Post: #1

The IRS Seized $107,000 From This North Carolina Man’s Bank Account. Now, He’s Fighting to Get It Back.

If he was a "conspiracy theorist" who saved in gold, silver, and guns, while keeping only the min amount of money needed in the bank to run his business, this would have never of happened and he would have more than 107,000 worth of assets because gold has more than tripled since 2001.

Quote:For most of his life, Lyndon McLellan has been in the business of country stores—the types of stores where the employees know customers’ names by heart and workers remain loyal for years and years.

His parents owned a general store and grill, and McLellan began helping out there at the ripe old age of 9. Then, 14 years ago, McLellan decided to try his hand at the family business and purchased his own store in the heart of the Bible Belt, naming it L&M Convenience Mart.

Business has been good for McLellan, and though L&M, located in Fairmont, N.C., began as just a convenience store and gas station, he’s since expanded it to include a restaurant that serves hot dogs, hamburgers and catfish sandwiches.

While most of his employees and their families spend Sunday mornings making right with God, McLellan skips church to man the store. He’s there on Christmas Day and during Thanksgiving dinner—a sacrifice McLellan makes for his employees.


Attention Coffee Drinkers, meet the Morning Bell, your new best friend.

A snap to consume the day's most important political news, conservative commentary, and original reporting that respects your time...and your intelligence. Sorry, donuts.

“It’s my livelihood,” he told The Daily Signal. “This is all I know how to do. I’m 50 years old, and if I had to do something else, I’d probably be in trouble. This is what I was brought up in. This is all I know.”

What McLellan didn’t know, though, was that the federal government could come in and take away what he’d worked so hard for.

On a summer day last July, McLellan, who hadn’t yet arrived at the store, received a phone call from one of his employees summoning him to L&M. More than a dozen federal agents had flooded into his business—officers from North Carolina’s Alcohol and Law Enforcement, the local police department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation—and they were asking for him.

“It’s my livelihood. This is all I know how to do. I’m 50 years old, and if I had to do something else, I’d probably be in trouble,” said Lyndon McLellan.

When McLellan arrived at the store, he met two federal agents dressed in suits who asked to speak with him in private. McLellan led the agents to L&M’s stock room, where they asked him if he knew of the term “structuring.”

He had no idea.

The federal agents then showed McLellan paperwork that included deposits to the store’s account at Lumbee Guaranty Bank. The statements showed two deposits made within a 24-hour period totaling $11,400.

The statements, they said, indicated he had a history of consistent cash deposits of less than $10,000, which is illegal.

Then, the agents told the small business owner something that shook him to his core: The Internal Revenue Service had seized all of the money in L&M’s bank account: $107,702.66.

“‘Are you telling me you took my money?’” McLellan recalled asking the agents. “I didn’t understand what was going on. They dropped a bomb on me. I was lost for five to 10 minutes. I can’t believe that y’all guys can walk in here and tell me y’all took every bit of my money out of the bank.”

After law enforcement cleared McLellan’s store, he drove to Lumbee Guaranty Bank. The agents had been there hours earlier and emptied his account, McLellan recalled, walking out of the building with a cashier’s check.

McLellan walked out of the bank with nothing.

>>> After Having His Motel Seized by the Government, Victim of Civil Asset Forfeiture Reflects on His Fight

Unknowingly Breaking the Law

Though he didn’t know it at the time, McLellan committed structuring violations when making cash deposits of less than $10,000.

McLellan himself doesn’t handle the deposits—that’s his niece’s responsibility—and a bank teller had previously advised her to make deposits of less than that amount. If cash deposits totaled more than $10,000, the bank had to file additional paperwork, the teller said.

“[Agents] asked if I knew what it was,” McLellan said of structuring. “I didn’t know what it was then, but I’ve learned a lot about it now.”

Structuring laws were originally put in place to catch drug trafficking and money laundering, but more and more instances have arisen where innocent Americans have committed structuring violations without even knowing it.

For unknowingly committing a structuring violation, the government seized all of the money in McLellan’s bank account by using a section of civil asset forfeiture laws that regulates cash deposits.

Civil asset forfeiture is a procedure that allows law enforcement to seize property if it’s suspected of being related to a crime. The practice began decades ago with good intentions.

However, law enforcement agencies have been using civil asset forfeiture to seize property and money for profit.

Between 2005 and 2012, the IRS seized $242 million for structuring violations.

In recent years, seizures executed because of structuring violations have increased dramatically. In 2005, the Internal Revenue Service made just 114 structuring seizures. By 2012, that number had risen to 639. During that same time period, the agency seized $242 million for structuring violations.

While banks must submit reports to the Department of the Treasury for cash deposits of more than $10,000, the government also receives “suspicious activity reports” on deposits below that threshold, Robert Johnson, a lawyer for the Institute for Justice and McLellan’s attorney, told The Daily Signal.

It’s likely the government received a suspicious activity report detailing McLellan’s deposits, which is how he “came onto the government’s radar.”

Johnson also noted that the IRS frequently teams up with local law enforcement to look through suspicious activity reports. By seizing property and money through the Department of Justice’s Equitable Sharing Program, law enforcement agencies share the proceeds of the forfeiture.

“The IRS deputizes these local law enforcement officers to go through suspicious activity reports and to identify cases where people are subject to forfeiture,” Johnson said. “So you have somebody who is not a federal official and yet is deputized to be enforcing federal law.”

In McLellan’s case, an affidavit was completed by a North Carolina law enforcement official, which indicated to Johnson that it was a state official likely combing through these suspicious activity reports who flagged the Fairmont convenience store, he said.

“The government has a financial incentive to broadly apply the forfeiture laws,” Johnson said. “When an agency like the IRS takes money under the forfeiture laws, that money goes back into the pockets of the agency and it’s available to the IRS to fund law enforcement activities without appropriation from Congress. It’s a powerful incentive for law enforcement to abuse civil forfeiture laws.”

>>> How California Cities Are Making Millions Seizing Property and Money From Law-Abiding Citizens
L&M Convenience Mart in Fairmont, N.C. (Photo: Institute for Justice)

L&M Convenience Mart in Fairmont, N.C. (Photo: Institute for Justice)

Violating Its Own Policies

Recognizing the increase in structuring violations from Americans who unknowingly violated the law, the Internal Revenue Service announced last year it would only pursue structuring cases if the money was tied to a crime.

Then, in March, the Justice Department announced it, too, would only pursue structuring cases if the defendant had been charged with a crime or if the money was used for criminal activity.

“Appropriate use of asset forfeiture law allows the Justice Department to safeguard the integrity, security and stability of our nation’s financial system while protecting the civil liberties of all Americans,” then-Attorney General Eric Holder said at the time.

During a February 2015 hearing on civil asset forfeiture, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen was asked broadly about McLellan’s case, in which there were no criminal charges pending or illegal activity conducted.

“I can tell you there hasn’t been a day that’s gone by that I don’t think $107,000 is a lot of money to me. To make it and have it taken—it’s not right.” said Lyndon McLellan.

“If that case exists, then it’s not following the policy,” Koskinen told lawmakers on the House Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee.

The policy change, though, didn’t stop the IRS from seizing McLellan’s money.

“I can tell you there hasn’t been a day that’s gone by that I don’t think $107,000 is a lot of money to me,” McLellan said. “To make it and have it taken—it’s not right.”
(Photo: Institute for Justice)

(Photo: Institute for Justice)

‘If You’re Wrong, You’re Wrong’

Months after seizing McLellan’s money, the federal government offered him 50 percent of his money back if he agreed to a settlement deal by March 30. Such settlement offers occur frequently in civil asset forfeiture cases, Johnson said, as victims often opt not to pursue years of litigation and lawyers fees.

McLellan declined the offer, because for him, the government’s seizure of his $107,000 is a matter of what’s right and wrong.

“I guess I’m old school. If you’re wrong, you’re wrong. If you’re right, you’re right. And in this case, I feel like they’re wrong,” he said. “And I was raised on—preached to about—what would be right and what would be wrong.”

“In criminal cases, defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Civil forfeiture cases flip this basic legal tenet on its head,” said Jason Snead of The Heritage Foundation.

Now, as is often the norm in civil asset forfeiture cases, McLellan must appear in court to prove his innocence. And it’s that practice that has policy experts calling on Congress to reform civil asset forfeiture laws.

“In criminal cases, defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Civil forfeiture cases flip this basic legal tenet on its head,” Jason Snead, research associate at The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told The Daily Signal.

“Once the government shows that your property is subject to forfeiture, the burden is on you as the owner to disprove the government. In effect, you are asked to prove your own innocence in order to win back your property. That is a high hurdle to clear.”

For McLellan, the thought of the government seizing citizens’ hard-earned money and property without their knowledge still puzzles him.

“It’s not fair to the American people who work for a living that one day they can knock on the door, walk in their businesses, and say, ‘We just took your money,’” McLellan said. “ … I always thought your money was safe in the bank, but I wouldn’t say that now.”

>>> Advocates Tell Congress: Reform Civil Asset Forfeiture Now

Post: #2

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this guy probably received countless letters from the I.R.S. which he chose to ignore, and that his tax returns probably had tons of red flags on them, such as really low revenue and/or ridiculous expenses. When you receive a letter from the I.R.S., it's best to respond immediately, whether it's in the form of a written response or in the form of a check. They tend to leave you the hell alone when you promptly respond to them.

Post: #3

I encourage all of you to look at this the right way, rather than form your own opinion on the matter.

This is a good thing. They took enough money from this cis-gender male white devil to pay for a couple medicare funded sex changes/castrations.

Post: #4

(05-12-2015 08:14 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  I encourage all of you to look at this the right way, rather than form your own opinion on the matter.

This is a good thing. They took enough money from this cis-gender male white devil to pay for a couple medicare funded sex changes/castrations.

They took enough to pay for over 20,000 packs of Oreos which people who receive food stamps can get their hands on. I haven't read anything about him either having received letters from the I.R.S. or not. It would have been nice if they could have included that one small detail.

Post: #5

Merenguero,

That's not what he's saying. He's saying he heard nothing until they seized his money.

He was offered a settlement of half, but he refused.

He hasn't been charged with not paying his taxes, he simply had his money taken, and under civil asset forfeiture laws, he has to prove he earned his money legally, but operating a cash business, that can be hard to do.

He wasn't audited, he had his money stolen, with his alleged "crime" being he didn't deposit his money in the right way, even though he deposited in the way his teller suggested.

I guess some people will make excuses for the powerful no matter how obvious the injustice.

May your chains rest lightly on your wrists.

Post: #6

"I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this guy probably received countless letters from the I.R.S. which he chose to ignore, and that his tax returns probably had tons of red flags on them, such as really low revenue and/or ridiculous expenses. When you receive a letter from the I.R.S., it's best to respond immediately, whether it's in the form of a written response or in the form of a check. They tend to leave you the hell alone when you promptly respond to them."

This is extremely unlikely given the situation. Any time you make multiple deposits that add up to above 10,000, you can be accused of "structuring" your deposits in a way that avoids them being reported to the IRS, which is a crime. It's a stupid law, but it's one they catch a lot of people on. Has nothing to do with his actual tax returns, which was probably fine.
The bank teller was a stupid jackass who deserves to lose his job.

Post: #7

delete, other posts beat me to it.

Post: #8

This is the kind of stuff that bothers me. It doesn't scare me, because I don't launder money, but it is basically a headache that I would have to deal with. Before every big fight, I withdraw thousands from my business account, place the bet, then deposit everything into my personal savings account. Everything is claimed and I can account for everything down to the penny. With my luck, they are bound to bother me at some point, but they will get nowhere, because everything I do is perfectly legal.

Post: #9

(05-12-2015 08:33 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  It doesn't scare me, because I don't launder money, but it is basically a headache that I would have to deal with.

This is like saying "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".

That a government agency can confiscate someone's money with no presumption of innocence and very little legal recourse should have every person angry.

There's another story making the rounds of the web today about a kid who got on a train for LA and had his life savings confiscated from his bag by a DEA agent. What was the DEA's response? "We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty. It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty."

That's right, "the money" is presumed guilty. I'm sure the money will demand its day in court.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...of-a-crime

Post: #10

This also happened to a lady named Carole Hinders, because she runs a cash-only restaurant.

Anyone can be labeled for "structuring" if you regularly deposit large amounts just below 10gs cash into your account.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-irs-a...ey-2014-12

New Mexico recently passed a bill that outlaws civil forfeiture. I'm not sure how the law works but if you register an LLC in New Mexico and you live in another state does that protect your assets?

Hopefully more states will follow.

Post: #11

(05-12-2015 08:07 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this guy probably received countless letters from the I.R.S. which he chose to ignore, and that his tax returns probably had tons of red flags on them, such as really low revenue and/or ridiculous expenses. When you receive a letter from the I.R.S., it's best to respond immediately, whether it's in the form of a written response or in the form of a check. They tend to leave you the hell alone when you promptly respond to them.

Not likely. They have the power in the United States to just take your money and force you into civil court to prove it was legally obtained with no notice. These are not good hearted people trying to be fair, there is no legal duty for them to tell you anything or give notice, and no penalty if they just take it.What incentive is there for them to give you notice? This happens all the time in Florida and Arizona where old people don't trust banks and keep cash and gold. Plus I guarantee that local law enforcement gets a cut of whatever they take as long as they filter it through the federal government first, like with drug seizures. I have said it over and over again, government is just a bunch of bureaucrats that exist to perpetuate themselves. The drug war was started because a federal agency was going to lose its funding because there was no reason for it to exist, prohibition passed because some politician wanted female votes, and the patriot act/homeland defense was passed to give a bloated government even more power to go through your private life and make you miserable without even having to give an "impartial" judge minimum oversight. Unilateral power without repercussions always leads to abuse, it has never been any other way-If someone can gain by making you suffer, with no consequence to them either way, get ready to suffer cause your suffering has just been incentivised.

Post: #12

(05-12-2015 08:33 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  This is the kind of stuff that bothers me. It doesn't scare me, because I don't launder money, but it is basically a headache that I would have to deal with. Before every big fight, I withdraw thousands from my business account, place the bet, then deposit everything into my personal savings account. Everything is claimed and I can account for everything down to the penny. With my luck, they are bound to bother me at some point, but they will get nowhere, because everything I do is perfectly legal.

They will take all your money and leave you with nothing. Try to handle a civil forfeiture case by yourself, you will lose. The government will bury you and since you have no money good luck finding an attorney. Think you can win and sue for pain and suffering? The government has immunity, getting past government immunity is next to impossible with no money, no lawyer, and the government has unlimited funds to make your life miserable. Lets say you find a lawyer, borrow money , and start to make some progress on your case-IRS decides to audit you and whoever gave you the money. Trust me, if you go against the government it is not designed for you to win, it is designed for you to give in.

Post: #13

I'm surprised no one brought this up but... judging from the article, he was flapping his gums to LE from the moment they met him. That breaks every rule in the book. You NEVER talk to police without an attorney. It is not illegal for them to lie to him but it is for him to lie to THEM. The scare tactics those guys use (especially the FBI) are designed to destroy you, not save you. Ditto for the IRS.

As soon as you start negotiating with them, you become a bigger target. Same for police. I've lived with police all my life: in my own family. My neighbors. Friends. Most are either dullards or bullies of one flavor or another, even the one in the ATF I knew. He is as much an ogre now as when I played little league with him. His entire family, nothing but bullies.

Best to keep your mouth shut when anyone from an alphabet agency comes calling. Let your lawyer do the talking. And as far as inviting them inside your house, well, that's like inviting in a vampire.

Post: #14

(05-12-2015 10:57 PM)Soothesayer Wrote:  I'm surprised no one brought this up but... judging from the article, he was flapping his gums to LE from the moment they met him. That breaks every rule in the book. You NEVER talk to police without an attorney. It is not illegal for them to lie to him but it is for him to lie to THEM. The scare tactics those guys use (especially the FBI) are designed to destroy you, not save you. Ditto for the IRS.

As soon as you start negotiating with them, you become a bigger target. Same for police. I've lived with police all my life: in my own family. My neighbors. Friends. Most are either dullards or bullies of one flavor or another, even the one in the ATF I knew. He is as much an ogre now as when I played little league with him. His entire family, nothing but bullies.

Best to keep your mouth shut when anyone from an alphabet agency comes calling. Let your lawyer do the talking. And as far as inviting them inside your house, well, that's like inviting in a vampire.

The average person who has never broken the law wants to help. He thinks the police are here to do good, there has been a mix up, and if he just tells the truth everything will be ok. He has not broken the law, why should he be afraid to talk to the police? They are looking for criminals, not him an honest man. Most people just don't know, they think "I have nothing to hide, guilty people don't talk to the police" famous last words...

Post: #15

Ignorantia juris non excusat.

Post: #16

(05-12-2015 11:18 PM)Americas Wrote:  Ignorantia juris non excusat.

Impertinens, Lex intra excrementorum.

The rule 'ignorance is no excuse' doesn't apply as a moral argument against reams of legislation that no one could ever hope to know even a small piece of. Especially since unlike the common law, which is grounded in intuitive 'natural law', legislation is a load of random bullshit. 'Structuring' is not a crime, regardless of what any democratic body declares.

Post: #17

(05-12-2015 11:38 PM)Phoenix Wrote:  Impertinens, Lex intra excrementorum.

The rule 'ignorance is no excuse' doesn't apply as a moral argument against reams of legislation that no one could ever hope to know even a small piece of. Especially since unlike the common law, which is grounded in intuitive 'natural law', legislation is a load of random bullshit. 'Structuring' is not a crime, regardless of what any democratic body declares.

Actually, it is a crime as outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act:

Quote:In the United States, the Bank Secrecy Act requires the filing of a currency transaction report (CTR) for transactions of more than $10,000 in currency (US or foreign). Financial institutions suspecting deposit structuring with intent to avoid the law are required to file a suspicious activity report.

Title 31 of the United States Code, section 5324, provides (in part):

No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section 5313 (a) or 5325 or any regulation prescribed under any such section, the reporting or record keeping requirements imposed by any order issued under section 5326, or the record keeping requirements imposed by any regulation prescribed under section 21 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act or section 123 of Public Law 91–508—

[...]

(3) structure or assist in structuring, or attempt to structure or assist in structuring, any transaction with one or more domestic financial institutions.

Section 5324 further provides that a violation of this provision may be punished by a fine or up to five years in prison, or both.[5]

Sums of money resulting from deposits of less than $10,000 may be seized after a warrant is issued based on a suspicious activity report. Legal proceedings, which may cost in the vicinity of $20,000 or more, may be required for an innocent party to retrieve his or her money. Reports in October 2014 by The New York Times of arbitrary seizures resulted in modification of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice to focus on investigations that "closely align" with IRS "mission and key priorities.” Banks are not permitted to warn or advise customers unless the customer asks, but sometimes bank tellers will informally warn customers.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuring

If you own a business, small or otherwise, it is your responsibility to understand and follow the necessary laws and by-laws. That's all there is to it. This guy didn't and now he is being punished for it. Whether you believe this law is bullshit or not, it's still the law.

Post: #18

If if it's a crime then why wasn't he charged with a crime?

Also, he didn't even break this code. Here's why:

No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section

He wasn't structuring for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements. He was simply told by the bank to do it that way.

Lastly, we commit three felonies a day according to a well respected lawyer and Alan Dershowitz, constitutional law professor.

Ignorantia juris non excusat cannot apply in modern America because there are simply too many laws.

Our system needs reform, bad, but simply stating Ignorantia juris non excusat is a faux intellectual defense of what has happened in this case.

This case is simply theft. The fact that he broke this section of the United States code is no excuse for honorable men to take all of his money.

Under your reasoning, the government would have carte blanche to lock up EVERY SINGLE citizen of this country because, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

Ignorantia juris non excusat is not some magical phrase that trumps all other moral reasoning when examining something that's happened involving the government and a victim of their persecution.

It was the law in many states that blacks could be held as slaves. That doesn't make the slaves who escaped lawless criminals who should have followed, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

There is something very aspergery to read about cases like this and respond with, "Ignorantia juris non excusat".

It is still the law. That doesn't change the fact that he was an honest, hardworking business owner. That doesn't change the fact that its impossible to know and understand the entire United States Code. And it also doesn't change the fact that the most effective way to get an immoral law changed is to make people aware of the injustice the law is causing.

People in small business provide services to others. They cook your food, clean your clothes, keep your air-conditioning on, sell your gas, they keep your pipes working, they are society.

Treating them like serfs beholden to the whims of the law enforcement class who doesn't have to understand the thousands of pages of US Code because they are part of the protected class of citizens who get to wield the thousands of pages of Code at their discretion, (see Glenn Reynolds of Tennessee who has covered extensively the IRS's selective enforcement of the tax law) and simply saying, "Ignorantia juris non excusat" as if that's an excuse for the rampant corruption and theft of honest peoples life savings and labor is so far below the minimum threshold for human decency I find it hard to believe your human and not some machine created by the United States government to enforce its precious "Code".

I actually think your're probably a decent guy, I was just on a roll there.

Post: #19

(05-13-2015 12:57 AM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  If if it's a crime then why wasn't he charged with a crime?

Well he was. The IRS has the discretion to give him a fine, sentence him jailtime, and/or confiscate his money. They chose the latter.

Quote:Also, he didn't even break this code. Here's why:

No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section

He wasn't structuring for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements. He was simply told by the bank to do it that way.

This is incorrect. The law was put in place to prevent people from avoiding filing a CTR, which is required for anything above $10,000. People started depositing a bunch of smaller payments into their bank accounts to avoid CTRs.

This individual wanted to avoid CTRs for whatever reason. Therefore, he purposely deposited less than 10,000 numerous times. This is the exact definition of structuring.

In fact, he wasn't even the one making the deposits:

Quote:McLellan himself doesn’t handle the deposits—that’s his niece’s responsibility—and a bank teller had previously advised her to make deposits of less than that amount.

Not only is he ignorant of the laws, he gets a god damn family member to do his financial work for him. Sending off your niece to deposit your money and ask the bank teller (who doesn't give a shit nor probably know the proper laws) about how it works is asinine.

Quote:Lastly, we commit three felonies a day according to a well respected lawyer and Alan Dershowitz, constitutional law professor.

Ignorantia juris non excusat cannot apply in modern America because there are simply too many laws.

Our system needs reform, bad, but simply stating Ignorantia juris non excusat is a faux intellectual defense of what has happened in this case.

This case is simply theft. The fact that he broke this section of the United States code is no excuse for honorable men to take all of his money.

Under your reasoning, the government would have carte blanche to lock up EVERY SINGLE citizen of this country because, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

Ignorantia juris non excusat is not some magical phrase that trumps all other moral reasoning when examining something that's happened involving the government and a victim of their persecution.

It was the law in many states that blacks could be held as slaves. That doesn't make the slaves who escaped lawless criminals who should have followed, "Ignorantia juris non excusat."

There is something very aspergery to read about cases like this and respond with, "Ignorantia juris non excusat".

People in small business provide services to others. They cook your food, clean your clothes, keep your air-conditioning on, sell your gas, they keep your pipes working, they are society.

Strawman. The point of ignorantia juris non excusat is not to know every law in every instance. It's that "oh well I had no idea I was doing something wrong therefore this is an injustice."

The reason he is in the mess right now is he is ignorant, lazy, and doesn't even take care of his own finances of his businesses.

The point of the matter is if you have a business you should know the laws that may affect you. For example, if you own a restaurant you should be familiar with the food safety by-laws. You should also be familiar with the tax and financial laws surrounding how you can file your taxes and deposit your money.

This isn't pre-school. No one is supposed to hold your hand here.

Post: #20

(05-13-2015 01:22 AM)Americas Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 12:57 AM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  If if it's a crime then why wasn't he charged with a crime?

Well he was. The IRS has the discretion to give him a fine, sentence him jailtime, and/or confiscate his money. They chose the latter.

Quote:Also, he didn't even break this code. Here's why:

No person shall, for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section

He wasn't structuring for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements. He was simply told by the bank to do it that way.

This is incorrect. The law was put in place to prevent people from avoiding filing a CTR, which is required for anything above $10,000. People started depositing a bunch of smaller payments into their bank accounts to avoid CTRs.

This individual wanted to avoid CTRs for whatever reason. Therefore, he purposely deposited less than 10,000 numerous times. This is the exact definition of structuring.

Where does it state he was trying to avoid CTR?

He owns a convenience store which mainly deals with cash. His insurance only allows up to 10k on premises. That means he typically needs to deposit his cash many times a week so he is below that threshold in case he gets robbed or something else happens.

Post: #21

Hang on, let me get this straight:

It's a crime in the USA to deposit regular business takings into a bank if they are usually below $10000??

This can't be right, surely???

Post: #22

(05-13-2015 01:28 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  Hang on, let me get this straight:

It's a crime in the USA to deposit regular business takings into a bank if they are usually below $10000??

This can't be right, surely???

Yep, it's what is happening. Even when business owners prove they are legit the IRS still won't give the entire amount back. This case is the norm where they try to give you a percentage back. Obviously, they know the guy was legit otherwise they wouldn't be offering anything back.

The whole innocent until proven guilty thang doesn't apply to the IRS.

Post: #23

(05-13-2015 01:28 AM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Where does it state he was trying to avoid CTR?

It can be deduced logically from the article:

Quote:The statements showed two deposits made within a 24-hour period totaling $11,400.

Quote:If cash deposits totaled more than $10,000, the bank had to file additional paperwork, the teller said.

So yes, he was intentionally avoiding filing a CTR. He/his niece didn't want to go through the process of filing the extra paperwork of the CTR. So instead of that, they deposited amounts (despite having in possession over $10,000) within 24 hours to avoid it. This is actually the incident, along with the consistency of their behaviour, that led to him being flagged and eventually the confiscation of his bank account.

Quote:He owns a convenience store which mainly deals with cash. His insurance only allows up to 10k on premises. That means he typically needs to deposit his cash many times a week so he is below that threshold in case he gets robbed or something else happens.

Irrelevant. He doesn't have to keep it on the premises but he can put it anywhere else he chooses.

Post: #24

(05-13-2015 01:33 AM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 01:28 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  Hang on, let me get this straight:

It's a crime in the USA to deposit regular business takings into a bank if they are usually below $10000??

This can't be right, surely???

Yep, it's what is happening. Even when business owners prove they are legit the IRS still won't give the entire amount back. This case is the norm where they try to give you a percentage back. Obviously, they know the guy was legit otherwise they wouldn't be offering anything back.

The whole innocent until proven guilty thang doesn't apply to the IRS.

What a racket. State sponsored theft.

Lovely.

Post: #25

(05-13-2015 01:39 AM)Americas Wrote:  

(05-13-2015 01:28 AM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Where does it state he was trying to avoid CTR?

It can be deduced logically from the article:

Quote:The statements showed two deposits made within a 24-hour period totaling $11,400.

Quote:If cash deposits totaled more than $10,000, the bank had to file additional paperwork, the teller said.

So yes, he was intentionally avoiding filing a CTR. He/his niece didn't want to go through the process of filing the extra paperwork of the CTR. So instead of that, they deposited amounts (despite having in possession over $10,000) within 24 hours to avoid it. This is actually the incident, along with the consistency of their behaviour, that led to him being flagged and eventually the confiscation of his bank account.

Quote:He owns a convenience store which mainly deals with cash. His insurance only allows up to 10k on premises. That means he typically needs to deposit his cash many times a week so he is below that threshold in case he gets robbed or something else happens.

Irrelevant. He doesn't have to keep it on the premises but he can put it anywhere else he chooses.

Your deduction skills need work.

When I took time off from college, I was managing a store like his. I was robbed several times. One of the reason I got my ass back to uni.

You don't keep around a large amount of money. You surely don't stuff money in your mattress so you accrue 10k to make your business look legit.

Your reasoning is he needs to sit on his money to make sure he has 10k in order to deposit it into the bank. Strange logic you have there.