Posted on 03/11/2008 12:35:04 PM PDT by JOAT
Gov. Eliot Spitzer ended up as the subject of an investigation into a prostitution ring because his bank branch in Manhattan turned him in to the Internal Revenue Service as someone who might be engaged in suspicious currency transactions, according to sources familiar with the investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Me too, especially in light of a Rat administration using these powers for political means.
That's been my reaction. She's damn good looking for a woman who's about to turn 50. Yet he plunked down major cheddar just for little Eliot to find somewhere else to play for a few minutes.
Good for the bank.
As a guy coming down on the financial industry with both jackbooted feet, you’d think he wouldn’t be so naive and stupid.
Yes, quite the disturbing trend in the last 30-50 years.
Way back when the 'rule of law' was an expected thing, political hacks worried about getting caught.
Now they know they can 'apologize and move on.' (At least most of the time.)
I know about the diamond rankings. I was alluding to public contracts (governor hiring these ladies) and union (whores) extortion.
I think all Republicans in NY and nationally should break down every dem spending bill into a new unit of currency, The Spitzer.
1 Spitzer = 1 High priced Call girl with a par value of $5000)
Dem Senator, “This bill will help illegal aliens get better cars!”
Repub Senator, “My great friend wants to spend TEN THOUSAND Spitzers on illegals while only spending FIVE THOUSAND Spitzers on citizens. THIS IS WRONG!”
Not really. They are required by law to file SAR to the authorities. If they don’t, they could be looking at millions in fines or have their charter yanked.
The staid then Bank of Boston, had the misfortune to promote a local woman as the manager of a branch in the "Italian" section of Boston as part of a community banking initiative.
The woman apparently ignored the cash reporting regulations for her organized crime connected neighbors. Weld swoops down and nails the bank for what was the largest banking fine ever at the time (~$500K, iirc).
Weld goes on to become MA Governor, and the bank goes on to be acquired, being tied up in knots by Weld's over zealous prosecution, unable to adapt to the changing banking scene in the 1980s.
So, I'm not surprised that a bank would want to avoid being the target of the next wannabe political appointee, especially when your bank may be linked to charges of illegalities, not to mention the possibility that questionable transfers my be linked to terrorists.
Exactly.
He must have believed his own hype, that he was a 'steamroller' that no one could oppose, not even old-monied interests.
Guess he found out otherwise.
The IRS requires banks and other businesses to report cash transactions of $10,000 and up. One way for drug dealers and other criminals to get around this was to break up their cash deposits to different banks, for example, $5,000 to Bank A, $5,000 to Bank B. Dividing up criminal proceeds in this manner is called “structuring”. To deal with this practice, banks are required to report multiple transactions to the IRS. I don’t know all the particulars of what they have to report.
Now, even assuming my rich uncle gave me $10,000 in cash for my birthday, and I took it down to the bank to deposit, they’d still have to report it to the IRS. Doesn’t mean I did anything wrong, just means the IRS wants to know about it, and may or may not keep an eye on me.
I wonder who the owners of this “club” are? And whether espionage has any relevance in all this?
The Soviets did this all the time...I wonder if any Muslim money is invoved?
You are probably right as far as the bank goes, but you can bet someone, somewhere along the line, saw his name sandwiched in among all the others and went “BINGO”! The IRS doesn't have the time or resources to look into everyone who buys expensive hookers and pays like he did.
I’m also uncomfortable with unconstitutional laws and regulations.
would you be more comfortable if all banks no longer monitored customers for fraud, money-laundering, or terrorism funding?
The amount to be reported is set each day. It may in fact be one thousand dollars at times. The ten grand figure isn’t anything to count on.
I think frequency as well as amount might play into the IRS’ interest.
No, you’re doing that for a common, rational, obvious, and legal purpose. And you’re sending the money to US banks for investment under your own name (i.e. transferring from you to you), not to mysterious shell companies. Regardless of the amounts involved in any one transaction or coordinated series of transactions, there is nothing suspicious about people spreading out their savings to stay within FDIC limits. Now if you start making a series of $4900 wire transfers from those accounts to mysterious shell corporations, you’ll definitely get reported.
Great idea!
“Now, even assuming my rich uncle gave me $10,000 in cash for my birthday, and I took it down to the bank to deposit, they’d still have to report it to the IRS. Doesn’t mean I did anything wrong, just means the IRS wants to know about it, and may or may not keep an eye on me.”
I think the problem there is that amount might be in the gift tax range. Just the IRS making sure it gets its fair share. I have heard of some grandparents who would disperse their money before they died, and the IRS didn’t like them doing that, of course. Not allowed to escape that death tax.
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.