4 ms·
> Well, except for the important detail that KYC requirements don't preclude the need for warrants... Banks and law enforcement frequently share data without c
by throwup 4y ago
> Well, except for the important detail that KYC requirements don't preclude the need for warrants...
Banks and law enforcement frequently share data without caring about warrants. One example: if you send a $10K wire (in the US), your bank may voluntarily submit a Suspicious Activity Report. And since they may be liable if they choose not to report, but are not liable if they do report, guess which option they typically choose?
- niom 4y agoWarrants are not a high a hurdle in practice when they are needed. The US has the third-party doctrine, so all information you've communicated to someone does not need a warrant unless otherwise protected. In the US you need to establish real probable cause (otherwise the fruit may be poisoned), but PC is a low legal standard. Non-US jurisdictions don't use the fruit of the poisoned tree doctrine and so the actual legal standard is more like "arguing probable cause for the warrant shouldn't look like an outright perversion of justice". The world's best limbo performer can't dance under that bar.
- notch656a 4y agoHell with KYC a government imposed search of your papers is dictated by law without even a warrant/PC/RAS. Where I live, you can legally carry a concealed gun in a bank without ID but you can't open a damn account and put $20 even with a US passport (without some proof of address).