KD in CA Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 More fun with the IRS..... http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/law-lets-irs-seize-accounts-on-suspicion-no-crime-required.html?_r=0 I recall a thread where people were pissed off at local cops for doing this; yet when it's !@#$ing IRS policy the outrage seems to melt away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 It's much more productive to worry about perceived and imagined threats than actual ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Banks are not permitted to advise customers that their deposit habits may be illegal or educate them about structuring unless they ask, in which case they are given a federal pamphlet, Ms. Van Steenwyk said. “We’re not allowed to tell them anything,” she said. nothing in the article surprises me, but reading it makes me livid nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 From the New York Times article For almost 40 years, Carole Hinders has dished out Mexican specialties at her modest cash-only restaurant. For just as long, she deposited the earnings at a small bank branch a block away — until last year, when two tax agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had seized her checking account, almost $33,000. The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes — in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report. . . . “How can this happen?” Ms. Hinders said in a recent interview. “Who takes your money before they prove that you’ve done anything wrong with it?” The federal government does. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 More fun with the IRS..... http://www.nytimes.c...uired.html?_r=0 I recall a thread where people were pissed off at local cops for doing this; yet when it's !@#$ing IRS policy the outrage seems to melt away. What needs to happen is if people win in court then the government pays their legal fees and they pay back double Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjamie12 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Or: the gov't just seizing assets without being accused of a crime should be, you know, not allowed in the first place? I don't know; too radical an idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 From the New York Times article The federal government does. . Of course, the liberal progressive mindset of the current administration is that all money belongs to the government and they just allow us to use it. So in a way, their actions make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Lets not forget our POTUS assured us there was not a "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS A quick reminder of their ongoing investigation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khtcRyw9jrQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) Banks are not permitted to advise customers that their deposit habits may be illegal or educate them about structuring unless they ask, in which case they are given a federal pamphlet, Ms. Van Steenwyk said. “We’re not allowed to tell them anything,” she said. nothing in the article surprises me, but reading it makes me livid nonetheless. I have to take anti-money laundering traing every year. Now it's very basic but it's my understanding that structuring is a red flag that there might be AML activities going on which will prompt an investigation. The act itself is not illegal but just part of series of tools used by people/businesses to launder money. Edited October 28, 2014 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 I have to take anti-money laundering traing every year. Now it's very basic but it's my understanding that structuring is a red flag that there might be AML activities going on which will prompt an investigation. The act itself is not illegal but just part of series of tools used by people/businesses to launder money. I have no problem with the IRS conducting investigations, but I have a huge problem with the seizure of assets while the investigation is ongoing, as well as the apparent scope of the investigations themselves. that's not to mention the guilty-until-proven-innocent nature of the charges. I find it impossible to understand how anyone but a fascist would support this kind of abuse by our public servants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 What needs to happen is if people win in court then the government pays their legal fees and they pay back double No, what needs to happen is the government needs to stop taking citizens' property for no valid reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts