Rumours are flying around on the internet and the Bitcoin fora about the Peck Madigan Jones firm. This firm is lobbying very hard for Bitcoin. The question that now pops up is whether this lobby firm is working to promote Bitcoin or working very hard against the use of Bitcoin?

What we know.

The Peck Madigan Jones company was founded in 1987. A wide variety of notable clients that range from environmental groups to some big names in finance, such as Deloitte, Wells Fargo Securities, US Chamber of Commerce, MasterCard and many others.

Possibilities & speculations.

Seeing that Peck Madigan Jones does have a lot of high-profile financial institutions, can be a major indicator on their plans about Bitcoin. It is no secret that most of the financial sector has it out for Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general, because the financial institutions do not have any control over cryptocurrencies.  Because of this, they can’t rake in the millions on transaction, fees and other taxes the financial sector can/could levy on their clients. The regulation on everything crypto-related is a likely avenue.

According to the firm’s latest disclosure: “Specific Lobbying Issues: Interchange fees, gift cards, overdraft fees, data breach, identity theft, Bitcoin and mobile payments. Implementation of Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub.L. 111-203), including debit interchange fee amendment. Mobile payments in general …”

There is also the possibility that Peck Madigan Jones is going to lobby for the use of Bitcoin. The disclosure’s mention of Bitcoin in the context of fees, gift cards, and mobile payments can possibly form a link to specific services and niches, rather than Bitcoin in general.

Conclusions.

What can we pick up from that disclosure? Well,the fact that “fees, identity theft, Bitcoin & consumer protection act as well as Wall Street” are a huge sign that Peck Madigan Jones Company is probably going to take the regulatory route. A possible result could be that this lobby group wants to have some control over the exchanges, which would be logical, since there have been some problems with the exchanges. That could be a reason why the Wall Street reform and consumer protection act are mentioned.

Whatever the case may be, we will keep an eye out as the news develops.