4 ms·

Money crimes should be prosecuted and solved at their start points and endpoints, not within the financial system. Failure to adhere to this standard is why we

Money crimes should be prosecuted and solved at their start points and endpoints, not within the financial system. Failure to adhere to this standard is why we no longer really control the money in our bank accounts anymore. Want to send a wire to your friend living in the middle east with a sketchy name? Might get flagged. Want to purchase something out of the ordinary for you online? Your debit card will probably block it at least at first. Law enforcement has become lazy and we have as well. Instead of solving actual crimes, we just use ML algorithms to find sketchy-looking transactions and then block them and investigate later maybe. This has significantly reduced our privacy and freedom at a much higher cost than the purported gains. This is the whole motivation behind the original push into crypto in the early 00s. We need something not beholding to any government that is as good as cash but digital, and the US gov sanctioning a mixer is just proof of this dire need.

sofixa 4y ago
> Money crimes should be prosecuted and solved at their start points and endpoints, not within the financial system. Failure to adhere to this standard is why we no longer really control the money in our bank accounts anymore That's easier said than done. It's drastically easier to catch crime by it's results (money) than in the act. Famously that's how Capone was caught. And what would be the advantage of that, to anyone? I doubt that erroneously flagged transactions are a real problem. Do you have any numbers on the matter?
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  And this is where it gets fun. Banks will absolutely not tell the customer that their transaction is flagged for one reason or another partly so that they do not lose their 'safe harbor' status under BSA. Any numbers you will see might be from the government, but FinCEN is relatively tight lipped about those for a variety of reasons. The discussion is taking place now, because it has become fairly onerous on an average person, who sends anything to MOHAMMED HASSAN. Instead of data, I can only offer anecdata. Long long time ( or not long ago depending on your perception of time ), we had a person, whose transaction matched some OFAC info, which resulted in bank holding the transaction. I cannot go into details beyond saying that eventually even OFAC representative seemed to admit to that it does not seem to apply to him. To the best of my knowledge, a year after that person still did not get his funds. It may have not happened to you, but I do not think it is as uncommon as you think. Parent is right. We are doing this backwards.
  - landemva 4y ago
    > not tell the customer that their transaction is flagged The teller is not allowed to disclose this to customer. > Any numbers you will see might be from the government In my experience, the board of directors of the bank get a monthly roll-up of the numbers.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      Yeah, but those numbers are not reported beyond those parties and for a good reason. That is why I listed FinCEN as a source, because they typically put some data out.. just nothing that could be useful for this discussion.
      - landemva 4y ago
        I suspect a federal open records request could get a count by month. Would need to craft request so it is clearly not going to ask for detailed info. And be ready to sue if they deny the request.

sofixa 4y ago

> Money crimes should be prosecuted and solved at their start points and endpoints, not within the financial system. Failure to adhere to this standard is why we no longer really control the money in our bank accounts anymore That's easier said than done. It's drastically easier to catch crime by it's results (money) than in the act. Famously that's how Capone was caught. And what would be the advantage of that, to anyone? I doubt that erroneously flagged transactions are a real problem. Do you have any numbers on the matter?

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
And this is where it gets fun. Banks will absolutely not tell the customer that their transaction is flagged for one reason or another partly so that they do not lose their 'safe harbor' status under BSA. Any numbers you will see might be from the government, but FinCEN is relatively tight lipped about those for a variety of reasons. The discussion is taking place now, because it has become fairly onerous on an average person, who sends anything to MOHAMMED HASSAN. Instead of data, I can only offer anecdata. Long long time ( or not long ago depending on your perception of time ), we had a person, whose transaction matched some OFAC info, which resulted in bank holding the transaction. I cannot go into details beyond saying that eventually even OFAC representative seemed to admit to that it does not seem to apply to him. To the best of my knowledge, a year after that person still did not get his funds. It may have not happened to you, but I do not think it is as uncommon as you think. Parent is right. We are doing this backwards.
- landemva 4y ago
  > not tell the customer that their transaction is flagged The teller is not allowed to disclose this to customer. > Any numbers you will see might be from the government In my experience, the board of directors of the bank get a monthly roll-up of the numbers.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    Yeah, but those numbers are not reported beyond those parties and for a good reason. That is why I listed FinCEN as a source, because they typically put some data out.. just nothing that could be useful for this discussion.
    - landemva 4y ago
      I suspect a federal open records request could get a count by month. Would need to craft request so it is clearly not going to ask for detailed info. And be ready to sue if they deny the request.