Comment by treebeard901

Comment by treebeard901 4 days ago

43 replies

View on Hacker News

The movie, Rebel Ridge, does a decent job showing just how bad this can be in a small town. It's not exactly realistic for how the former Marine depicted chose to try to resolve the situation... It does give room to consider just how corrupt it can all be. Consider if you live in a town with only one bank. Clearly the bank and the police have a relationship and in a small town, odds are they all know each other quite well. Say someone withdraws money from the bank. Then the teller sort of rats you out to law enforcement or someone adjacent to law enforcement. They manufacture an excuse to pull you over just as was done in this Nevada story. The movie Rebel Ridge goes into the difficulty in even getting your money back in the first place. At one point they explain a large part of the police departments funding comes from this. Then again, it isn't just small police departments getting kick backs, it's everyone involved to run up the cost for someone who had their money stolen.

At some point, civil forfeiture laws will lay the foundation for having any amount of cash being a sort of assumption of criminality. Consider too that smaller banks and even large banks have reserve requirements but not enough to cover all of the deposits. When most money exists in digital form in a database somewhere, over time, the concept of real paper money gets that assumption of wrong doing. Almost like it is the financial equivalent of "you must have something to hide, or else you would be using your credit card".

RickS 3 days ago

One of the more insidious versions of this is the static thresholds for things like "a suspiciously large amount of cash", which are not inflation adjusted, causing them to effectively shrink over time. A $10K cash travel limit established by the Bank Secrecy Act in 1970 would be over $80K in 2025 dollars. The law is structured so that the net is constantly tightening by default.

Reply View 0 replies
nicholasjarnold 3 days ago

> When most money exists in digital form in a database somewhere, over time, the concept of real paper money gets that assumption of wrong doing.

It's already happening, and it probably just depends on the teller you get. I have no idea if it's policy or not, but I've been questioned pretty intrusively for cash transactions even under the reporting limit of 10k (see: BSA, CTR).

Reply View 10 replies
  • HWR_14 3 days ago

    You are probably questioned more about cash transactions under the reporting limit. Over the reporting limit they file a form. Under they have to determine if they need to file a form.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • username135 3 days ago

      Over 10k in a day of cumulative deposits will automatically trigger a CTR (currency transaction report). Amounts over 3k can trigger a SAR (suspicious activity report) but those are typically at teller discretion unless its a very specific circumstance like a customer buying $2500 in traveller cheques but has a typical average balance under some low threshold.

      All those reports go to the banks AML (Anti Money Laundering) group who have to follow specific reporting guidlines from big brother. Lots of data is used to determine your risk level, which gets assigned tonyou when you open an account, especially a business account. Depending on the sic codes you choose determines how heavily you are scrutinized by the banks interal risk structure.

      I could go on but you get the gist.

      Source: too many decades in financial services orgs

      Reply View 0 replies
  • sigmoid10 3 days ago

    The EU literally got rid of the 500 Euro bank note because it was primarily used by criminals for evading the law.

    Reply View 5 replies
    • Y_Y 3 days ago

      They literally did not. 500s are still currency, they just stopped printing them.

      Reply View 4 replies
      • whycome 3 days ago

        I think that’s what was implied. Canada “got rid of” the $1000 bill but it’s still legal tender. Canada also got rid of the penny, but it remains legal tender. Banks will take them if vendors don’t.

        Reply View 0 replies
      • sigmoid10 3 days ago

        German Marks can also still be swapped for legal tender. That doesn't mean it is possible to use them like the Euro.

        Reply View 2 replies
  • [removed] 3 days ago
    [deleted]
    Reply View 0 replies
matheusmoreira 3 days ago

> At some point, civil forfeiture laws will lay the foundation for having any amount of cash being a sort of assumption of criminality.

Already true in Brazil where I live.

It's just the financial arm of global warrantless mass surveillance. I highly recommend not allowing them to do this to you.

Brazilian central bank developed a digital centralized money transfer system called pix. You already know where this is going, right? At first it was great: instant, zero fees, no taxes. Right now the entire nation is angry about the fact our IRS equivalent will start using the pix transaction data to cross reference and audit citizens. If you move more than ~800 USD your financial data gets sent to the government automatically.

I like to believe that Brazil is some kind of test bed for dystopian nonsense like this.

Reply View 1 reply
  • Vilian 2 days ago

    They already did it with credit card, I'm actually surprised that they weren't already doing that, not sure if I understand the issue

    Reply View 0 replies
the-dude 4 days ago

> At some point, civil forfeiture laws will lay the foundation for having any amount of cash being a sort of assumption of criminality.

Although we don't have civil forfeiture, this is already true in The Netherlands.

Reply View 27 replies
  • soco 4 days ago

    Are you sure the "any amount" generalization is true? I know in Switzerland of money confiscated at border control for simple suspicion, but we are talking (tens of) thousands. Although there's a certain obligation of declaration those people always "forget", that situation stays shitty, but in any case it's a very very far cry from "any amount".

    Reply View 15 replies
    • jeroenhd 3 days ago

      One Dutch party in the previous government tried to outlaw carrying more than €2000 in the street. As far as I know, that law didn't pass. Plus you can keep as many cash reserves at home as you want (but good luck getting any back if that gets stolen).

      However, there are rules that make cash less useful for large payments. Cash payments over €10000 (€3000 starting in March) are outright banned without involving the government.

      There are more practical problems than "I just really want to buy a car without giving out my bank account", though: more and more Dutch stores have stopped taking cash to reduce the risk and losses of robberies. You can still carry cash, but spending it may require some research ahead of time, and not every business is interested in the overhead of going through the money laundering prevention system when normal people usually just buy >€3000 stuff through their bank accounts.

      If anything, the Dutch government has been telling people to have cash available in case of emergencies after "geopolitical tension" (read: the Russian invasion into Ukraine). Not that anyone seems to listen, but they encourage having cash reserves. They're still working out an exact amount to recommend, but a couple hundred euros seems to be most likely.

      Reply View 9 replies
      • ethbr1 3 days ago

        Can we note the absurdity of one part of the government banning too much cash, while another part of the government notes that some cash is essential?

        Also, prepper realism: a week's worth of cash at hand goes a long way towards handling the most likely disaster scenarios (which are all well short of Road Warrior).

        Reply View 4 replies
      • tivert 3 days ago

        > If anything, the Dutch government has been telling people to have cash available in case of emergencies after "geopolitical tension" (read: the Russian invasion into Ukraine). Not that anyone seems to listen, but they encourage having cash reserves. They're still working out an exact amount to recommend, but a couple hundred euros seems to be most likely.

        In that scenario, it seems like that would be an insufficient amount to really do anything except handle very basic needs for a week or two.

        Reply View 2 replies
      • graemep 3 days ago

        > If anything, the Dutch government has been telling people to have cash available in case of emergencies after "geopolitical tension" (read: the Russian invasion into Ukraine). Not that anyone seems to listen, but they encourage having cash reserves.

        There is a very strong case for people keeping cash because of its resilience.

        People will not do it until something happens to make them realise the problems - maybe cyberwar or natural disaster bringing electronic payment systems to halt.

        Reply View 0 replies
    • the-dude 3 days ago

      If it were really 'any' in the philosophical sense, cash would be outlawed. So no, it is not 'any', it is anywhere between more than a couple of hundred to a couple of thousands, depending on what the police or prosecutor feels is reasonable.

      What is wrong with a (couple of) thousand euros?

      > I know in Switzerland of money confiscated at border control

      You are describing smuggling, I was talking about normal domestic use.

      Reply View 3 replies
      • ethbr1 3 days ago

        > You are describing smuggling

        There's a thin line between smuggling and wanting personal money to be somewhere else.

        I get why most states want to track cash coming across their border, but it's really none of their business if they can't prove theres a crime.

        The absence of a crime does not constitute a crime.

        Reply View 1 reply
        • soco 3 days ago

          And now the funny part: even after they failed to prove there's a crime, the Swiss police still often refuses to release the money.

          Reply View 0 replies
      • nullc 3 days ago

        > If it were really 'any' in the philosophical sense, cash would be outlawed.

        The state doesn't have unlimited power, so no. What you expect to see where cash is being banned outright is a slow erosion of less common uses, larger amounts, and an addition of inconveniences and risks in order to drive people off it so that an eventual ban is less unpopular or is even popular. ("screw those bank distrusting weirdos!")

        To ban outright risks backlash and failure.

        Reply View 0 replies
    • [removed] 4 days ago
      [deleted]
      Reply View 0 replies
  • MEMORYC_RRUPTED 4 days ago

    While I don't disagree with the general statement, I do want to add the nuance that this isn't true for small amounts of cash money. Recently, the government even recommended people to keep more cash on hand in case of emergency / large scale disruptions to the financial system.

    Even with large amounts of money, it's not like they're knocking on doors, looking under yer bed.

    Reply View 9 replies
    • RajT88 3 days ago

      What constitutes a large sum depends a bit based on the situation (or what kind of person you are!).

      A 2020 study found the average seized was $1300: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...

      In some states, the average seized amount is in the hundreds, or even less: https://thewhyaxis.substack.com/p/cops-still-take-more-stuff...

      In Chicago, they are taking amounts less than $100: https://reason.com/2017/06/13/poor-neighborhoods-hit-hardest...

      "You are too poor to fairly have $100, so we're taking it" seems insane to me.

      Reply View 0 replies
    • the-dude 4 days ago

      What is small and what is large is a matter of opinion.

      If they are out to get you and can't find anything incriminating, cash will do. The press will happily report on this too : 'There was a police raid so and so, nothing was found but they found a (large) amount of cash'.

      Furthermore, our government is planning legislation to make cash transactions > € 3000 illegal.

      Reply View 7 replies
      • psunavy03 3 days ago

        The media will sensationalize anything. Another favorite is claiming someone had "hundreds of rounds of ammunition" when even someone who just shoots recreationally, let alone competitively, would burn through that in an afternoon. It's like accusing a golfer of going through hundreds of balls at the driving range . . . yeah, that's the point of going.

        Reply View 0 replies
      • SketchySeaBeast 3 days ago

        > What is small and what is large is a matter of opinion.

        There's certainly there's some vagueness in the middle, for me a few hundred isn't large, but a grand is, and I don't know that everyone would agree, but I think most everyone would agree that $5 is small and $10,000 is large.

        Reply View 5 replies
  • coldtea 4 days ago

    Non-sovereign subjects can't be allowed to do whatever they want with their own money...

    Reply View 0 replies
jncfhnb 3 days ago

The reserve requirement comment feels out of place. Banks don’t keep their reserve requirements in physical cash.

Reply View 0 replies