3 ms·

That part of the story makes the least sense. So casino gets $100M. Then what? If the casino isn't involved in the scheme, how can a thief take that $100M, usi

• jonknee 11y ago
  Convert money to chips, cycle chips around, convert chips to cash. It's a really common money laundering technique, though not usually at this scale.
  • imaginenore 11y ago
    So casino buys chips from itself, gambles with itself, then exchanges the chips to cash where exactly? That makes no sense.
    • SeanBoocock 11y ago
      The implication in the article is that the casinos weren't directly involved in the money laundering. Those who were perpetrating it brought the money into the casinos (ie bought chips with "dirty" money), engaged in otherwise legitimate looking behavior at the casinos, and then cashed out the chips for cash. Apparently, the loop on this was tight enough not to fool investigators.
      • imaginenore 11y ago
        No, the article says the money was wired to the casinos.
    • jonknee 11y ago
      The point of money laundering is to conceal the path of funds. Changing your money into chips and then your chips into money (at different times) accomplishes this. Casinos are remarkably light on the documentation side compared to financial institutions. When you change money into chips you don't get a receipt or have to sign anything, you just get chips. Similarly, you don't need to do anything special to switch chips back into cash. If you're trying to make the funds look really legitimate you can even pay tax on your gambling "winnings".