4 ms·

I really hope this is a joke lol. The amount of paperwork required today is far in excess of anything required pre-GFC. Basically any wealth acquired prior to t

I really hope this is a joke lol. The amount of paperwork required today is far in excess of anything required pre-GFC. Basically any wealth acquired prior to then is up for confiscation, and this happens all the time. But again, nobody cares, because injustices delivered upon the rich are fine. Imagine you inherited a property from your parents, how do you imagine you’d be able to prove the provenance of that asset? Or the cash used to buy it/pay the mortgage on it? You can’t.

ls612 3y ago
>Imagine you inherited a property from your parents, how do you imagine you’d be able to prove the provenance of that asset? Or the cash used to buy it/pay the mortgage on it? You can’t. Do you have an example of what you mean by this? Like they will say "well you don't have your old paper pay stubs from the 1990s when you were paying the mortgage on your house so we will confiscate your house, go die alone in the gutter"? Because I find that hard to believe. Most people with wealth have an obvious reason for that wealth which is documented in the formal bureaucratic system.
- AmericanChopper 3y ago
  > well you don't have your old paper pay stubs from the 1990s when you were paying the mortgage on your house so we will confiscate your house Yes this is basically how it works. The only contrived thing about my example is that we’re talking about one house a person inherited, rather than millions of dollars in assets. Here’s a well documented example of this happening in real life https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-09-30/judge-backs-fbi-beverly-hills-safe-deposit-box-raid https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-09-30/judge-ba... > A federal judge ruled Friday that the FBI’s seizure of tens of millions of dollars in cash and valuables from 700 safe-deposit boxes in Beverly Hills did not violate anyone’s constitutional rights. > The decision by U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner endorsed law-enforcement tactics that tested the limits of how aggressive federal agents can be in seizing money and property in the absence of any evidence that the owner committed a crime. > The ruling did not address some of the most controversial aspects of the raid, such as the FBI’s attempt to confiscate assets from box holders on the presumption they were criminals, even in cases where agents had no evidence to validate their suspicions. Of course, nobody cares, because those people are rich, so they probably didn’t deserve that money anyway…
  - vkou 3y ago
    I assure you, rich people care very deeply about having their money taken away, and are, as a class, incredibly litigious, and are often politically connected. I am not very impressed by implications that of the truly downtrodden and powerless people in the United States, the 'rich' are anywhere near the front of that line.
  - k1t 3y ago
    To be fair: “The government seized the nests of safety deposit boxes because there was overwhelming evidence that [the deposit box storage location] was a criminal business that conspired with its criminal clients to distribute drugs, launder money, and structure transactions to avoid currency reporting requirements, among other offenses,” they said in papers filed in Los Angeles federal court. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-02/fbi-beverly-hills-vault-search-seizure https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-02/fbi-beve... You can request your items back here: https://forms.fbi.gov/u-s-private-vaults-claim-form https://forms.fbi.gov/u-s-private-vaults-claim-form
    - AmericanChopper 3y ago
      Personally I don’t think there is any “to be fair” interpretation of the government making a presumption of guilt and placing the burden onto members of the public to prove their own innocence.
eschneider 3y ago
If you inherited it (at least in the US) there will be probate records. And property transfer records. There's LOTS of documentation for that sort of thing.
- AmericanChopper 3y ago
  Records that you inherited it are not enough. Where are the records that your parents acquired it properly? Where are the records that prove the money they used to acquire the house were acquired properly? This is the trouble with a presumption of guilt, proving these things are basically impossible.
  - eschneider 3y ago
    No. Probate records that you inherited it are enough to get property transferred to your name and the title recorded as such. If you want to be covered just in case your parents somehow stole the land and falsified their ownership, title insurance is a thing. None of this is impossible. None of this is unknowable. This all happens everyday.
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      The problem (this time) isn't that they try to deny your title to the property, it's that you sell the property and they freeze your account with the money in it and now the burden is on you to prove that your parents acquired it lawfully, which you have no way to do because it happened many years ago and your parents have passed away.
      - eschneider 3y ago
        No. If you have title, it's presumed that the land has been lawfully transferred. If someone/.gov wants to claim otherwise, they need to prove that. The entire mortgage market is predicated on that. Can someone cite an instance where someone who "inherited property had to prove their parents acquired it legally because their funds were frozen after a sale" because I'd be very interested in seeing that. I'd be a LOT more willing to believe that a sale fell through because the BUYERS couldn't verify the parent's title, but that's not what's described here. Do buyers here not do a title exam?

ls612 3y ago

>Imagine you inherited a property from your parents, how do you imagine you’d be able to prove the provenance of that asset? Or the cash used to buy it/pay the mortgage on it? You can’t. Do you have an example of what you mean by this? Like they will say "well you don't have your old paper pay stubs from the 1990s when you were paying the mortgage on your house so we will confiscate your house, go die alone in the gutter"? Because I find that hard to believe. Most people with wealth have an obvious reason for that wealth which is documented in the formal bureaucratic system.

AmericanChopper 3y ago
> well you don't have your old paper pay stubs from the 1990s when you were paying the mortgage on your house so we will confiscate your house Yes this is basically how it works. The only contrived thing about my example is that we’re talking about one house a person inherited, rather than millions of dollars in assets. Here’s a well documented example of this happening in real life https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-09-30/judge-backs-fbi-beverly-hills-safe-deposit-box-raid https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-09-30/judge-ba... > A federal judge ruled Friday that the FBI’s seizure of tens of millions of dollars in cash and valuables from 700 safe-deposit boxes in Beverly Hills did not violate anyone’s constitutional rights. > The decision by U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner endorsed law-enforcement tactics that tested the limits of how aggressive federal agents can be in seizing money and property in the absence of any evidence that the owner committed a crime. > The ruling did not address some of the most controversial aspects of the raid, such as the FBI’s attempt to confiscate assets from box holders on the presumption they were criminals, even in cases where agents had no evidence to validate their suspicions. Of course, nobody cares, because those people are rich, so they probably didn’t deserve that money anyway…
- vkou 3y ago
  I assure you, rich people care very deeply about having their money taken away, and are, as a class, incredibly litigious, and are often politically connected. I am not very impressed by implications that of the truly downtrodden and powerless people in the United States, the 'rich' are anywhere near the front of that line.
- k1t 3y ago
  To be fair: “The government seized the nests of safety deposit boxes because there was overwhelming evidence that [the deposit box storage location] was a criminal business that conspired with its criminal clients to distribute drugs, launder money, and structure transactions to avoid currency reporting requirements, among other offenses,” they said in papers filed in Los Angeles federal court. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-02/fbi-beverly-hills-vault-search-seizure https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-02/fbi-beve... You can request your items back here: https://forms.fbi.gov/u-s-private-vaults-claim-form https://forms.fbi.gov/u-s-private-vaults-claim-form
  - AmericanChopper 3y ago
    Personally I don’t think there is any “to be fair” interpretation of the government making a presumption of guilt and placing the burden onto members of the public to prove their own innocence.

eschneider 3y ago

If you inherited it (at least in the US) there will be probate records. And property transfer records. There's LOTS of documentation for that sort of thing.

AmericanChopper 3y ago
Records that you inherited it are not enough. Where are the records that your parents acquired it properly? Where are the records that prove the money they used to acquire the house were acquired properly? This is the trouble with a presumption of guilt, proving these things are basically impossible.
- eschneider 3y ago
  No. Probate records that you inherited it are enough to get property transferred to your name and the title recorded as such. If you want to be covered just in case your parents somehow stole the land and falsified their ownership, title insurance is a thing. None of this is impossible. None of this is unknowable. This all happens everyday.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    The problem (this time) isn't that they try to deny your title to the property, it's that you sell the property and they freeze your account with the money in it and now the burden is on you to prove that your parents acquired it lawfully, which you have no way to do because it happened many years ago and your parents have passed away.
    - eschneider 3y ago
      No. If you have title, it's presumed that the land has been lawfully transferred. If someone/.gov wants to claim otherwise, they need to prove that. The entire mortgage market is predicated on that. Can someone cite an instance where someone who "inherited property had to prove their parents acquired it legally because their funds were frozen after a sale" because I'd be very interested in seeing that. I'd be a LOT more willing to believe that a sale fell through because the BUYERS couldn't verify the parent's title, but that's not what's described here. Do buyers here not do a title exam?