Posted on 12/02/2013 9:02:40 AM PST by Kaslin
The statists never did much like that Constitution thing. So they just ignored the part about unjust seizure, gave it a different name, and kept right on doing what they were doing. It’s the American way.
In the case of the grocery store, the gentleman’s daily deposits happened to fall below the $10k reporting level, so the IRS accused him of bundling. The weird thing is that they had just done an audit on him so they should know what his cash receipts are and how much should be deposited on an average day. Plus, who bundles to hide an amount of $35,000. Wtf, I have more money than that in my private accounts.
>> so the IRS accused him of bundling.>>
Would you please be good enough to explain what bundling is to me?
IIRC - Banks are required to report cash deposits of more than x amount.
The idea is to catch those who illegally run a cash business (ostensibly drug dealers, etc.).
The ‘bundle’ then occurs when someone has (e.g.) $18K to deposit; but to avoid this large deposit being reported, they will it into smaller individual bundles, each of which can then be deposited without triggering the report.
dang - once again no ‘edit’ button...
Exactly right.
I’m not in favor of these laws, but if we are going to keep them then there should be some restrictions to prevent abuse:
1. Assets are frozen for 180 days or until charges are filed.
2. Assets are unfrozen if charges are dropped or the defendant is acquitted
3. Forfeiture is only permissible after a felony conviction
4. The federal government is not allowed to work with police in districts with local laws banning forfeiture (Using the federal forfeiture program as an end run around local policies is wrong).
With these in place, the only way for the police to get a windfall... is to do their job and bust bad guys.
Thank you so much Jonno. I couldn’t find it on the internet.
Thank you, wafflehouse, for your answer to bundling.
Much appreciated.
Although it was done under Reagan, it was Rudy Giuliani's pet project at the DOJ.
For a business like this family-owed market, freezing his bank account for 180 days would likely lead to bankruptcy. He would have no funds to pay his suppliers or to meet his payroll.
Not all cases are as bogus as this. Let's say a rich fellow is bored with his wife and wants to procure some company. We won't use real names, so let's call our rich guy Elliot Spitzer. Now Elliot Sptizer (not his real name) wants to buy a $15,000 prostitute so to avoid the banking reporting requirements he makes two payments to the procurer of $9000 and $6000. Despite the fact that is illegally done for purely criminal intent, and that he also violates the long standing Mann Act by procuring said prostitute across state lines, our hypothetical Mr. Spitzer is not prosecuted. Why? Because he is a high ranking democrat and the (democrat) prosecutor doesn't feel prosecuting the sitting governor of the hypothetical state of "New York" is in the interest of (democrat) justice.
Also had something to do with insurance coverage according to the article I read in the paper. Coverage max for 10 grand maybe.
Silly USNBandit! Laws are for peasants!
I would further add that "commissions" for entities which seize assets are inherently corrupting and should be forbidden. At minimum, they encourage cases which could generate a large windfalls by targeting people who are relatively harmless, to be given priority over cases involving crooks who do much more damage, but have nothing of value to seize.
If someone is in a situation of naturally having smaller amounts which total over $10,000, is there can one preemptively file a form to say in essence "I am making this transaction, and I'm telling you I'm making this transaction. Any claim by the government that this transaction is under $10,000 simply because I don't want to report it would should be regarded as a clear an obvious lie?"
And don’t forget Tip O’Neill and the democrats in control of Congress loved it ‘cause it made them look “tough” on crime.
The bill was passed in the House and then the Senate with a lot of fanfare and little opposition. Ole Tip saw that it was pushed from committee to final floor vote in a flash.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.