7 ms·

>You have a pretty good chance of making the case that you are just doing your business Did you read the article? Specifically the story of the business that m

>You have a pretty good chance of making the case that you are just doing your business Did you read the article? Specifically the story of the business that made <10k deposits because they had theft protection of max 10,000 ? By the time you "make a case" you're already out lawyer fees and risk your business being closed. Please read the article (again). IRS does not need to show that you were trying to evade reporting requirements to seize the money. They don't even need to file a case!

maxerickson 12y ago
There's millions of small businesses, there must be hundreds of thousands making frequent medium sized cash transactions and they made 600 seizures. A statistic like that doesn't make things any more just for the 600, but it serves as some sort of guide for how much a cash business should worry about it.
- emotionalcode 12y ago
  My problem isn't with the statistics. My problem is that the law depends on fuzzy bits of information that are easy to rhetorically manipulate in order to direct a case towards (complete and total financial asset seizure, immediately) or (not). It's not logical. The seizure is not reliant on facts. It is not reliant on evidence. This demonstrates an imbalance between ability to determine truth, and ability for the powers that be to act. It is dependent purely on abstract pattern. Other commenters have pointed out that that model can be used to accurately represent the behavior of innocents. I'd much rather see data on the effectiveness of this law. Does it actually track suspicious activity? Does it work, and is the value of that work enough to justify the grief it creates to the few you refer to that the law affects?
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    I think I'm just separating concerns more than most here. I guess because I'm not that outraged by society doing something unjust (because look around). Does it sound like the law is being used unfairly? Yeah. Does it sound like the law as written is easy to use unfairly? Maybe, probably yes. Would I oppose changes to the law intended to make it harder to abuse? No. Do I think it is a major practical concern for a typical small business or individual? No. I don't think it is inconsistent or difficult to hold all those ideas at once.

maxerickson 12y ago

There's millions of small businesses, there must be hundreds of thousands making frequent medium sized cash transactions and they made 600 seizures. A statistic like that doesn't make things any more just for the 600, but it serves as some sort of guide for how much a cash business should worry about it.

emotionalcode 12y ago
My problem isn't with the statistics. My problem is that the law depends on fuzzy bits of information that are easy to rhetorically manipulate in order to direct a case towards (complete and total financial asset seizure, immediately) or (not). It's not logical. The seizure is not reliant on facts. It is not reliant on evidence. This demonstrates an imbalance between ability to determine truth, and ability for the powers that be to act. It is dependent purely on abstract pattern. Other commenters have pointed out that that model can be used to accurately represent the behavior of innocents. I'd much rather see data on the effectiveness of this law. Does it actually track suspicious activity? Does it work, and is the value of that work enough to justify the grief it creates to the few you refer to that the law affects?
- maxerickson 12y ago
  I think I'm just separating concerns more than most here. I guess because I'm not that outraged by society doing something unjust (because look around). Does it sound like the law is being used unfairly? Yeah. Does it sound like the law as written is easy to use unfairly? Maybe, probably yes. Would I oppose changes to the law intended to make it harder to abuse? No. Do I think it is a major practical concern for a typical small business or individual? No. I don't think it is inconsistent or difficult to hold all those ideas at once.