Posted on 11/23/2001 2:58:00 PM PST by Smogger
Nov. 18--Ordinary businesses, from bicycle shops to bookstores to bowling alleys, are being pressed into service on the home front in the war on terrorism.
Under the USA Patriot Act, signed into law by President Bush late last month, they soon will be required to monitor their customers and report "suspicious transactions" to the Treasury Department -- though most businesses may not be aware of this.
Buried in the more than 300 pages of the new law is a provision that "any person engaged in a trade or business" has to file a government report if a customer spends $10,000 or more in cash. The threshold is cumulative and applies to multiple purchases if they're somehow related -- three $4,000 pieces of furniture, for example, might trigger a filing.
Until now, only banks, thrifts, and credit unions have been required to report cash transactions to the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970. A handful of other businesses, including car dealers and pawnbrokers, have to file similar reports with the Internal Revenue Service.
"This is a big deal, and a big change, for the vast majority of American businesses," said Joe Rubin, chief lobbyist for the US Chamber of Commerce. "But I don't think anybody realizes it's happened."
The impact is less clear for consumers, although privacy advocates are uncomfortable with the thought of a massive database that could bring government scrutiny on innocent people. Immigrants and the working poor are the most likely to find themselves in the database, since they tend to use the traditional banking system the least.
"The scope of this thing is huge," said Bert Ely, a financial services consultant in Alexandria, Va. "It's going to affect literally millions of people."
The filing of so-called suspicious activity reports, though, is only the latest in a series of law enforcement moves the government has made in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. And so far, the filing requirement has been overshadowed by debate over the other changes.
The Patriot Act signed into law Oct. 26, for example, gives the government a vast arsenal of surveillance tools, easier access to personal information, and increased authority to detain and deport noncitizens. House and Senate negotiators came to terms Thursday on a bill that would add 28,000 employees to the federal payroll in an effort to bolster airport security, and Attorney General John Ashcroft has said he is reorganizing the Justice Department and the FBI to focus on counterterrorism efforts.
As for the business-filing requirement, specifics about what companies have to do and when they have to do it still need to be worked out. The Treasury Department has until March 25 -- the date the Patriot Act becomes law -- to issue regulations about how to put the new rules into practice.
"The law itself doesn't go into any detail, because you'd presume that's what the Treasury regulations are for," said Victoria Fimea, senior counsel at the American Council of Life Insurers. "And the devil, of course, is in the details."
When he signed the legislation, President Bush said the new rules were designed to "put an end to financial counterfeiting, smuggling, and money laundering." The problem, he and others have said, was keeping tabs on the billions of dollars that flow outside the traditional banking system and across national borders each year.
Money launderers often disguise the source of their money by using cash to buy pricey things. Later, they can resell the products and move the money into a bank account -- at which point it has been laundered, or made to look legitimate, by the aboveboard sale.
Making a series of transactions just below the $10,000 filing threshold is also illegal under the new law if it's done to keep a business from contacting the government.
Financial services companies such as banks, insurers, and stock brokerages face a higher standard under the new law than other businesses. In addition to the filing requirements, they have to take steps such as naming a compliance officer and implementing a comprehensive program to train employees about how to spot money laundering.
Unlike other businesses, though, most financial services companies already have a process in place to deal with government regulation.
"Certainly for the bigger [insurance] companies, they most likely are already tooled up for this," said Fimea. "For other companies, this creates a whole new landscape."
James Rockett, a San Francisco lawyer who represents banks and insurance companies in disputes with regulators, said he's skeptical the authorities will get any useful information from reports filed by nonfinancial companies.
"You're trying to turn an untrained populace into the monitors of money laundering activity," Rockett said. "If you want to stop this, it's got to be done with police work, not tracking consumers' buying habits."
Voices opposing any of the new law-enforcement measures appear to be in the minority, however. For now, at least, few people and few companies want to be perceived as being terrorist sympathizers.
"In a political sense, it would have been very hard for us to go to Congress in this case and loudly argue that the legislation shouldn't include nonfinancial-services guys," said Rubin, of the US Chamber of Commerce. "Everybody wants to help and to stop money laundering right now."
Scott Bernard Nelson can be reached by e-mail at nelson@globe.com.
Well its a validly enacted law. Your caretakers have enacted it. Either your mindset is in the minority or your caretakers have ignored your views. In either case just because you don't like it doesn't make it unconstitutional.
Ha, its hard enough to cut through your mind's fog and work for the simple truth here. As for the others you list, I'll be happy to consult given the proper renumeration.
More like a bighorn ram! Charge!
There is no military on our border. There is no freeze of immigration. There is no stoppage of visas from muslim countries. These things would offend the liberals and the "civil rights" coalition. The only thing that this @$@# government HAS done is pass a bunch of laws to restrict my rights. Once again, rather than actually going after the evil people in question, the govt chooses to punish its law abiding citizens (a la gun control)
You know nothing about me, what I have done or what I do. Your opinion of me has nothing to do with the topic or discussion.
Now if you want to stay on topic fine. If not we have nothing further to discuss.
and this is your on topic response? You and I haven't been having a discussion anyway so feel free to stop responding.
Your first comment to me was to inform me this was a conservative thread and your comments have gone downhill from there.
My feelings will not be hurt if you decide to ignore me...:)
Well its too late. The debate was had, the votes were cast in congress and the president signed it. Now, as a citizen your job is obey it until it is repealed through the same process or invalidated by the judiciary.
They waited until a 9-11-01 event ocurred. They would have waited a lot longer if necessary.
So what. That does not make it constitutional either.
"Your caretakers have enacted it. Either your mindset is in the minority or your caretakers have ignored your views."
They are not caretakers they are REPRESENTATIVES and my mindset has nothing to do with this subject. My point on this thread has been that the REPRESENTATIVES such as Congress and the President, failed to uphold their oath of office, IGNORED the constitution and passed and signed into law something they did not read.
" In either case just because you don't like it doesn't make it unconstitutional."
Just because Congress and the President like does not make it constitutional either.
Will you challege it in court?
Will you accept that it is constitutional if the Supreme Court says it is? Or do you have a different constitution than the rest of us?
Please do not twist the issue with silly arguement.
The law is not all about anyone. It is about cash transactions. As I have said in other posts, I have made several cash transactions of over $10k. The cash was legitimate. I had nothing to hide. I welcome the government to verify my cash transaction if doing so will take some real scum off of the streets.
You fear of this new law make me suspicious of you.
Several years ago the Pittsburgh Press ran a series of articles about people that had their money taken simply because they were caught in airports with large sums of money. I remember one guy who had a nursery or landscaping business that was headed for a southern state to buy stuff.
He lost over $7,000 that was siezed for no reason other than he had it on him at the airport.
If you know the cost of something, you can always get a cashiers check. If you're not sure how much you're going to end up spending it gets to be a problem if you're planning on bringing your purchase or purchases back with you.
If you go to a construction equipment auction and you don't have a bank letter of credit, you better have cash. Lots of equipment goes for way over $10,000.
You are a liar. That is not how it went and you know it, because I already had to remind you once that was not how it went.
"I asked you if you are a liberal or conservative. You then asked me what I thought you were. I told you what I thought and now you dont like the answer. You should not have asked if you didnt want an answer."
Your reply was
"Fair enough. I was stunned by your answer. So I won't ask you anything else...:)"
I know of one case where the drug dog alerted on a guy in the airport. When he was questioned, he didn't have drugs on him per se. But he had thousands of dollars that had enough cocaine on them that he was charged with possession.
In a lot of these "horror" stories, pertinent facts are left out. As for your machinery auction situation...what about traveler's checks? Safer than walking around with cash. Just a thought.
Thank you for staying on topic. Please don't embarrass yourself anymore.
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.