Flying With Money
You and I have a fundimentl difference of opinion of what it means to be a citizen of the United States of America. I am not a constitutional scholar or a lawyer but I believe this to my core. The state cannot deprive me of my property without due process. Due process is the burden of the state, not the citizen. Unreasonable search and seizure and denial of due process are exactly why the 4th and 5th amendments exist. It's not a technicality.Quote: PaigowdanIf I were an HONEST cop, I would accept a reasonable reason for a driver having $6,000 in C-notes - but I would have my suspicions and book it as evidence if NOT receiving a plausible (cop-wise) scenario - AND to be returned upon reasonable proof to the court.
And I tell you, Mr. Driver would receive a lecture on using and supporting Credit Unions "for the people" to protect them - as fellow Americans, or even illegals.
Quote: bobbartopI am not in the anti-police category. But realistically, "probable cause" is really just a theory to be discussed in a college law course or administration of justice, etc. In the real world, away from the classroom, and out of the view of television cameras, there's no such thing as probable cause. They will MAKE their own probably cause. Sorry to sound so cynical, but I've got the life lessons to prove it. Miranda v Arizona, Mapp v. Ohio, it's all just make believe. They do what they want.
Yeah, they will.
Manufactured, assumed or reasonable, they got that trump card, based on their own experience of a situation.
So, any money discovered over $2,000 or $3,000 or so in any car that isn't 100% Hush-puppy crumb cake, panty waste, milquetoast professional class lawyer, accountant or doctor-looking, is assumed to be meth money related. $1,000 in a beater car. Most times any big money's impounded - just on their say-so.
Cops have their own basic strategy in assessing a situation for probable cause.
1. If you're clean and no money was present, - you're free to go with a ticket, with no other losses. If you have a $40 on you, they won't take that. Obviously it's gas and McDonald's money.
2. If you're clean WITH money present, - you're free to go with a ticket, and assets possibly/probably seized. If you had $2,000 on you - they'll take that, saying you're not clean, - "possible drug trafficking proceeds." And a LOT of American counties you may have passed through may have their own meth/OxyContin/dope issues. They may see you as a problem, even if colored by their local drug problem/forfeiture revenue reasons.
So, why carry large sums of money through the necks of the woods where they operate on this basis?
Answer: no good reason, unless you're just fine saying goodbye to that money.
Quote: JimRockfordYou and I have a fundimentl difference of opinion of what it means to be a citizen of the United States of America. I am not a constitutional scholar or a lawyer but I believe this to my core. The state cannot deprive me of my property without due process. Due process is the burden of the state, not the citizen. Unreasonable search and seizure and denial of due process are exactly why the 4th and 5th amendments exist. It's not a technicality.
So far, I haven't seen any proof that the phenomenon that everybody is getting so exercised about--cops seizing the money of innocent law -abiding citizens and their never never ever ever getting it back--actually exists. What I've seen are a few internet anecdotes, blog posts, and video podcasts. While corrupt cops may indeed be roaming the land , looking for cash like brains-starved zombies, I doubt it. It seems much more likely to be an internet meme. And a great way for hubby to explain why he's coming home from the casino flat broke: "gee, honey, I won five grand tonight, but the cops took it all!" In other words, I don't take internet tales at face value.
That aside, anyone who travels in a car, plane, train, boat, or on a skateboard with large sums of cash is an idiot and is asking for trouble. Having the cops take your cash--however likely that is--is only one of dozens of things that could go wrong.
And as far as that tired American Freedom argument goes, well, I have the right to set fire to myself, and any law prohibiting me from doing that is a grievous infringement of my somethingth amendment rights. But you still would be right to ask me, "Legal or illegal, why in earth would you want to do it?"
And the inocent people who are in their homes? How about when they take your home, gold, silver, cars etc etc? It's one thing having to protect yourself from some scumbag bag thief. Now you have to worry about all law enforcement as well.Quote: PaigowdanYeah, they will.
Manufactured, assumed or reasonable, they got that trump card, based on their own experience of a situation.
So, any money discovered over $2,000 or $3,000 or so in any car that isn't 100% Hush-puppy crumb cake, panty waste, milquetoast professional class lawyer, accountant or doctor-looking, is assumed to be meth money related. $1,000 in a beater car. Most times any big money's impounded - just on their say-so.
Cops have their own basic strategy in assessing a situation for probable cause.
1. If you're clean and no money was present, - you're free to go with a ticket, with no other losses. If you have a $40 on you, they won't take that. Obviously it's gas and McDonald's money.
2. If you're clean WITH money present, - you're free to go with a ticket, and assets possibly/probably seized. If you had $2,000 on you - they'll take that, saying you're not clean, - "possible drug trafficking proceeds." And a LOT of American counties you may have passed through may have their own meth/OxyContin/dope issues. They may see you as a problem, even if colored by their local drug problem/forfeiture revenue reasons.
So, why carry large sums of money through the necks of the woods where they operate on this basis?
Answer: no good reason, unless you're just fine saying goodbye to that money.
Yes, banks CAN be part of the solution, but the ultimate solution is simply bringing cash with you....the problem is police doing civil asset forfeiture.
Quote: AxelWolfAnd the inocent people who are in their homes? How about when they take your home, gold, silver, cars etc etc? It's one thing having to protect yourself from some scumbag bag thief. Now you have to worry about all law enforcement as well.
Almost never, except for far out on the highway, and when holding a ton of cash in a car....
Police who answer a burglary or nuisance call at a business location, or at home in a city location are extremely safe, and this is obviously a lot different than a lone trouper pulling over a lone driver with an unexplainable bundle of cash on an empty highway, especially in a car smelling of pot.
The thing is, driving down a highway very far from any nearby city, with an absolute fortune in cash found in your car, is absolutely and extremely unexplainable. It'll simply be seized. He may very well think the large amount of cash you carry is from drug trafficking, and he will seize it for the state on an empty country road.
The cash might - probably will - never be seen again.
This is different than a city burglary cop, looking at a broken lock or window at your house in the city.
WTF you talking about "driving down a highway very far from any nearby city" I happens all over INCLUDING AIRPORTS, BUS STATIONS etc etc. All nearby major cities. People have had very good explainable reasons. IE. A known car collector bids on a classic car on eBay, Its blatantly obvious why he has the money, yet they take his money (PLEASE READ AND WATCH SOME VIDEOS ) And remember a large amount of incidences we never hear about.Quote: PaigowdanAlmost never, except for far out on the highway, and when holding a ton of cash in a car....
Police who answer a burglary or nuisance call at a business location, or at home in a city location are extremely safe, and this is obviously a lot different than a lone trouper pulling over a lone driver with an unexplainable bundle of cash on an empty highway, especially in a car smelling of pot.
The thing is, driving down a highway very far from any nearby city, with an absolute fortune in cash found in your car, is absolutely and extremely unexplainable. It'll simply be seized. He may very well think the large amount of cash you carry is from drug trafficking, and he will seize it for the state on an empty country road.
The cash might - probably will - never be seen again.
This is different than a city burglary cop, looking at a broken lock or window at your house in the city.
Quit telling us what we already know. We all know we shouldn't be traveling with large amounts of cash, especially on deserted highways where known drug money is often being trafficked. That's not the point the point is they shouldn't have a law that allows and encourages them to take peoples money. ONLY under an extreme situation where there's ample evidence the money is used for illegal activity should they be allowed to take it. If someone has a criminal history of selling drugs, laundering money and running cash, if the money is packed in the tires of the truck along with cocaine, guns and 5 illegals hidden in the back..... fine.
But when a guy gets in a fight with his girlfriend/wife and he grabs his saving of 15k from the safe because shes going crazy(who knows perhaps she will torch the house) jumps in his RV starts driving (perhaps on his way to the bank) gets pulled over and the police confiscate it, that's BS. That's not that far fetched. You say don't cry me a river, well something similar happened to a 61 year old man suffering from stage IV cancer.
I don't care how rare you think it is It shouldn't be allowed encouraged or accepted. One time is to many times.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikSo far, I haven't seen any proof that the phenomenon that everybody is getting so exercised about--cops seizing the money of innocent law -abiding citizens and their never never ever ever getting it back--actually exists. What I've seen are a few internet anecdotes, blog posts, and video podcasts. While corrupt cops may indeed be roaming the land , looking for cash like brains-starved zombies, I doubt it. It seems much more likely to be an internet meme. And a great way for hubby to explain why he's coming home from the casino flat broke: "gee, honey, I won five grand tonight, but the cops took it all!" In other words, I don't take internet tales at face value.
That aside, anyone who travels in a car, plane, train, boat, or on a skateboard with large sums of cash is an idiot and is asking for trouble. Having the cops take your cash--however likely that is--is only one of dozens of things that could go wrong.
And as far as that tired American Freedom argument goes, well, I have the right to set fire to myself, and any law prohibiting me from doing that is a grievous infringement of my somethingth amendment rights. But you still would be right to ask me, "Legal or illegal, why in earth would you want to do it?"
PGD and nearly everyone sure sound like we are in Mexico, Columbia or other parts of the world where police (and perhaps judges also) bribery & corruption run rampage.
Yes, there are bad cops, but police bribery & corruption is nearly non-existence here in the U.S (we do have VERY serious problem about police brutality and subsequent cover up, but it is a different topic).
What value do you put on the convenience when factoring in the risk?
I look at the risk, and the convenience and the value of my time, and in the end I choose the convenience & the value of time that give me hassle free and instantaneous access to my money anytime and anywhere during travel over the very low risk of having my money illegally or legally confiscated by a corrupted cop or law enforcement personnel/agency.
And speaking of police brutality and subsequent cover up issue, my impression is that people here seems to side with police and find ways to defend their "good cop" through the “to protect and to serve” logic. But when it comes to the issue of money seizure, which is all about bribery & corruption issue, then everyone is suspicious of their “to protect and to serve” duty, and yells “bad cop! bad cop! bad cop!” Why?
Quote: WizardofnothingI just went through airport now and my bag got flagged for an electric razor wtf- and when they looked into the travel pouch there was 10k- The tsa guard just said - where you headed I said Vegas- and he said try not to loose it all the first day!!
Carrying large sum of cash gives you great convenience and make it much easier for you to schedule your activities.
>>...$10,000 non-reporting limit is Federal law.
Apparently, you didn't get the memo. Here's text from page 25 of the 2016 Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual:
Cash--minimum amount must be at least $5,000, unless the person from whom the cash was seized either was, or is, being criminally prosecuted by state or federal authorities for criminal activities related to the property, in which case the amount must be at least $1,000.
OK, so the real limit is $5,000, right? Sez so right in the manual, plain as can be. But, wait! There's more, because U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) has a lotta wriggle room (because these are only "guidelines"):
These guidelines are intended to be sufficiently flexible to enable each USAO (or in administrative matters, the agent in charge of a field office) to establish and utilize local procedures that clearly define and assign local pre-seizure/restraint planning responsibilities.
Uh-huh. Right. Page 21. Local offices can make up their own rules. So, there may really be no rules.
Vote these morons out of office that create these rules/laws!!
Quote: LuckyPhow777,
>>...$10,000 non-reporting limit is Federal law.
Apparently, you didn't get the memo. Here's text from page 25 of the 2016 Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual:
Cash--minimum amount must be at least $5,000, unless the person from whom the cash was seized either was, or is, being criminally prosecuted by state or federal authorities for criminal activities related to the property, in which case the amount must be at least $1,000.
OK, so the real limit is $5,000, right? Sez so right in the manual, plain as can be. But, wait! There's more, because U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) has a lotta wriggle room (because these are only "guidelines"):
These guidelines are intended to be sufficiently flexible to enable each USAO (or in administrative matters, the agent in charge of a field office) to establish and utilize local procedures that clearly define and assign local pre-seizure/restraint planning responsibilities.
Uh-huh. Right. Page 21. Local offices can make up their own rules. So, there may really be no rules.
I think it is more likely that you take thing out of context. I know for certain that for banking electronic or physical transaction, amount larger than $10,000 must be reported to the fed, and I think the same rule is apply to transporting physical currency.
Quote: LuckyPhowGreasy,
>>...Is this really an issue traveling by car in 2016?
The original thread I mentioned is almost totally about seizures from folks driving cars, and about what to say and do when stopped. It's long, but it tells you what you need to know.
And, IMHO, the answer to your question is, Yes!
I believe there was no previous mention of the following government program, so I'll add it here:
Wall Street Journal (26-Jan-2015): U.S. Spies on Millions of Drivers -- DEA Uses License-Plate Readers to Build Database for Federal, Local Authorities
Ummm... here's the link (maybe with admin help, please): http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-spies-on-millions-of-cars-1422314779
I know everyone is busy, so here's my take on an executive summary (my emphasis):
One email written in 2010 said the primary purpose of the program was asset forfeiture—a controversial practice in which law-enforcement agencies seize cars, cash and other valuables from suspected criminals. The practice is increasingly coming under attack because of instances when law-enforcement officers take such assets without evidence of a crime.
The document said, <quote>…DEA has designed this program to assist with locating, identifying, and seizing bulk currency, guns, and other illicit contraband moving along the southwest border and throughout the United States. With that said, we want to insure we can collect and manage all the data and IT responsibilities that will come with the work to insure the program meets its goals, of which asset forfeiture is primary.<end-quote>
Is this a Great Country, or what?
Quote: IbeatyouracesI'm going to reiterate this.....taxes and this forfeiture crap is nothing but extortion and theft!
Vote these morons out of office that create these rules/laws!!
Scratch "morons" and replace it with "criminals"
Then I suggest you research it further. You'll find the issue acknowledged by propaganda rags like The Washington Post and Forbes. Legislation was proposed this year to address the abuse.Quote: JoeshlabotnikSo far, I haven't seen any proof that the phenomenon that everybody is getting so exercised about--cops seizing the money of innocent law -abiding citizens and their never never ever ever getting it back--actually exists. What I've seen are a few internet anecdotes, blog posts, and video podcasts. While corrupt cops may indeed be roaming the land , looking for cash like brains-starved zombies, I doubt it. It seems much more likely to be an internet meme. And a great way for hubby to explain why he's coming home from the casino flat broke: "gee, honey, I won five grand tonight, but the cops took it all!" In other words, I don't take internet tales at face value.
The cops and local and state government agencies are crooks.Many of them factor these asset forfeitures into their annual budgets.
Your money is guilty until you prove its innocence.
For more on this check out Radley Balko in the Washington post or The Aclu website or the Institute for justice.
Quote: Hunterhill...If you're a serious table games Ap you most likely need to carry cash...
And a chip inventory from various casinos.
>>...I think it is more likely that you take thing out of context. I know for certain that for banking electronic or physical transaction, amount larger than $10,000 must be reported to the fed
True, financial transactions equal to or greater than $10K must be reported, whether done by your bank or your casino. I agree.
But, deposits of cash in amounts under $10K can also result in funds being seized. The Federales call it "structuring." Structuring refers to people who want to move more than $10K, but do it in smaller amounts under $10K so as not to trigger the financial oversight you referenced. Where that occurs, federal government agencies may decide to seize the money of anyone they believe may be trying this technique to avoid legal reporting requirements.
But, not everyone who has regular cash transactions under $10K is doing so to dodge the law. People who collect antiques (have you seen the popular TV show?) or who buy classic cars. Associations and social service groups who help with things like disaster relief, for example. And, lotsa small businesses. It is not uncommon for folks to have good reasons to use cash frequently in amounts under $10K.
Right, but why would the government want to seize money from those folks? I dunno, but they apparently do. Here's a story from the (rather conservative) Daily Signal (14-Jun-2016) about such seizures by the IRS:
Headline: For Americans Who Had Cash Seized By Government, a Chance to Get It Back
In a victory for lawmakers working to make it harder for the government to take property from innocent Americans, the Internal Revenue Service plans to give people who have had money seized over the last six years the chance to petition to get their money back, The Daily Signal has learned.
<snip>
Additionally, a subset of civil forfeiture laws regulating cash transactions allows the government to seize money from those accused of structuring violations. From 2005 to 2012, the IRS seized more than $242.6 million under structuring laws in more than 2,500 cases, according to the Institute for Justice. Both civil forfeiture and structuring laws were intended to target drug traffickers, money launderers, and those financing terrorist activities. However, small business owners have emerged in recent years telling of how they’ve had money seized by the IRS after the agency alleged they were structuring cash withdrawals and deposits to intentionally skirt reporting requirements.
But, why not just audit the businesses? Cash that was deposited and cash that was withdrawn from a bank wasn't being hidden, right? Aren't audits how IRS monitors this stuff? Duh! Much easier to allege the crime and seize the money than to conduct an audit.
There's a lot more in the story. Here's the link (admin help, please, if req'd):
http://dailysignal.com/2016/06/14/breaking-for-americans-who-had-cash-seized-by-government-a-chance-to-get-it-back/
And the Institute for Justice, mentioned above, also has lots of info. Not sure it will change your mind, but others may wish to know there's nothing magic about $10,000.
Quote: IbeatyouracesAnd a chip inventory from various casinos.
Which begs the question of where to keep that? Seems a whole lot easier to carry Pumpkins and Chocolates then huge wads of cash.
It doesn't have to be over 10k the are required to also report suspicious transfers or activity.Quote: 777Quote: LuckyPhow777,
>>...$10,000 non-reporting limit is Federal law.
Apparently, you didn't get the memo. Here's text from page 25 of the 2016 Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual:
Cash--minimum amount must be at least $5,000, unless the person from whom the cash was seized either was, or is, being criminally prosecuted by state or federal authorities for criminal activities related to the property, in which case the amount must be at least $1,000.
OK, so the real limit is $5,000, right? Sez so right in the manual, plain as can be. But, wait! There's more, because U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) has a lotta wriggle room (because these are only "guidelines"):
These guidelines are intended to be sufficiently flexible to enable each USAO (or in administrative matters, the agent in charge of a field office) to establish and utilize local procedures that clearly define and assign local pre-seizure/restraint planning responsibilities.
Uh-huh. Right. Page 21. Local offices can make up their own rules. So, there may really be no rules.
I think it is more likely that you take thing out of context. I know for certain that for banking electronic or physical transaction, amount larger than $10,000 must be reported to the fed, and I think the same rule is apply to transporting physical currency.
They are also required to file a SAR (suspicious activity report) for anything they, the casino, may deem suspicious. An example is someone buying in for $3,000, making a few small wagers, then cashing out. Buying in or cashing out multiple times in an apparent attempt to stay below the $10k threshold can be considered suspicious as well. Structuring is buying in or cashing out more than once within a 24-hour period in an attempt to thwart federal law / Title 31 reporting regulations.
It is NOT the player's responsibility to make sure these reports are filed or anything of the sort. The casino needs your ID & SSN when filing a CTR but not a SAR. It is illegal for the casino to tell ANYONE (except the US Treasury, I believe....but that's who gets the SAR anyway) that a SAR has been filed.....even to the person who it is being filed for (i.e.: the "suspicious" person), the police, or anyone else. A SAR being filed doesn't necessarily mean anything suspicious actually happened or the casino is suspicious of you.....I suppose it's more of a formality, something they do because they have to. If the casino cannot identify the person by obtaining ID, the casino (i.e.: cashier) should be as descriptive as possible regarding the person, when filing a SAR.
Casinos are becoming more strict with this kind of stuff, under Title 31, for anti-money-laundering.....since gambling is pretty much the easiest way to launder money, casinos have been a prime target for those wishing to launder money.
Carrying money on the other hand, that is not involved in a transfer (i.e.: someone having $20k in their pocket) is NOT subject to anything under Title 31 or federal reporting requirements. There is nothing that needs to be filed, no paperwork, no fancy IRS this or US Treasury that. Does not need to be reported, as long as it remains within the USA. If you plan on taking that money ($10k+) into the USA or to be taken out of the USA, as far as I know, it does need to be reported (but I don't really know about any of that stuff, I don't have much interest or care for traveling internationally with money).
TL;DR: Nothing needs to be reported if you are traveling within the USA. All the reporting stuff only has to deal with banks/casinos, or foreign travel. You can legally drive from Maine to California to Washington to Florida with $10M in your trunk, and you don't need to report a thing. (Not that you necessarily should.)
Edit: Some stuff edited above.
Edit2: If you're an AP, you should really learn this kind of stuff.
Quote: DeMangoWhich begs the question of where to keep that? Seems a whole lot easier to carry Pumpkins and Chocolates then huge wads of cash.
Easier to carry, sure. Try cashing a chocolate if you played unrated though.....
Quote: RSThey are required to file a CTR (cash transaction report) for withdrawals or deposits totaling (the net of each separate) an amount greater than $10k. If you buy in for $10k exactly, a CTR will not be filed. I've done it before. Filing a CTR for an amount of $10k or less is illegal. Same with mandating an ID from a patron by lying and saying "it's needed for federal regulations/law" when it is not actually needed (i.e.: no CTR).
...
Casinos are becoming more strict with this kind of stuff, under Title 31, for anti-money-laundering.....since gambling is pretty much the easiest way to launder money, casinos have been a prime target for those wishing to launder money.
In banking transaction, I can see the value of money-laundering where money can be distributed to multiple individuals, organizations, and other businesses domestically and internationally. But for a typical chip buy-in & cash-out in a casino environment, how does money is laundered ? If a drug dealer took $100,000 cash (assume non-counterfeit bills) to a casino, and after combination of many bets and chip transactions, he/she then left the casino with an amount either less than or greater than his/her original cash depending on his/her luck. I don’t see how the money was laundered in the cash/chip exchange scenario?
With regarding to CTR, how would the casino handle an international customer or a non-US citizen but legal resident customer who does not have SSN? The customer has only either a driver license, or a passport. Would the customer be asked to leave the property or be banned from the property forever for simply failing to provide a SSN?
Quote: 777In banking transaction, I can see the value of money-laundering where money can be distributed to multiple individuals, organizations, and other businesses domestically and internationally. But for a typical chip buy-in & cash-out in a casino environment, how does money is laundered ? If a drug dealer took $100,000 cash (assume non-counterfeit bills) to a casino, and after combination of many bets and chip transactions, he/she then left the casino with an amount either less than or greater than his/her original cash depending on his/her luck. I don’t see how the money was laundered in the cash/chip exchange scenario?
With regarding to CTR, how would the casino handle an international customer or a non-US citizen but legal resident customer who does not have SSN? The customer has only either a driver license, or a passport. Would the customer be asked to leave the property or be banned from the property forever for simply failing to provide a SSN?
I don't know HOW all the stuff actually works. I understand the theory behind it -- file SARs and CTRs to combat money-laundering...but I don't know exactly how that combats money-laundering. (Something I'm not much interested in.) As far as how someone would launder money, I really don't know, but I'd imagine the person just says they won more than they did. Take $20k, turn it into $15k (a net loss of $5k) and report it as a $10k win, or something like that.
As far as CTR / SSN / foreigner goes, I really don't know how that works. I've probably read it before, just didn't take note of it (not applicable to me). They probably write down their ID card number or some other identification number (like on a passport?). Really, don't know. =\
Quote: RSI don't know HOW all the stuff actually works. I understand the theory behind it -- file SARs and CTRs to combat money-laundering...but I don't know exactly how that combats money-laundering. (Something I'm not much interested in.) As far as how someone would launder money, I really don't know, but I'd imagine the person just says they won more than they did. Take $20k, turn it into $15k (a net loss of $5k) and report it as a $10k win, or something like that.
As far as CTR / SSN / foreigner goes, I really don't know how that works. I've probably read it before, just didn't take note of it (not applicable to me). They probably write down their ID card number or some other identification number (like on a passport?). Really, don't know. =\
It makes sense. A drug dealer can make his $100,000 "illegal" money to look like a, say $80,000 legal gambling income through false or truthful reporting.
With regarding to CTR again, if a U.S. citizen customer REFUSE to provide SSN for whatever reason, how would the casino handle this? Will he/she be banned from the property for life?
Quote: RSCarrying money on the other hand, that is not involved in a transfer (i.e.: someone having $20k in their pocket) is NOT subject to anything under Title 31 or federal reporting requirements. There is nothing that needs to be filed, no paperwork, no fancy IRS this or US Treasury that. Does not need to be reported, as long as it remains within the USA. If you plan on taking that money ($10k+) into the USA or to be taken out of the USA, as far as I know, it does need to be reported (but I don't really know about any of that stuff, I don't have much interest or care for traveling internationally with money).
TL;DR: Nothing needs to be reported if you are traveling within the USA. All the reporting stuff only has to deal with banks/casinos, or foreign travel. You can legally drive from Maine to California to Washington to Florida with $10M in your trunk, and you don't need to report a thing. (Not that you necessarily should.)
Many people here had expressed great concern about money seizure/confiscation by law enforcement personnel. So here is a question for ALL, under what law that a DEA, TSA, police or other law enforcement personnel can question the source of a citizen “hard earned” money in his/her body, car, plane, boat or house whether the amount is $1 or $1,000,000?
Quote: RSCarrying money on the other hand, that is not involved in a transfer (i.e.: someone having $20k in their pocket) is NOT subject to anything under Title 31 or federal reporting requirements. There is nothing that needs to be filed, no paperwork, no fancy IRS this or US Treasury that. Does not need to be reported, as long as it remains within the USA. If you plan on taking that money ($10k+) into the USA or to be taken out of the USA, as far as I know, it does need to be reported (but I don't really know about any of that stuff, I don't have much interest or care for traveling internationally with money).
TL;DR: Nothing needs to be reported if you are traveling within the USA. All the reporting stuff only has to deal with banks/casinos, or foreign travel. You can legally drive from Maine to California to Washington to Florida with $10M in your trunk, and you don't need to report a thing. (Not that you necessarily should.)
Quote: 777Many people here had expressed great concern about money seizure/confiscation by law enforcement personnel. So here is a question for ALL, under what law that a DEA, TSA, police or other law enforcement personnel can question the source of a citizen “hard earned” money in his/her body, car, plane, boat or house whether the amount is $1 or $1,000,000?
My guess is since there is no mechanism for self-reporting, and demanding self-reporting by the transporter would create a great inconvenience and is really NOT enforceable, then it is up the law enforcement personnel to do the “reporting” if any transporter is caught with transporting amount greater than $10,000. And based on many stories told here, I think the law enforcement personnel have one additional authority that bank and casino employees do not have, and that authority is to confiscate suspicious cash …
Quote: 777My guess is since there is no mechanism for self-reporting, and demanding self-reporting by the transporter would create a great inconvenience and is really NOT enforceable, then it is up the law enforcement personnel to do the “reporting” if any transporter is caught with transporting amount greater than $10,000. And based on many stories told here, I think the law enforcement personnel have one additional authority that bank and casino employees do not have, and that authority is to confiscate suspicious cash …
It doesn't have to be more than 10k,they will take any amount that they want along with your cellphone or anything of value that you have.
Sixty minutes did a story on a town in Texas ,They took as little as $80 from someone. They target minorities and actually prefer smaller amounts ,less chance of the victim hiring a lawyer to recover their money.
Quote: DRichI may have missed if somebody already corrected this but you do not have to report cash you are flying with if you are flying domestic. The $10,000 reporting is for international flying to or from the U.S.
I think for international travel, a "reporting" is basically a traveler's declaration to the customs upon departing or returning to the U.S.
If for some reason, a traveler's cash on hand is greater $10,000, what is the normal procedure for the customs to handle the amount in excess of $10,000?
Quote: HunterhillIt doesn't have to be more than 10k,they will take any amount that they want along with your cellphone or anything of value that you have.
Sixty minutes did a story on a town in Texas ,They took as little as $80 from someone. They target minorities and actually prefer smaller amounts ,less chance of the victim hiring a lawyer to recover their money.
I can see few isolate incidents here and there in the U.S., but let's not equate this to the problem of systemic bribery and corruption in Mexico or other part of the world.
They are supposed to keep track of your buy in's as well and once it reaches over 10k a CTR should be done. That way someone can't say they only bought in for 1k and won 10k now they cleaning 9k.Quote: 777In banking transaction, I can see the value of money-laundering where money can be distributed to multiple individuals, organizations, and other businesses domestically and internationally. But for a typical chip buy-in & cash-out in a casino environment, how does money is laundered ? If a drug dealer took $100,000 cash (assume non-counterfeit bills) to a casino, and after combination of many bets and chip transactions, he/she then left the casino with an amount either less than or greater than his/her original cash depending on his/her luck. I don’t see how the money was laundered in the cash/chip exchange scenario?
With regarding to CTR, how would the casino handle an international customer or a non-US citizen but legal resident customer who does not have SSN? The customer has only either a driver license, or a passport. Would the customer be asked to leave the property or be banned from the property forever for simply failing to provide a SSN?
In poker games oftentimes they don't do this. I would think that would be the easiest way to launder and exchange money.
Quote: 777Many people here had expressed great concern about money seizure/confiscation by law enforcement personnel. So here is a question for ALL, under what law that a DEA, TSA, police or other law enforcement personnel can question the source of a citizen “hard earned” money in his/her body, car, plane, boat or house whether the amount is $1 or $1,000,000?
Civil forfeiture.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Civil+forfeiture+
Quote: 777
If for some reason, a traveler's cash on hand is greater $10,000, what is the normal procedure for the customs to handle the amount in excess of $10,000?
I don't believe there are any different procedures as long as the flyer declares the cash. I have been asked the source of the cash when taking more and less than $10k. I really think when they ask they are just checking for suspicious behavior and evasiveness. The issue is if you don't declare it and they happen to find it.
Quote: HunterhillIt doesn't have to be more than 10k,they will take any amount that they want along with your cellphone or anything of value that you have.
Sixty minutes did a story on a town in Texas ,They took as little as $80 from someone. They target minorities and actually prefer smaller amounts ,less chance of the victim hiring a lawyer to recover their money.
Yep, ya gotta look out for "they." They are everywhere. They stalk the land for victims. They will tackle you, drag you into the bushes, and hack out your internal organs on the spot! They know that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting them from doing anything they want!!!!!!!!! It's an EPIDEMIC!! YAAAAAAAH!!!! Donald Trump, save us!!!
I know this is 100% absolutely true fact because I read it on the internet!
The civil forfeiture is just cops / TSA / law enforcement taking someone's money. I don't know the laws regarding this kinda stuff, not sure if they're state or federal laws either. But as far as I know, it really seem like it's exactly what it looks like -- they take your money and you're f***ed.....just because they can "suspect" the money was used for illegal purposes.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikYep, ya gotta look out for "they." They are everywhere. They stalk the land for victims. They will tackle you, drag you into the bushes, and hack out your internal organs on the spot! They know that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting them from doing anything they want!!!!!!!!! It's an EPIDEMIC!! YAAAAAAAH!!!! Donald Trump, save us!!!
I know this is 100% absolutely true fact because I read it on the internet!
Seriously, just stop. Have you ever been pulled over for a bullsh** reason, knowing it's all bullsh**? You talk to the cop for a few minutes, thinking just give me my damn ticket and let me go. But oh wait -- he claims some bullsh** about you sounding nervous, is there anything in your car you should be nervous about? No, okay......but can the cop search your car? You say no. He says OK, I'll be calling for a K-9 unit and they'll be out here shortly. It's already been an hour now, you're either standing outside or in the cop's front seat. You think there's maybe a sliver of a chance the dog won't "hit" on your car, falsely.....even though there is nothing in your car. You already know what's going to happen, it's like watching a horror movie, "No, don't go that way! That's where the murderer is!" But the person in the movie goes anyway.
Finally they bring the dog around the car a few times, and low and behold, he gives out a few barks. Cop says "You can either open it for us, or we'll open it ourselves." You unlock the car and watch several cops rummage through your stuff, grabbing it and chucking it on the asphalt. It's a game to them, and you're their pawn.
Meanwhile, the original cop is standing next to you, still questioning you, is there anything in your car you don't want us to find? You know this'll all go over much easier if you let us know.....we'll be out of here in no time....we're pretty lenient around here, ya know, especially for someone who's never had any problems before, you seem like a good guy, but I can't help you if you don't help yourself.
An hour and a half later, bags torn apart, practically shredded, clothes and other items scattered across the asphalt now dirty and messed up, everything that remains in the car completely scrambled, everything taken out of the glove box and center console.
All for what? You guessed it -- they found nothing, as there was nothing to begin with. You don't think it'll happen to you, but in the blink of an eye, all of a sudden you're getting pulled over for speeding, going 65 in a 70.
I'll say it again -- seriously, stop posting here, joesh. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote: RS<snip>I'll say it again -- seriously, stop posting here, joesh. You have no idea what you're talking about.<snip>
This is a subject that has been discussed a few times here; perhaps he would be well served to check out the ACLU's information on this; I think they are a group that he would approves of, based on his desire to rid the world of Republicans/Conservatives:
"Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government."
https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police-practices/asset-forfeiture-abuse
"On Friday, the ACLU settled a class action lawsuit, pending court approval, against officials in the East Texas town of Tenaha and Shelby County over the rampant practice of stopping and searching drivers, almost always Black or Latino, and often seizing their cash and other valuable property."
https://www.aclu.org/blog/settlement-means-no-more-highway-robbery-tenaha-texas
Even as someone on the other side of the political spectrum, I find these laws to be repugnant. I haven't researched who put them in place (D or R types); I just know that either side can create bad law while trying to make something good. Too broad of wording, unintended consequences, etc. all happen even to some good ideas.
"They" aren't hiding around every corner, of course, but why mock people discussing something that really does happen who are on a board where people discuss issues involving gambling and where some really do carry large sums of money for legitimate reasons?
Quote: JoeshlabotnikYep, ya gotta look out for "they." They are everywhere. They stalk the land for victims. They will tackle you, drag you into the bushes, and hack out your internal organs on the spot! They know that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting them from doing anything they want!!!!!!!!! It's an EPIDEMIC!! YAAAAAAAH!!!! Donald Trump, save us!!!
I know this is 100% absolutely true fact because I read it on the internet!
Maybe in your world you only read about things on the Internet. Some of us here have been through asset forfeiture or know people that have.
I really am sorry... lol
Someone more versed in the law can perhaps provide further comment? Has this theory ever been litigated?
Quote: RomesGuys... I... I.... I'm just sorry for calling Dan to the thread.
I really am sorry... lol
Incredible. Other people bicker and it's my fault. More BS.
Hi Dan,Quote: PaigowdanIncredible. Other people bicker and it's my fault. More BS.
Welcome to the thread.
I wonder where it will head.
Quote: OnceDearHi Dan,
Welcome to the thread.
I wonder where it will head.
You guys decide.
Quote: MathExtremistIf someone is a professional gambler and needs to deal in cash for business purposes, wouldn't asset forfeiture -- after the police are informed of your profession -- be tortious interference with business expectancy? If you inform the police that you're a pro gambler who needs to carry cash to run your business, and your cash is forfeited, I think you may have a cause of action to recover not just the forfeited cash but the value of the future business expectancy that was precluded or spoiled by the forfeiture. In other words, if you're on the way to a short-term play worth $5,000 in EV and you have $10,000 in your car, if the cops stop you and take the money, not only do you not have the 10k anymore but you've lost out on the 5k of expected income.
Yes, something like this has been litigated. Back in the early days of AC, a BJ player was backed off, and successfully sued for the right to play. He then tried to recover damages, on the premise that he could have been playing all that time and would have been X ahead based on his EV. Rather than laughing at him, the court in NJ listened to his case. Unfortunately, he lost, with the court citing cases where a lost business opportunity was not collectible damages, because no one could figure out what such an opportunity was worth (how likely to succeed, worth how much if it did). The court did remark that parties should agree on liquidated damages in such cases. The plaintiff probably way overstated what playing at that casino would have been worth to him. The judge also remarked that there were other places to play where similar opportunities existed.
Someone more versed in the law can perhaps provide further comment? Has this theory ever been litigated?
