7 ms·

Of course its attractive to criminals. Same reason they love cash. Doesn't mean that we should ban cash

by cdiddy2 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> Doesn't mean that we should ban cash Mixers aren’t banned. A mixer that was used to launder money by North Korea was.
- Laaas 4y ago
  All decentralised (non-custodial) mixers could be used by North Korea. Should they all be banned?
- cdiddy2 4y ago
  And yet US banks aren't banned https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/secret-documents-show-how-north-korea-launders-money-through-u-n1240329 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/secret-documents-show-how...
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > yet US banks aren't banned Banks which collect KYC and respond to criminal probes. Those that don’t absolutely get sanctioned.
wcfields 4y ago
> ban cash Well, it's not banned, but over $10k USD in cash you need to fill out an IRS form 8300 [1] precisely to curb criminal use of cash. (Although I'd argue it should be upped and pegged to inflation as 10k isn't what 10k used to be.) [1] https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/form-8300-and-reporting-cash-payments-of-over-10000 https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
- notch656a 4y ago
  Wouldn't filing a form 8300 be unconstitutional violation of the 5th amendment if the cash is an element of the crime of both parties? As an example, felons can't be charged with NFA violations for owning a short barrel rifle for example because registering their firearm would be self-incrimination. I believe Timothy Leary also got out of being charged with Marijuana reporting [tax] requirement because filing for the tax would self-incriminate his possession. Edit: See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States for NFA. Thanks below for Leary.
  - ccooffee 4y ago
    I have NEVER heard of any of this. Can you provide any sources? I think the 5th has been restricted enough by the courts that it literally only matters if you EXPLICITLY invoke it. (At least this is my understanding of Berghuis v. Thompkins.)
    - vageli 4y ago
      Leary v United States https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/6/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/6/
  - giantg2 4y ago
    Criminals are still required to pay taxes, they just aren't required to list its source (misc entry on income form). Leary's case was won on the basis that the registering provision violated the right to not self-incriminate (and that you couldn't pay that tax without registering). Similar for the NFA case - they can't get then for the failure to register, but they can still get them for manufacturing/possessing it (especially since it was amended after the ruling).
    - notch656a 4y ago
      >Criminals are still required to pay taxes, they just aren't required to list its source >they can't get then for the failure to register A criminal filing an 8300 would be effectively "registering" their illegally owned money, including the source from who the money is received.

Of course its attractive to criminals. Same reason they love cash. Doesn't mean that we should ban cash

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> Doesn't mean that we should ban cash Mixers aren’t banned. A mixer that was used to launder money by North Korea was.

Laaas 4y ago
All decentralised (non-custodial) mixers could be used by North Korea. Should they all be banned?
cdiddy2 4y ago
And yet US banks aren't banned https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/secret-documents-show-how-north-korea-launders-money-through-u-n1240329 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/secret-documents-show-how...
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > yet US banks aren't banned Banks which collect KYC and respond to criminal probes. Those that don’t absolutely get sanctioned.

wcfields 4y ago

> ban cash Well, it's not banned, but over $10k USD in cash you need to fill out an IRS form 8300 [1] precisely to curb criminal use of cash. (Although I'd argue it should be upped and pegged to inflation as 10k isn't what 10k used to be.) [1] https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/form-8300-and-reporting-cash-payments-of-over-10000 https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

notch656a 4y ago
Wouldn't filing a form 8300 be unconstitutional violation of the 5th amendment if the cash is an element of the crime of both parties? As an example, felons can't be charged with NFA violations for owning a short barrel rifle for example because registering their firearm would be self-incrimination. I believe Timothy Leary also got out of being charged with Marijuana reporting [tax] requirement because filing for the tax would self-incriminate his possession. Edit: See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States for NFA. Thanks below for Leary.
- ccooffee 4y ago
  I have NEVER heard of any of this. Can you provide any sources? I think the 5th has been restricted enough by the courts that it literally only matters if you EXPLICITLY invoke it. (At least this is my understanding of Berghuis v. Thompkins.)
  - vageli 4y ago
    Leary v United States https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/6/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/6/
- giantg2 4y ago
  Criminals are still required to pay taxes, they just aren't required to list its source (misc entry on income form). Leary's case was won on the basis that the registering provision violated the right to not self-incriminate (and that you couldn't pay that tax without registering). Similar for the NFA case - they can't get then for the failure to register, but they can still get them for manufacturing/possessing it (especially since it was amended after the ruling).
  - notch656a 4y ago
    >Criminals are still required to pay taxes, they just aren't required to list its source >they can't get then for the failure to register A criminal filing an 8300 would be effectively "registering" their illegally owned money, including the source from who the money is received.