5 ms·

I don’t think that’s right exactly. My understanding is that any debt can be settled by legal tender. A court does not have to get involved.

wcoenen 6y ago
This is only a consequence of what happens in court. Suppose someone owns you a certain amount of gold according to an agreement, but it turns out they can't actually deliver the gold. Then there's no point in refusing a settlement in legal tender and taking that person to court, because the court will then value the debt in legal tender and force you to accept the legal tender anyway.
- anonunivgrad 6y ago
  Sorry to be pedantic, but I don’t think that’s right. 31 U.S.C. 5103 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103) says “United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.” It’s not legal tender for just court judgments, but all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues.
  - wcoenen 6y ago
    I don't see how the paragraph you quote is contradicting what I said. It is saying that the US dollar can be used as "legal tender" for certain things, but it doesn't define what it means precisely for something to be "legal tender". And that precise meaning was the point I was arguing. Reference for the definition of legal tender by the UK royal mint: https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/legal-tender-guidelines/ https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/le...?
    - anonunivgrad 6y ago
      https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/currency/pages/legal-tender.aspx https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/currency/pages... “This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor.”
      - wcoenen 6y ago
        Note note how the word "legal" comes back again there. It doesn't mean "legal" as opposed to illegal. It means "for the purpose of settling things within the legal system". Anyway, that treasury.gov link is actually a good reference for the original point I was trying to make about the introduction section of the paper: it explains that companies are not obliged to accept legal tender for normal payments.
        anonunivgrad 6y ago
        Normal payments are not debt. If you want to buy a tv at a store, they can decline cash as a form of payment. You don’t owe them. The tv in your cart at the checkout aisle is still theirs. There is no debt. But if you bought that same tv on an installment plan, they would have to accept payments in cash. The first one does not involve debt, the second does. That’s the difference.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - Aeronwen 6y ago
    And when I refuse your truckload of pennies?
    - anonunivgrad 6y ago
      (I’m not your lawyer and this is not legal advice.) Many countries have laws specifying that certain denominations are legal tender only up to a certain total amount. The US does not, but you can run into other legal trouble. Consider the contractual obligation of good faith, for example. You might potentially be liable for the additional expense incurred in accepting a truckload of pennies.
      - waste_monk 6y ago
        For example, Australia [1]: " A payment of coins is a legal tender throughout Australia if it is made in Australian coins, but this is subject to some restrictions about how much can be paid in coin. According to the Currency Act 1965 (section 16) coins are legal tender for payment of amounts which are limited as follows: * not exceeding 20c if 1c and/or 2c coins are offered (these coins have been withdrawn from circulation, but are still legal tender); * not exceeding $5 if any combination of 5c, 10c, 20c and 50c coins are offered; and * not exceeding 10 times the face value of the coin if $1 or $2 coins are offered. " [1] https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/legal/legal-tender/ https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/legal/legal-tender/

wcoenen 6y ago

This is only a consequence of what happens in court. Suppose someone owns you a certain amount of gold according to an agreement, but it turns out they can't actually deliver the gold. Then there's no point in refusing a settlement in legal tender and taking that person to court, because the court will then value the debt in legal tender and force you to accept the legal tender anyway.

anonunivgrad 6y ago
Sorry to be pedantic, but I don’t think that’s right. 31 U.S.C. 5103 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103) says “United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.” It’s not legal tender for just court judgments, but all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues.
- wcoenen 6y ago
  I don't see how the paragraph you quote is contradicting what I said. It is saying that the US dollar can be used as "legal tender" for certain things, but it doesn't define what it means precisely for something to be "legal tender". And that precise meaning was the point I was arguing. Reference for the definition of legal tender by the UK royal mint: https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/legal-tender-guidelines/ https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/le...?
  - anonunivgrad 6y ago
    https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/currency/pages/legal-tender.aspx https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/currency/pages... “This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor.”
    - wcoenen 6y ago
      Note note how the word "legal" comes back again there. It doesn't mean "legal" as opposed to illegal. It means "for the purpose of settling things within the legal system". Anyway, that treasury.gov link is actually a good reference for the original point I was trying to make about the introduction section of the paper: it explains that companies are not obliged to accept legal tender for normal payments.
      - anonunivgrad 6y ago
        Normal payments are not debt. If you want to buy a tv at a store, they can decline cash as a form of payment. You don’t owe them. The tv in your cart at the checkout aisle is still theirs. There is no debt. But if you bought that same tv on an installment plan, they would have to accept payments in cash. The first one does not involve debt, the second does. That’s the difference.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- Aeronwen 6y ago
  And when I refuse your truckload of pennies?
  - anonunivgrad 6y ago
    (I’m not your lawyer and this is not legal advice.) Many countries have laws specifying that certain denominations are legal tender only up to a certain total amount. The US does not, but you can run into other legal trouble. Consider the contractual obligation of good faith, for example. You might potentially be liable for the additional expense incurred in accepting a truckload of pennies.
    - waste_monk 6y ago
      For example, Australia [1]: " A payment of coins is a legal tender throughout Australia if it is made in Australian coins, but this is subject to some restrictions about how much can be paid in coin. According to the Currency Act 1965 (section 16) coins are legal tender for payment of amounts which are limited as follows: * not exceeding 20c if 1c and/or 2c coins are offered (these coins have been withdrawn from circulation, but are still legal tender); * not exceeding $5 if any combination of 5c, 10c, 20c and 50c coins are offered; and * not exceeding 10 times the face value of the coin if $1 or $2 coins are offered. " [1] https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/legal/legal-tender/ https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/legal/legal-tender/