7 ms·
Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports
- techload 2y agohttps://archive.is/EW5JN https://archive.is/EW5JN
- input_sh 2y ago> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. This is the only shocker for me. Can anyone elaborate? I've always assumed x-ray scanners can't figure out the amount of cash, but shouldn't they be able to detect giant stacks of cash?
- crazygringo 2y agoThe answer is in the article: > The machines can be programmed to find cash, but they aren’t because they are operated by airport-security agents, responsible for passenger safety, not customs and immigration officials. As to why the UK government doesn't pass a regulation that airport security is also responsible for detecting large amounts of cash, I have no idea.
- fullspectrumdev 2y agoSeparation of duties. Airport security do one job, border farce/customs do the other. Turning airport security into customs and excise agents would be legally challenging. Same way TSA in America largely don’t give a flying fuck when Amercians from legal states board international flights with cannabis products such as gummies or vape pens - that’s a problem for the customs people on the other side. I should note here that some places do mix the duties - the airport security guys at Schipol will make a vague effort to stop you from taking a big bag of weed through, and will politely take it off your hands.
- woleium 2y agoFree weed!
- pests 2y agoThat's how it worked from experience and stories from friends. TSA is searching your bag for security things, not trying to find drugs. If they find it, might toss it, might ignore it, but they are not directly a police agency, they dgaf.
- johnneville 2y agodespite the separation of duties, at first glance, it would appear worthwhile to me for the customs agencies to buy access to the CT scanners or just the output from the security agencies so they could easily detect the cash maybe there are laws regarding privacy or just bureaucratic challenges that prevent this though
- fbdab103 2y agoOn the gripping hand, traveling with cash should not be a crime. We already surrender so much privacy to the TSA. I would fear that we would be hearing about more "TSA vs $20k in stacks of cash" civil forfeiture cases.
- jfim 2y agoThat's already the case, although not for domestic travelers it seems. See for example https://reason.com/2020/07/30/homeland-security-seized-2-billion-in-cash-from-travelers-at-u-s-airports/ https://reason.com/2020/07/30/homeland-security-seized-2-bil...
- johnneville 2y agofor sure, I was thinking from the narrower government perspective rather than the larger "is this the right thing to do" view and appreciate the reminder to keep things in context
- crazygringo 2y ago
- is_true 2y agocorruption maybe?
- Spooky23 2y agoCustoms is complicated, and security people struggle to detect security threats.
- throwaway444441 2y ago> As to why the UK government doesn't pass a regulation that airport security is also responsible for detecting large amounts of cash, I have no idea. Shouldn't law abiding citizens have the right to possess and carry cash?
- amenhotep 2y agoWhether or not our citizens should have the right to do something seems rarely related to whether the UK government sticks its noses in our business to make sure we aren't.
- yodsanklai 2y agoThey have but it needs to be declared so as to avoid tax evasion and money laundering
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- input_sh 2y agoNobody says you can't, carrying whatever amount across the border is perfectly legal. What's illegal is trying to carry >10k without declaring it to the customs. If you're a law abiding citizen, why wouldn't you declare it? If you don't, well congrats, you're no longer a law abiding citizen.
- seabass-labrax 2y agoAs a British citizen, I'm quite happy with the detection of money laundering not being a responsibility of airport security. It might initially make sense to check for cash, because once the money leaves the country it's much harder to track. Yet, that's the same for any time a criminal leaves the country - should airport security be responsible for checking your cases for stolen goods? Imposing such duties onto airports will be expensive. Smaller airports in Britain are already running at a tiny fraction of their capacity, with only London, Manchester and Edinburgh operating any serious services. A particularly striking example is Cardiff Airport: it can accommodate A380s, but you'll have to be patient if you want to spot a widebody airliner there. It's not really worth the extra equipment and staff to search for money laundering in these quieter airports, and the costs would probably force them to shut down entirely if not funded by the taxpayer. This situation of reduced capacity is not entirely theoretical, either. Before boarding Eurostar railway services through the Channel Tunnel, passengers have to go through security which includes passport control, customs and X-Ray (for luggage) and millimetre band scanners (for passengers). The introduction of these checks reduced capacity by a third, meaning that the Eurostar trains run with empty seats, when other trains running domestic services on the very same line can be crowded. It's about to get even worse now that Britain and the EU are introducing incompatible facial recognition systems that gate the entrances. As you can tell, I'm rather passionate about this issue :) I just think it's important that borders don't become the de-facto location on which all types of law enforcement converge, and for border security to be so entirely out of proportion with domestic policing.
- 1992spacemovie 2y ago[flagged]
- crazygringo 2y agoNone of your arguments make any sense to me. It doesn't seem expensive -- it's literally a configuration option on the scanners already installed. It doesn't have anything to do with stolen goods generally, it's simply about detecting stacks of cash that there's already a specific law stating that you must declare when leaving the country. By definition this isn't regular domestic policing, because it's inherently an issue that can only occur at the border.
- resolutebat 2y agoIn addition, systematic security scans are performed at the departing airport, and it's generally not a crime to export huge amounts of undeclared cash, only to import it.
- crazygringo 2y agoNo, a major part of the article is that the scans are not performed. And it absolutely is a crime to export huge amounts of undeclared cash. Again, a major part of the article. Think about it -- if large amounts of undeclared cash are being exported, then they're probably both criminal proceeds and haven't had taxes paid on them. And the government wants to stop both. It's actually the government on the import side that may be less interested. As in this very article. Governments are less likely to be complaining about money coming in.
- OldSchool 2y agoCustoms can certainly approach you any time right up to the gate. In 2010, my wife and I were approached by an agent and asked very directly if we had more than $10,000 in USD cash with us as we waited at the gate to board a nonstop flight from the US to Moscow. We answered truthfully "no" in a brief conversation and he wished us well almost immediately. I don't think he suspected we were money launderers. My guess is that upon hearing both of us speak, he easily determined that we were not natives of Russia and thus not, for example, carrying but not declaring a substantial amount of cash intended for family back home.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- blincoln 2y agoI'm also surprised by that claim. Every time I've flown with a thick book in my carryon, it's been flagged for inspection. One of the staff told me once that it's because thick stacks of paper look a lot like plastic explosive on an X-ray. I have to imagine a suitcase full of cash would look the same way.
- throwup238 2y agoUS currency is made with a mix of 75% cotton and 25% linen fibers, rather than wood pulp like paper. They're less dense so they probably don't look the same on an xray.
- SoftTalker 2y agoBut they have anti-counterfeiting metallic strips and ink, you'd think that would jump out on an x-ray image.
- throwup238 2y agoXRay depends on density and the security features are way too thin to matter
- crazygringo 2y ago> ...heaved seven heavy suitcases onto the conveyor belt... > ...and a few million more dollars worth of cash in eight suitcases... > ...In October 2020, two other women weren’t so lucky. They were questioned at a Heathrow departure gate by officers of the Border Force, the agency in charge of U.K. customs and immigration. One of the women told officers she checked five suitcases to Dubai because she wasn’t sure what to wear... I'm utterly baffled at why a money smuggling operation would be done with a conspicuous 5 to 8 suitcases at a time, rather than just 1 or 2. They were offered "around $3,750" to fly suitcases containing around $500,000 each. Which is not a high percentage even for just a single suitcase. So even besides the extra risk of attracting attention from so many suitcases, you'd think they'd want to spread them out more just for risk reduction generally -- in case the checked luggage is lost, in case a courier decides to abscond with the cash themselves, etc.
- alexey-salmin 2y agoSurely this was an advice from one of the Big Three consultancy agencies, following the cost-structure analysis
- HighlandSpring 2y agoMy best guess is a lack of willing participants combined with pressure from up top to move money to keep the operation going/meet targets. We also don't know how much of that 500k is profit - maybe the margins in organised crime aren't what they used to be. Each $3,750 saved is money they can put straight into their pocket as their boss might never find out how many mules they ended up using. Or maybe the reporting is fishy
- quartesixte 2y ago3750 for committing serious crimes seems so low, one can only imagine the desperation or lack of value understanding involved with participants. Or coercion.
- kayodelycaon 2y ago
- toephu2 2y ago> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. I think this is false. Anytime I've flown with cash in my checked in luggage, it was always stolen and it was obvious someone went through my suitcase. Then I stopped doing that obviously. (happened in U.S. and Indonesia)
- lettergram 2y agoHow dare you question the TSA, the best and brightest of us. \s As a funny counter, I recently traveled through 6 TSA checkpoints with a loaded magazine in my bag. I had it from when I was at my farm, oops. Was a little concerned because I was in Boston when they found it (I’m based out of Tennessee). But they let me go and confiscated it. Point being, if they can’t find a loaded magazine, I doubt they’d be able to find money intentionally. Then again, might have more incentive to find the money
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hiddencost 2y agoBoston is not a gun friendly town. You got lucky.
- lettergram 2y agoYeah, I generally agree. That said, there’s a couple things: 1. You’re technically allowed to travel through anywhere with any firearms in the US (I only had a magazine, not a firearm) legally. That includes planes, but you have to check the bags. That said, they can still arrest you and not follow the law. 2. I carry a conceal carry permit with reciprocity with most states for this very reason. I actually showed it to them and it made things much smoother
- lsllc 2y agoYou got really lucky! In MA possession of ammunition without a (MA issued) permit is a crime with up to 2 years in jail. MA doesn't have ANY reciprocity with other states regarding your CCW and the City of Boston in particular has a ban on any high-capacity (>10 rounds) magazines of ANY sort/age. MA banned hi-capacity mags but only ones made after 1994, pre-ban ones are ok, just not in Boston (and I think a few other towns). You are right about peaceable journey, but I would not risk any of my liberty or rights on the good nature of a LEO in such a state.
- imglorp 2y agoIf someone really wanted to slow illicit businesses, they would look at ones of the US's biggest exports: shell corporations. Delaware and South Dakota churn them out legally by the hundreds of thousands. This is how all that laundering, tax evasion, and worse is performed. Tie then all to owners and halt much of this.
- benmanns 2y agoStarting January 1, 2025, existing companies will need to report beneficial owners to FinCEN, which may start the process of cutting down on shell company abuse. https://www.fincen.gov/boi-faqs#B_2 https://www.fincen.gov/boi-faqs#B_2
- avidiax 2y agoLast I heard about this, the shell companies have 6 months after creation to declare the true beficial owners. So it seems like the game continues, now in 6 month installments.
- csomar 2y agoFirst, let me be clear that no one (country) wants to slow illicit businesses making inflows (and not committing the crime inside said country). Second, while Delaware offers privacy, you still need to bank (or even crypto) and that requires KYC/AML which really makes Delaware nothing more than a privacy tint. Finally, I don't think any country/regulator cares about all of that; they are just (in my opinion) using this as a scapegoat to remove cash.
- imglorp 2y agoIsn't the privacy tint the meat of laundering? After passing through a couple shells, KYC at that point just knows who made a bunch of income, but not how. What's the rest of the story?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- 2y ago
- vaadu 2y agoMoney sniffing dogs? They train dogs to sniff for plants, food and drugs. Cash in baggage should be easy?
- hn_throwaway_99 2y agoBut cash is everywhere, and it's not illegal to have it in your luggage if declared or below a certain amount. Seems like you'd get a ton of false positives as it would be very difficult to train a dog to only alert if it smells a lot of cash. But I did read another article that said they sprayed their vacuum packed cash bags with coffee and air freshener - don't know if that works that well against cash sniffing dogs.
- tastyfreeze 2y agoMaybe cash sniffing elephants. Elephants can count, or at least scale, obscured items by smell.