Law lets IRS seize accounts

Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
386
Location
Finland
"Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report." LOL, and I thought that local authorities were bad. Cash&gold might become popular again..
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 18, 2014
Messages
884
Location
CA
I don't know how widespread this is with the IRS but it's been a big problem elsewhere for a while now:
Quote:
Civil forfeiture allows law enforcement to seize property (including cash and cars) without having to prove the owners are guilty. Last September, Tan Nguyen was pulled over for driving three miles over the speed limit, according to a suit he filed. Deputy Lee Dove asked to search the car but Nguyen said he declined. Dove claimed he smelled marijuana but couldn’t find any drugs. The deputy then searched the car and found a briefcase containing $50,000 in cash and cashier’s checks, which he promptly seized. According to the Associated Press, Nguyen said he won that cash at a casino. Nguyen was not arrested or charged with a crime—not even a traffic citation. In the suit, Dove threatened to seize and tow Nguyen’s car unless he “got in his car and drove off and forgot this ever happened.” That would have left Nguyen stranded in the Nevada desert.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/institutefor...d-with-a-crime/
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
7,765
Location
North America
This fires me up.
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
"Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report." LOL, and I thought that local authorities were bad. Cash&gold might become popular again..
Yeah, what's an old lady to do, keep a bunch of cash lying around until she has more than 10k? I know this is meant to get the bad guys, but is another example of a good idea executed poorly. A minimal check (aka Due Diligence) by the IRS would have found her legit, as well as the Marine in the article. It should be the law that if the IRS follows this sort of pattern, and is shown to be in error (such as the Marine saving for his daughters' college) the IRS should be liable for all expenses paid by the person to recover their legally earned money.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
1,912
Location
Villa Park, IL
Originally Posted By: Kuato
This fires me up.
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
"Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report." LOL, and I thought that local authorities were bad. Cash&gold might become popular again..
Yeah, what's an old lady to do, keep a bunch of cash lying around until she has more than 10k? I know this is meant to get the bad guys, but is another example of a good idea executed poorly. A minimal check (aka Due Diligence) by the IRS would have found her legit, as well as the Marine in the article. It should be the law that if the IRS follows this sort of pattern, and is shown to be in error (such as the Marine saving for his daughters' college) the IRS should be liable for all expenses paid by the person to recover their legally earned money.
+1 I totally agree, this is abuse of power...
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,672
Location
'Stralia
If you don't "use" the money in your bank account down here for a period of 3 years, the Govt takes it. If you a) work out that they have; b) prove it's yours; and c) apply to have it reimbursed. You can have it back...and that's not only possible proceeds of crime, it's pensioners with a few grand in the bank for a rainy day/grandchild's wedding
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
3,462
Originally Posted By: 01_celica_gt
Originally Posted By: Kuato
This fires me up.
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
"Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report." LOL, and I thought that local authorities were bad. Cash&gold might become popular again..
Yeah, what's an old lady to do, keep a bunch of cash lying around until she has more than 10k? I know this is meant to get the bad guys, but is another example of a good idea executed poorly. A minimal check (aka Due Diligence) by the IRS would have found her legit, as well as the Marine in the article. It should be the law that if the IRS follows this sort of pattern, and is shown to be in error (such as the Marine saving for his daughters' college) the IRS should be liable for all expenses paid by the person to recover their legally earned money.
+1 I totally agree, this is abuse of power...
Think about this.... They created the law of any 10k transaction must be reported.....then go after you for a chain of deposits UNDER the IRS threshold. Whatever you want to call it, it has a "ist" at the end of the word! Gov't is to big and too intrusive.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
7,485
Location
S California
A young man was traveling by car from New York to California to purchase the car of his dreams for $20K. He was stopped by the police at 3 AM for a rolling stop on a rural highway in the mid west. He had a clean record, no arrests or conviction of any kind. He was asked if he was carrying any cash and he responded that he had $20K. He produced a copy of the eBay print out and emails concerning the purchase including the name, phone number and address of the seller and photos of the car. The police claimed that in reality he was traveling to California to purchase drugs and confiscated the cash and the car he was driving without arresting him or charging him with a crime of any kind. This citizen finally gave up trying to reclaim his money when he realized that the legal fees would exceed $20K plus the value of his car. This happened 2 years ago and even though the story was reported and the deal to buy the dream car proved to be true this citizen never recovered his money or the car. There is something very wrong going on here. I think that this citizen could have arranged to purchase drugs in New York without the trouble and expense of traveling to California. The police could have confirmed with a quick phone call to the New York Police that illegal drugs are available for sale in New York and that the deal to purchase the dream car in California was in fact true. The final insult was the statement in court from the local chief of police that they use seized cash to purchase extras for the department that would not otherwise be approved, items and services not directly related to the business of running the police department.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
2,309
Location
ohio
Originally Posted By: Trav
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if this is tied to who the person voted for also.
Only half the government is corrupt, not the whole thing.......
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
6,274
Location
Atlanta,GA
She was probably structuring for sure. Unless you have an exemption (i.e grocery stores) the depositor has to fill out a CTR for cash deposits that exceed $10k. (probably just his/her signature these days). Fill out the [censored] form and move on. Banks only report these transactions when the Feds ask for it. It's not automatic.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Messages
7,256
Location
USA
No place is perfect. You all complain like cry babies and some attribute this to a particular political party. Unfortunate to be on the wrong end of these loopholes. cry
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
307
Location
Utah
Of course this is due to one particular political party, Duh, the one that is currently in charge and has been for 6 years. They could change all of these unconstitutional abusive issues for the betterment of the American people they supposedly work for and represent, but things just get more restrictive and more punitive for law abiding 'we the people'. Apparently, the ones in power, right now, like it this way.....so sad for our once great republic and free America.
 

Win

Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Messages
4,703
Location
Arkansas
Nothing new here, the IRS has always had extraordinary powers to take people's stuff. And structuring financial transactions to avoid reporting requirements has been a crime as long as I can remember. A serious one. The feds tend to call it money laundering. It's in the United States Code, shouldn't be hard to get the cite. I've read posts on here on the subject that have left me aghast.
 
Joined
May 26, 2014
Messages
5,214
Location
Columbus,Nebraska
The place to register a complaint is with you congressmen. Members of both parties had a hand in crafting the legislation that the spells out what the IRS can do. Carrying large amounts of cash is not good practice and certainly not advisable. If I was going to travel across the country to purchase a vehicle, I would open an account in the city where the transaction might take place or make arrangements to have the money wired to me. Anything is better than carrying that much cash. Our state patrol stops vehicles on Interstate 80 almost every week and seizes large amounts of drugs and cash. I know of only one instance where the money was returned. We may not like it, but it's the law.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2014
Messages
884
Location
CA
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
A young man was traveling by car from New York to California to purchase the car of his dreams for $20K. He was stopped by the police at 3 AM for a rolling stop on a rural highway in the mid west. He had a clean record, no arrests or conviction of any kind. He was asked if he was carrying any cash and he responded that he had $20K. He produced a copy of the eBay print out and emails concerning the purchase including the name, phone number and address of the seller and photos of the car. The police claimed that in reality he was traveling to California to purchase drugs and confiscated the cash and the car he was driving without arresting him or charging him with a crime of any kind. This citizen finally gave up trying to reclaim his money when he realized that the legal fees would exceed $20K plus the value of his car. This happened 2 years ago and even though the story was reported and the deal to buy the dream car proved to be true this citizen never recovered his money or the car. There is something very wrong going on here. I think that this citizen could have arranged to purchase drugs in New York without the trouble and expense of traveling to California. The police could have confirmed with a quick phone call to the New York Police that illegal drugs are available for sale in New York and that the deal to purchase the dream car in California was in fact true. The final insult was the statement in court from the local chief of police that they use seized cash to purchase extras for the department that would not otherwise be approved, items and services not directly related to the business of running the police department.
That's civil forfeiture - increasingly used by law enforcement.
Quote:
Civil forfeiture allows law enforcement to seize property (including cash and cars) without having to prove the owners are guilty. Last September, Tan Nguyen was pulled over for driving three miles over the speed limit, according to a suit he filed. Deputy Lee Dove asked to search the car but Nguyen said he declined. Dove claimed he smelled marijuana but couldn’t find any drugs. The deputy then searched the car and found a briefcase containing $50,000 in cash and cashier’s checks, which he promptly seized. According to the Associated Press, Nguyen said he won that cash at a casino. Nguyen was not arrested or charged with a crime—not even a traffic citation. In the suit, Dove threatened to seize and tow Nguyen’s car unless he “got in his car and drove off and forgot this ever happened.” That would have left Nguyen stranded in the Nevada desert.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/institutefor...d-with-a-crime/ [/quote]
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2014
Messages
884
Location
CA
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
The place to register a complaint is with you congressmen. Members of both parties had a hand in crafting the legislation that the spells out what the IRS can do.
Good point.
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Carrying large amounts of cash is not good practice and certainly not advisable. If I was going to travel across the country to purchase a vehicle, I would open an account in the city where the transaction might take place or make arrangements to have the money wired to me. Anything is better than carrying that much cash.
Yes why take the risk? But it doesn't make it right that law enforcement can take your cash OR valuables when NO crime has been committed.
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Our state patrol stops vehicles on Interstate 80 almost every week and seizes large amounts of drugs and cash. I know of only one instance where the money was returned. We may not like it, but it's the law.
It's a law called civil forfeiture that is clearly being abused by police departments looking for sources of revenue to spend on what they like.
 
Top