populous nations? I don't think so. This headline should be "PayPal suspended in India". I realize it affects Indian users in a way that primarily benefits PayPal in the short-term, but the fact is that it is PayPal who is now prevented from operating in a large market. India and its users will find or create alternative services. Hell, I hope they come up with some very strong alternatives so that Americans can stop using PayPal too.

Whats that heading anyways ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082854)

Oh..oh.. The news heading itself is misleading. "India Suspended from PayPal ...." Shouldn't it be simply "PayPal made to stop remittance to india..."
News if not told clearly can be useless !

experience from my recent trip to India (3, Informative)

nerdyalien (1182659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083094)

I visited New Delhi last November (2009).

On my way in, I managed to change my USD to INR at the airport right after the immigration counter, no problem with that.

But on my way out, I thought I can get my INR change back to USD at the air port (this is my normal routine). Alas! there are no money-changers at the airport. Even if they are available, they are only for Indians and it is capped at INR 5000.

I ended up bringing some 5-digit amount INR back to home, later changed back to USD and lost something like ~20 USD as I don't get same rates outside India.

This is ridiculous. I mean, I have been to many airports. And in most of them, there is a money changer and there are no restrictions for foreigners. But this is the first time I'm seeing other way around. Strange land indeed!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...