16 ms·
'By limiting large cash payments, the EU will make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money. ' Bizarre how the EU is penalizing everyone in order to 'mak
by olivermarks 4y ago
'By limiting large cash payments, the EU will make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money. '
Bizarre how the EU is penalizing everyone in order to 'make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money'.
People pay taxes in order to have their bureaucrats serve them by creating a safe financial and social environment, not to have them assume everyone is a criminal/terrorist and greatly impede access to their assets based on that logic.
The EU (formerly the 'common market') has become an authoritarian, autocratic monster.
- nix23 4y ago>Bizarre how the EU is penalizing everyone in order to 'make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money'. Just imagine one criminal say's to another: Sorry i cant take those 15k euros, it's illegal didn't you know that???
- Quarrelsome 4y agothat isn't laundering money. Laundering money is when you take black market money and try to turn it into white market money. The conversation you hold up as a straw man to mock this legislation is taking black market money and transitioning it into: black market money.
- nix23 4y agoSo another criminal say to me sorry i don't take your black-market money it's illegal, or the money-washing pizzeria?
- Quarrelsome 4y agoif a criminal gives another criminal money then the money is still black. You need to launder it to make it white. Now its harder to launder large quantities because you have to turn it into even smaller chunks.
- nix23 4y ago>You need to launder it to make it white. Yes i buy drugs and sell them...i don't think the mafia has anything against that money, they will then just give it to the Vatican bank to wash it. If you really don't understand that this i just a excuse....
- Quarrelsome 4y agoVatican City is not in the EU. I seriously don't understand what point you're attempting to make here. This legislation will make it harder for people to simply launder money. Yes, you are right that it won't stop people from complicatedly laundering money but that's not the point of the legislation.
- nix23 4y ago>Vatican City is not in the EU. Too bad eh? But schengen..and thinking about it switzerland too, hey criminals! You are once again welcomed to give us (switzerland) the money, because you cant use it somewhere else....what a excellent idea. >I seriously don't understand what point you're attempting to make here. I don't understand why try to defend a law that is as effective as german power production.
- Quarrelsome 4y ago> Too bad eh? So you accept that your tangent is not relevant? I feel like you're not actually interested in this specific subject but rather just have an anti-EU axe to grind. That's a tiresome way to be and I would suggest you try to hold in your urges and stay on subject. There's plenty of time and space to have these discussions but railroading any discussion about the EU into angry Farage-esqe diatribe is the domain of demagogues.
- xxs 4y agoThe "Vatican" bank would still need to comply with all the AML laws to take the cash. Carrying the cash (as notes) to Vatican alone would still be an issue. Indeed, a proper straw man argument.
- 1337biz 4y agoThe hn responses are stunning. It is insane that a pro privacy crowd supports the removal of freedoms, such as cash payments. It is amazing how many hn users appreciate their bank and government to keep track of their purchases and hope more people will become like them - just because they can't imagine buying anything worth 10k. When even HN is in full swing anti cash - and with current inflation rates 10k probably won't even purchase a propper bike in the near future - we will enter dark times for any privacy loving individual.
- pclmulqdq 4y agoThe European crowd on HN in general is very much in favor of big government. I assume GDPR is very popular here despite making software development a huge pain, for example. Americans on HN (and ironically a lot of Germans on here) seem to be much more libertarian in their sensibility.
- rahen 4y agoNot all Europeans thank goodness. Switzerland and Germany are usually careful with big government. Even France was the birthplace of libertarianism and has a healthy ancap scene. I only wish they weren't so quiet, because so many people give up their power to the state here.
- thiht 4y agoYou guys are unbelievable. Of course GDPR makes some things harder. It’s the whole point. GDPR is probably one of the biggest pro-freedom laws of the last years. Not big corp freedom for sure, but people freedom, and that’s GOOD. But Americans with their skewed vision of freedom just can’t see it I guess. Honestly if GDPR pisses off Americans, it probably means it hit on the nail.
- pclmulqdq 4y agoWe just define freedom differently than you do. I honestly think your version is weird and totalitarian, exactly the way you think mine is. Here's mine: "Freedom" is what you have in the absence of coercion. The freest state of being is being the last person alive on Earth. Freedom gives you nothing, because if freedom gave you something then someone else would have been coerced into giving it to you. Freedom also gives you the chance to do everything you need to do to survive and thrive. In a society, we necessarily give up some freedom because my freedom to have stuff is threatened by your freedom to take it when I'm not looking (you would not have had that freedom in isolation). In more recent times, we have started to give up freedom in exchange for security, too, and everyone thinks that is worthwhile, although we disagree on how far you should go. The US military budget and all the government healthcare programs in the world are this kind of trade. That's what GDPR is: it's a trade of freedom for the security of European sovereignty and European business (notice how I didn't mention privacy or user security). It's not about the "little guy" vs the "big corporations," the big corporations have plenty of money and lawyers they can use to comply. The people that all of these laws hit are the startups and small companies. This philosophy is why there are no European unicorns. Europe as a whole has given up the freedom to "start up" without compliance with a huge number of rules and regulations (or money to pay bribes). Uniquely, GDPR goes a step further and tries to impose this burden on everyone in the world, not just people and companies that have signed up for the European project. In the European worldview, there seem to be a lot of "rights" exemplified by the UN human rights charter. These include things that nobody had 25 years ago, like "the right to high-speed internet." These "rights" and "freedoms" really aren't freedom: someone has to pay to provide them at the end of the day. For those of us across the pond, these are weird trades: you voluntarily pay incredibly high tax rates and huge administrative burdens for these supposed "rights," some of which look like luxuries to us, and feel as though they don't make you any less free.
- mrfumier 4y agoNobody as a normal person pays 10k€ in cash. Not even 1000 €.
- WesolyKubeczek 4y agoJust paid a multiple of €1000 to a contractor for building me a shed. So?
- martin8412 4y agoYea.. I'm sure he'll remember to report that money to the tax authorities.
- WesolyKubeczek 4y agoThankfully, it’s his problem, not mine.
- namaria 4y ago"Government officials claim more power, point to sinister danger to justify. More at 11"
- pier25 4y agoEveryone? People that legitimately need to make cash payments for more than 10k represent probably less than 1% of the population. And I'd be surprised even most people that can do it would do it.
- stev-0 4y agoI don’t see how limiting cash payments is “penalizing” anyone. I have never payed more than say $3k in cash. It just doesn’t make sense to do so. Privacy shouldn’t exist for financial transactions. It makes it easier to launder money or hide wealth. There is no other use for “dark” financial transactions. There is no tyranny in making finances of everyone transparent. It doesn’t force anyone to make different choices about WHAT to do with their money. It makes what people pay for auditable.
- twohaibei 4y ago> I have never payed more than say $3k in cash. It just doesn’t make sense to do so. Let me quote someone smart on privacy topic: > Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say. Cash = privacy. I dont want to get stripped from privacy by anyone for any reason.
- stev-0 4y agoI don’t say I have nothing to hide. I’m saying I’ve got no financial transactions above 10k to hide… You are not allowed to hide such transactions by law in the country where I am from.
- hakfoo 4y agoOne real-world scenario is the numismatics and bullion world. Especially on bullion items, there's very narrow margins, and I'd expect a high transaction-reversal risk (i. e. demanding refunds or charging back if the price of gold dropped after purchase). In practice, this means that many dealers will charge a higher price for using non-cash payment systems. At least in the US, some dealers will even be explicitly cash-only. Six one-ounce gold coins would get you over USD/EUR 10,000, and isn't that exotic of a purchase in that context. A documented payment system might be viable for that scenario, if it was completely zero-cost to merchants and consumers, although some dealers might still not want the reversal risks. However, conjuring that would require major state intervention.
- helloworld11 4y ago
- N19PEDL2 4y ago> ... the EU is penalizing everyone ... I'd rather say: the EU is penalizing a very few people who usually pay €10k cash.
- MisterBastahrd 4y agoAnd here I am, a non-murderer, wondering why there's a law restricting my right to murder people.
- Teandw 4y agoIn what circumstances have you or someone you known ever needed to pay for something over €10k in cash?
- ErikCorry 4y agoNever. Americans should consider having a working bank sector. My biggest cash purchase ever was a monitor 20 years ago for less than 10% of this limit. I don't even have cash in my wallet any more, and I don't know anyone who has.
- mozman 4y agoI always ask for tax to be included when paying for cash.
- from 4y agoWhy is your default to disallow it? I understand there is the interest of society and all in preventing crime but a reporting requirement like in the US would do the exact same thing and produce useful intelligence instead of just making all large cash transactions go underground.
- csomar 4y agoWhy is this even a question? Are we really discussing whether people are allowed to trade tokens with physical items? Did the bar really go that low.
- voidfunc 4y agoWhy shouldn't it be a question? Why do we allow it in the first place?
- justahuman74 4y agoPrivate party vehicle sales, I've done this a few times.
- zahllos 4y agoI know someone in Switzerland who bought a car in cash, 12x 1k chf notes. If you're paying for a big-ish shop, e.g. over 100chf, the major supermarkets won't blink if you proffer a 1k note because that's how the older generation get their pension. I've personally paid for about 20chf worth of stuff with a 200 note.
- pelorat 4y ago> Bizarre how the EU is penalizing everyone in order to 'make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money'. It doesn't affect anyone. No one in Europe uses cash for anything more expensive than maybe 200 euros. Of course in some countries like Sweden and the Netherlands no one uses cash any more at all, and almost all ATM machines have been removed. I believe cash-only places are now outlawed. The reason for this is because of the small stores run by immigrants that does you-never-know-what with the money you give them. > People pay taxes in order to have their bureaucrats serve them by creating a safe financial and social environment Safe in this case means eliminating those shady cash-only stores. Here in Europe the cash-only stores (nowadays outlawed) were mostly run by immigrants. We're talking pizzerias, barber shops, fast food trucks, corner cafes. Places where a lot of cash is laundered. God riddance to those places.
- Aerroon 4y agoAnd if the banks decide that they don't want to serve someone like you? Then what? Or if the banks all decide to introduce very high fees for transactions?
- bathory 4y agoThat too, isn't allowed by European law. :-)
- perlgeek 4y ago> It doesn't affect anyone. No one in Europe uses cash for anything more expensive than maybe 200 euros. Sold a used car just last year, got 2700€ in cash for it. Much easier than doing a bank transfer (which takes 1 day to arrive, if you're unlucky, and can be rolled back), or a paypal transfer (which can be undone) or anything else between to individuals. For b2c or b2b I agree, nobody pays that much in cash, but for individuals transacting with one another, it still seems the easiest option.
- spyder 4y agoDomestic bank transfers in many EU countries are already "instant" and EU wants to make it mandatory for every member without extra fees: https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/10/26/eu-pushes-for-banks-to-offer-instant-payments-in-euros-at-no-extra-cost https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/10/26/eu-pushes-for-banks...
- Teandw 4y ago"Bizarre how the EU is penalizing everyone in order to 'make it harder for criminals to launder dirty money'." This likely affects a number of people that is so small, that it's irrelevant. Not sure it makes sense to say that such a law that effects a tiny number of individuals is penalizing everyone.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- biztos 4y agoIn some parts of the EU, it’s still pretty common to do the down payment of a private real estate transaction in cash, and that can easily exceed €10K. I’ve done it myself and I’m not even a local. If it’s illegal then it’s just going to go off the books, at a small cost to taxes and accuracy of records, for some people; but for others it will force them to end this traditional practice, and I can imagine that might cause hardship. But yeah, Russians under the bed, sure.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- SergeAx 4y ago> This likely affects a number of people that is so small, that it's irrelevant We as society are spending literally billions to make our cities and infrastructure accessible for people with disabilities. Their number also very small, but we decided it is well relevant.
- Teandw 4y agoThe percentage of people with mobility disabilities is extremely high. With medical breakthroughs increasing the age of life too, this is only likely to increase with time
- 4y ago
- ssss11 4y agoThis approach of treating everyone like criminals is pervasive in current times. Look at all the cameras on the streets. The logging of all internet data. The CSAM crap on iPhones. Even security scanners in retail which have been around at least 20 years. It’s the easy way out imo, instead of employing expensive labour to actually catch criminals, and somehow society has been convinced that it’s ok. I do think it’s a gradient and not black and white. Retail security scanners - ok fine, cameras everywhere - why?
- B8MGHCBekDuRi 4y ago> This approach of treating everyone like criminals is pervasive in current times if you usually keep 10k of cash in your pocket, you're probably someone who's not scared by criminals. And I only know two types of people with those characteristics: corrupted cops and other criminals. EDIT: it is actually 3 kinds, the third one being taxi drivers, which in my country are mostly low-level criminals.
- ashwagary 4y agoRemember about 10 years ago when Cyprus started confiscating money held in private bank accounts to settle government debts and the people holding cash kept their money because it was physically in their possession and harder to confiscate? Remember earlier this year when people in Lebanon had to hold bank managers at gun point to try and withdraw money from their own accounts so they could buy basic goods as the economy collapsed? The "CaSh hAZ nO PuRpOSe eXCePt fOR cRImE" crowd in this comment section have massive blind spots due to a general ignorance of monetary history. I'm not surprised politicians are laughing while taking advantage of it.
- landemva 4y agoThe politicians are definitely laughing at the workers. Panama Papers showed part of the politician's stash of corrupt funds. https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/pandora-papers-reveal-offshore-holdings-of-ukrainian-president-and-his-inner-circle https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/pandora-papers-r... "Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky rode to power on pledges to clean up the Eastern European country, but the Pandora Papers reveal he and his close circle were the beneficiaries of a network of offshore companies, including some that owned expensive London property."
- asah 4y agoIs this indexed to inflation? If not, then it's even worse.
- from 4y agoThese laws never are on purpose. The $10000 reporting threshold in America was set in 1970 and would be almost $80000 today.
- darth_avocado 4y agoAhh yes the good ol “harder to launder dirty money argument. But, > money laundering doesn’t work like that. You don’t have large cash payments, you have a ton of smaller cash payments. > big banks launder money, have better oversight there instead of restricting cash
- Teandw 4y agoMoney laundering, like drugs, starts in larger amounts and is broken down further down the chain it goes. Those $5 and $10 bills getting laundered started from a $50K transaction getting laundered.
- darth_avocado 4y agoRight but you don’t make a large “payment”. You break down the large sun into a smaller one outside the system. When it enters the legal system, the amount is smaller. Unless of course, you use banks.
- tormeh 4y agoNot always. A popular step is to buy an expensive car in Germany using cash, then bring it to another country. Germany is central to many money laundering schemes because of the prevalence of cash payments there.