The government is seizing money without any proof of criminal activity, because they can

[NaturalBornHustler]

Just came across this article about a local small business owner (and others) having their bank accounts raided because they were depositing less than 10k at a time, but close to it. The feds call it "structuring". Usually it is connected with drug dealing and other illegal stuff, but even if you are squeaky clean doesn't matter, they keep the money!

http://citypaper.com/news/cashed-out-1.1301518

South Mountain co-owner Randy Sowers is now in the hot seat with the feds, because in late February, the Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigations Division (IRS-CID) used a federal anti-money-laundering statute to seize the contents of a PNC bank account Sowers says was the depository of cash earned by his company’s farmers-market business.

Sowers has not been charged with a crime, and says he expects to learn soon whether or not he will be. As for getting his money back—nearly $70,000, a fraction of the nearly quarter-million dollars in cash deposits the feds say Sowers laundered between May and December last year—well, based on the experiences of others in his position, he’ll likely not see it again, at least not all of it.

Baltimore County Police officer Michael Aiosa, who has been detailed as an IRS -CID task-force member since October 2010, signed the six-page affidavit used to get the seizure warrant to empty the account, of which Sowers and his daughter-in-law, Karen Sowers, are co-signatories. The affidavit says cash deposits were broken down into increments of under $10,001 each, causing PNC to not generate required “currency transaction reports” (CTRs) that financial institutions must file with regulators when they receive or disburse more than $10,000 in a single cash transaction. Under 31 U.S.C. 5324, federal law prohibits such conduct, which is called “structuring.”

Another law that is being twisted from it's original intent and purpose to enrich our corrupt government...

Historically, the anti-structuring statute has been used by prosecutors as an ancillary charge with other accusations of nefarious behavior, such as drug dealing or terrorism. And it still is. But over the last few years, prosecutors have started to use it more regularly as a standalone charge—an observation noted by defense attorneys that Maryland U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein confirms.

Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data center about federal court cases, reports that in fiscal year 2011 Maryland brought 14 of the nation’s 99 structuring cases, making it the top state for such prosecutions. Nationally, the numbers have been rising; the 2011 figures are up 8.8 percent from the year before and up 57.1 percent from five years ago.

Greater prosecutorial emphasis on enforcing the anti-structuring statute has resulted in a rise in money seizures, civil-forfeiture cases, and criminal charges against small businesses and the people who own them. Typical targets handle a lot of cash, and in Maryland gas stations, liquor stores, and used-car dealerships have landed in expensive trouble, losing money through seizures, criminal penalties, and legal bills.

Fucking thieves. God some things in this country make me sick.

[SixToedPete]

Obama and his IRS goons will stop at nothing to steal your money. Vote him out of office or expect much more of the same.

[Dan Druff]

The guy was probably guilty of dodging filling out a CTR (and was probably under-reporting his income to the IRS), but this is still bullshit. They shouldn't seize his money simply because he's structuring his deposits under $10,000.

Interestingly, this has poker implications, too. While many players just keep their cash in a box, depositing your winnings into the bank in this fashion is similarly against the law, and the same seizure bullshit can occur, too.

I agree that these seizures are violating the spirit of the law, and this "structuring" crap should really only be used as part of a greater criminal investigation. If someone is making the money legitimately and is still depositing less than $10,000 at a time in order to avoid filling out forms, that shouldn't be a crime nor should it be a reason for the government to seize money.

BTW, banks (and even casinos) are under instruction from the federal government to report any attempts by customers at structuring. These reports are almost always made in secret, and you have no clue they're tattling on you until something bad happens.

Not all institutions cooperate with this, though. For example, the Commerce Casino is notoriously lax with keeping track of cash going in and out of their cage. Banks tend to be more observant and willing to report people.

[Mad Dad]

I don't really understand this line of thinking. On the one hand, many want gaming that is properly controlled and on the other hand many also want government out of their lives. It seems folks want the benefits of the former without the costs of the latter. I call this ""tooth fairy" logic.

[son of lockman]

Our geat and noble government cheating it's citizens?...Why I can hardly believe that....

[Steve-O]

Obama and his IRS goons will stop at nothing to steal your money. Vote him out of office or expect much more of the same.

Not for nothing, but you can't possibly think this is an Obama problem???? This stuff is done on the state level --which would explain why Maryland filed 14 of the 99 structuring charges last year as reported in the article.
--------------------------------------------------------

As far as the article, this is the downside of working for yourself or having a cash business; it opens you up to audits and this type of stuff. You have to be very careful about the laws that apply to you, and should expect a higher scrutiny. I go into tax season every year expecting to get audited since I'm self-employed, and my accountant says the same thing "keep your fingers crossed". But I also know what records to keep and what laws might apply to me. This person should have known better, especially if this was a regualr occurence; realistically he must have deposited over $10k at some point and realized he filled out paperwork on that occasion.

I mean, this is one-side of this story and I think this throw-away line "...to make multiple cash deposits of just under $10,000, sometimes at multiple bank branches on the same day, are trying to hide something." in the piece gives you a good idea of what was actually going on.

Without the structuring law do you have any idea how easy it would be to launder money and avoid paying taxes? There were only 99 cases of this last year, which tells me that it's not filed unless there is actually some nefarious business going on... but like with anything else there is the chance of some innocent people caught in the snare.

[jsearles22]

Obama and his IRS goons will stop at nothing to steal your money. Vote him out of office or expect much more of the same.

Not for nothing, but you can't possibly think this is an Obama problem???? This stuff is done on the state level --which would explain why Maryland filed 14 of the 99 structuring charges last year as reported in the article.
--------------------------------------------------------

As far as the article, this is the downside of working for yourself or having a cash business; it opens you up to audits and this type of stuff. You have to be very careful about the laws that apply to you, and should expect a higher scrutiny. I go into tax season every year expecting to get audited since I'm self-employed, and my accountant says the same thing "keep your fingers crossed". But I also know what records to keep and what laws might apply to me. This person should have known better, especially if this was a regualr occurence; realistically he must have deposited over $10k at some point and realized he filled out paperwork on that occasion.

I mean, this is one-side of this story and I think this throw-away line "...to make multiple cash deposits of just under $10,000, sometimes at multiple bank branches on the same day, are trying to hide something." in the piece gives you a good idea of what was actually going on.

Without the structuring law do you have any idea how easy it would be to launder money and avoid paying taxes? There were only 99 cases of this last year, which tells me that it's not filed unless there is actually some nefarious business going on... but like with anything else there is the chance of some innocent people caught in the snare.

You are much better at articulating your thoughts then I am. I thought pretty much these same things, but didnt want to be the first "bad guy" in the thread!

[PLOL]

BTW, banks (and even casinos) are under instruction from the federal government to report any attempts by customers at structuring. These reports are almost always made in secret, and you have no clue they're tattling on you until something bad happens.

Funny that you say this. Somebody in Daytona had 12k in chips and gave my friend 3k to cash out. Obviously, this is not allowed but they did it anyway. So the supervisor catches them and gets in a big argument with them. He then tells them that he's going to fill out a SARc (Suspicious Activity Report for casinos) on both of them. I later looked it up and saw that SARs have to be filled out without informing the person and that it's actually a felony to inform somebody that you're filling out a SAR about them.

[NaturalBornHustler]

I mean, this is one-side of this story and I think this throw-away line "...to make multiple cash deposits of just under $10,000, sometimes at multiple bank branches on the same day, are trying to hide something." in the piece gives you a good idea of what was actually going on.

If you read the article that line was not referring to the case in question, but was a general statement about what USUALLY happens in these cases. There is no evidence of that happening in this case. There is no evidence of anything, not criminal activity or tax evasion, which is why there are no corresponding charges. They simply are "guilty" of depositing less than 10k at various points. That's it.

Without the structuring law do you have any idea how easy it would be to launder money and avoid paying taxes? There were only 99 cases of this last year, which tells me that it's not filed unless there is actually some nefarious business going on... but like with anything else there is the chance of some innocent people caught in the snare.

Again, there is nothing "nefarious" going on here. If there was they would have been charged along with their money being taken, they weren't...that is the entire point. I have no problem with them seizing money if you are up to no good and they can prove it, but in this case they found nothing illegal going on yet still took the money.

[Steve-O]

If you read the article that line was not referring to the case in question, but was a general statement about what USUALLY happens in these cases. There is no evidence of that happening in this case. There is no evidence of anything, not criminal activity or tax evasion, which is why there are no corresponding charges. They simply are "guilty" of depositing less than 10k at various points. That's it.

Without the structuring law do you have any idea how easy it would be to launder money and avoid paying taxes? There were only 99 cases of this last year, which tells me that it's not filed unless there is actually some nefarious business going on... but like with anything else there is the chance of some innocent people caught in the snare.

Again, there is nothing "nefarious" going on here. If there was they would have been charged along with their money being taken, they weren't...that is the entire point. I have no problem with them seizing money if you are up to no good and they can prove it, but in this case they found nothing illegal going on yet still took the money.

This is not true, the guy himself wouldn't comment on whether he had done anything, other than to say he "didn't know" which cannot be true since he MUST have made a deposit of over $10k on certain occasions. This looksl ike a PR piece setup by his defense team. I think the exact line was, "Sowers has not been charged with a crime, and says he expects to learn soon whether or not he will be." This is when we will hear the other side of this story.

The general statement is very relevant when you consider there are less than 100 cases of this law being applied each year! There is no evidence of it happening here because the reporter only told the story from the defendant's side!

[BCR]

The guy was probably guilty of dodging filling out a CTR (and was probably under-reporting his income to the IRS), but this is still bullshit. They shouldn't seize his money simply because he's structuring his deposits under $10,000.

Interestingly, this has poker implications, too. While many players just keep their cash in a box, depositing your winnings into the bank in this fashion is similarly against the law, and the same seizure bullshit can occur, too.

I agree that these seizures are violating the spirit of the law, and this "structuring" crap should really only be used as part of a greater criminal investigation. If someone is making the money legitimately and is still depositing less than $10,000 at a time in order to avoid filling out forms, that shouldn't be a crime nor should it be a reason for the government to seize money.

BTW, banks (and even casinos) are under instruction from the federal government to report any attempts by customers at structuring. These reports are almost always made in secret, and you have no clue they're tattling on you until something bad happens.

Not all institutions cooperate with this, though. For example, the Commerce Casino is notoriously lax with keeping track of cash going in and out of their cage. Banks tend to be more observant and willing to report people.

This has been standard protocol for years, and has happened to me on more than one occasion. The last time I went to Canada a few years back, I brought $9500 in cash because I knew the inevitable question and didn't want to lie, and figured I could hit the ATM for anything else I might need as I've had a significantly higher daily withdrawal limit over the average customer by choice.

After a very good weekend, I got a series of checks cut by Fallsview and made some cash deposits via ATM up there with some extra cash, and left around the same amount of cash for my trip home. When I got to customs, they skipped all the preliminary questions about tobacco, purpose of trip, etc. and went straight to how much cash are you carrying? I answered honestly, and then the guy asked what about checks? I knew that he knew, as I'd never been asked that directly before right off the bat, so I answered honestly, and got pulled over to fill out the CTR and questioned by some bozo for an hour while they searched my vehicle, so I know Fallsview not only told them, they were precise, and quick, because that trip through customs was unique to the many I'd made before. This guy did amateurish structuring, and while you say prove it, they say, simply show us where the money came from? The burden should be theirs, but in reality, it's fucking easy to show someone the origin of where most of your money came from if it's straight up. You have to have a better plan than this guy.

[Corrigan]

After a very good weekend, I got a series of checks cut by Fallsview and made some cash deposits via ATM up there with some extra cash, and left around the same amount of cash for my trip home. When I got to customs, they skipped all the preliminary questions about tobacco, purpose of trip, etc. and went straight to how much cash are you carrying? I answered honestly, and then the guy asked what about checks? I knew that he knew, as I'd never been asked that directly before right off the bat, so I answered honestly, and got pulled over to fill out the CTR and questioned by some bozo for an hour while they searched my vehicle, so I know Fallsview not only told them, they were precise, and quick, because that trip through customs was unique to the many I'd made before. This guy did amateurish structuring, and while you say prove it, they say, simply show us where the money came from? The burden should be theirs, but in reality, it's fucking easy to show someone the origin of where most of your money came from if it's straight up. You have to have a better plan than this guy.