@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
Those pushing central bank digital currency are counting on the naive to start to clear a path forward... You do understand the differences between CBDC and forms of currency such as crypto, right?
But most of that is digital transactions, great big transactions bank to bank, internationally with the largest banks. That was the point of my earlier post about the IRS clamping down on complicated financial transactions:
"The agency said it would open examinations into 75 of the nation’s largest partnerships, which were identified with the help of artificial intelligence, by the end of the month. The partnerships all have more than $10 billion in assets and will receive audit notices in the coming weeks.
"More audits are likely to come. In October, the I.R.S. will send 500 notifications, known as compliance alerts, to other large partnerships indicating that the agency has found discrepancies in their balance sheets. These partnerships could also face audits if they cannot explain the differences in their balances from the end of one year to the start of the next.
"The focus on partnerships is part of a broader push by the I.R.S. to scrutinize wealthier taxpayers in 2024. Mr. Werfel said that the agency is dedicating dozens of revenue officers to pursue 1,600 millionaires who the I.R.S. believes owe at least $250,000 in unpaid taxes.
"In the coming year, the I.R.S. said it plans to increase scrutiny of digital assets as a vehicle for tax evasion and investigate how high-income taxpayers are using foreign bank accounts to avoid disclosing their financial information."
If someone is de-banked, I'd think there are plenty of other ones that would want their business.
Absolutely not, the characterization that large denomination currencies were discontinued by the cashless cabal conspiracy is totally outside the realm of rational thought and I won't hear otherwise.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
You do understand the differences between CBDC and forms of currency such as crypto, right?
Mark
I never saw crypto as currency, they were always securities or commodities in my eyes. And the crypto market and exchanges behaved like the 19th century stock exchanges, filled with graft. A lot of the "old timey" stock schemes made a come back with crypto.
They never functioned like currency the exchanges were inconvenient.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
You do understand the differences between CBDC and forms of currency such as crypto, right?
Mark
I never saw crypto as currency, they were always securities or commodities in my eyes. And the crypto market and exchanges behaved like the 19th century stock exchanges, filled with graft. A lot of the "old timey" stock schemes made a come back with crypto.
They never functioned like currency the exchanges were inconvenient.
Personally, I want no part of either. I have never owned a penny of crypto but at least it is a decentralized form of "currency" possessed and held by those with the mining power. With CBDC, the controllers of the issuance will have complete power over the use and movement of "currency" if so desired. In my opinion, the more we move to a cashless system, the quicker we will end up with a central bank digital currency which I like even less.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
You do understand the differences between CBDC and forms of currency such as crypto, right?
Mark
I never saw crypto as currency, they were always securities or commodities in my eyes. And the crypto market and exchanges behaved like the 19th century stock exchanges, filled with graft. A lot of the "old timey" stock schemes made a come back with crypto.
They never functioned like currency the exchanges were inconvenient.
The exchanges were commodity markets. That's different than peer-to-peer payments.
I don't see cash going anywhere until the criminals and politicians find an easier way to do it digital. Then sure all bets are off, until then it's all trending digital but that might go like thumb implants you can add a bank card too instead of totalitarianism.
A lot people do enjoy a good economic collapse LARP
Fun mind exercise at least.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
@jmlanzaf said:
The EU had a 500 Euro note. I'm not sure why their computers can't handle large wire transfers.
There is a difference between being able to do something and choosing to do it.
FWIW, the last time I dealt with the ACH system on the inside, transactions were limited to $99,999,999.99. We had to break larger transactions up into chunks. There were also protections against duplicate transactions (same source, destination, date, and amount), we couldn't just break $250,000,000.00 into 5 x $50,000,000.00.
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
@jmlanzaf said:
The EU had a 500 Euro note. I'm not sure why their computers can't handle large wire transfers.
There is a difference between being able to do something and choosing to do it.
FWIW, the last time I dealt with the ACH system on the inside, transactions were limited to $99,999,999.99. We had to break larger transactions up into chunks. There were also protections against duplicate transactions (same source, destination, date, and amount), we couldn't just break $250,000,000.00 into 5 x $50,000,000.00.
Thank God the 500 Euro not makes the $250 million transfer easier than the $100 million ACH.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
I don't see cash going anywhere until the criminals and politicians find an easier way to do it digital. Then sure all bets are off, until then it's all trending digital but that might go like thumb implants you can add a bank card too instead of totalitarianism.
A lot people do enjoy a good economic collapse LARP
Fun mind exercise at least.
Hmmm... you went from complaining about conspiracy theorists to spinning a conspiracy theory. Good job!
The Fed Now digital currency has begun. I know of several Wells Fargo customers that have received a letter stating that they are making changes to the way their (your) currency is being held. Nothing will change, for now they said.
I see the CBDC coming and a slow roll out is necessary to work out any kinks. I think that coin and currency will become less and less important as people adjust to paying the Lemonade Stand Kid his $2 in digital.
I suspect in ten years the Mint will stop making coin for you and me... perhaps just for collectors.
Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
@Martin said:
Why should a large volume of cash be a concern for anyone? Break the law that is different story. But having large
Sums of cash doesn’t mean you’ve broke a law
Martin
As long as you can document it. If you won millions in the lottery and decided that you wanted to have $100k in cash just because you could what's wrong with that? Just don't redeposit it at $5K per week which you could of course also explain.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
Absolutely not, the characterization that large denomination currencies were discontinued by the cashless cabal conspiracy is totally outside the realm of rational thought and I won't hear otherwise.
Hey folks! I just IGNORED my first user.
IGNORE
My research shows the cashless cabal did Kennedy, 9/11, stolen election, clot shot and billions to Ukraine while America rots.
users can IGNORE me, admins can delete my account if necessary. I'm not into old, tarnished coins anyways, I just want fat stack of raw AGEs!
@Martin said:
Why should a large volume of cash be a concern for anyone? Break the law that is different story. But having large
Sums of cash doesn’t mean you’ve broke a law
Martin
As long as you can document it. If you won millions in the lottery and decided that you wanted to have $100k in cash just because you could what's wrong with that? Just don't redeposit it at $5K per week which you could of course also explain.
Why would you need to document it. It’s up to the government to prove you obtained it illegally correct?
@AUandAG said:
The Fed Now digital currency has begun. I know of several Wells Fargo customers that have received a letter stating that they are making changes to the way their (your) currency is being held. Nothing will change, for now they said.
I see the CBDC coming and a slow roll out is necessary to work out any kinks. I think that coin and currency will become less and less important as people adjust to paying the Lemonade Stand Kid his $2 in digital.
I suspect in ten years the Mint will stop making coin for you and me... perhaps just for collectors.
You may correct me if I am saying anything inaccurate but Fed Now appears to be the Fed transfer portion of a full blown CBDC. It is NOT a CBDC! Funds are still transferred to and from the decentralized institutions.
Don't confuse paying a kid $2 for lemonade with your Zelle or Paypal and CBDC where the entire transaction remains centralized with (In the US) the Fed.
BTW, with the flip of a switch Fed Now could become a CBDC.
You would WANT to be able to document it just in case you would ever NEED to. There are plenty of stories out there about folks having large sums of money confiscated, some never getting it back. Would be smart to keep it at home.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
Gateway Pundit is a garbage fear and rage porn website.
Should have ended here. Kept accuracy.
Maybe so, but a fellow dealer in my town still has no clue why his account was shut down. I don't care which reporting outlet spins the tale. When the truth is true, what do you do ?
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
Gateway Pundit is a garbage fear and rage porn website.
Should have ended here. Kept accuracy.
Maybe so, but a fellow dealer in my town still has no clue why his account was shut down. I don't care which reporting outlet spins the tale. When the truth is true, what do you do ?
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
Could be something nefarious. But isn't it much more likely that it's some combination of the bank is incompetent, the bank employees undertrained, bank/regulatory policies are unclear, the dealer doesn't read (or comprehend) regulatory mailings from his bank, or the dealer hasn't asked the right person/question?
I have been in the banking/finance industry for my entire adult life and I can tell you that 99.99% of the time the explanation is above. For the other 0.01% of the time it's someone like Jeffrey Epstein or El Chapo. Except for "unsavory businesses" (like porn) or illegal businesses, the bank could not care less about the type of business or the amount of cash involved. If it's too much cash to handle the bank will charge for it. But, they absolutely cannot take any chances with regulations/regulators. And no client who crosses that line is worth the civil (and perhaps criminal) penalties.
So, if someone appears to be structuring, or not reporting, or not submitting to Know Your Client rules (sound like a significant subset of coin/PM dealers?) they will immediately shut down the accounts, and rightfully so. It's an existential danger to the banks' business.
So what would be a realistic remedy? Instead of depositing $7,000 weekly you wait and deposit $14,000 bi-weekly so it doesn't look like you fit the structuring profile?
@Batman23 said:
So what would be a realistic remedy? Instead of depositing $7,000 weekly you wait and deposit $14,000 bi-weekly so it doesn't look like you fit the structuring profile?
Any attempt to change deposit or withdrawal amounts specifically to avoid regulatory issues is in itself problematic. Just deposit what you need and have some sort of reasonable basis to be able to back yourself up if the bank asks questions. If they ask where the funds are from or try to get information about the deposits and you say that's none of your business, things are less likely to end well.
@Martin said:
Why should a large volume of cash be a concern for anyone? Break the law that is different story. But having large
Sums of cash doesn’t mean you’ve broke a law
Martin
As long as you can document it. If you won millions in the lottery and decided that you wanted to have $100k in cash just because you could what's wrong with that? Just don't redeposit it at $5K per week which you could of course also explain.
Why would you need to document it. It’s up to the government to prove you obtained it illegally correct?
A lady from Arnold's Park, Iowa who ran a restaurant was accused by the IRS of structuring. They confiscated her funds, but she eventually won her case.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
Gateway Pundit is a garbage fear and rage porn website.
Should have ended here. Kept accuracy.
Maybe so, but a fellow dealer in my town still has no clue why his account was shut down. I don't care which reporting outlet spins the tale. When the truth is true, what do you do ?
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
The problem with these kinds of “articles” is that they intentionally cherry-pick instances of specific types of people having their bank accounts dropped to target specific fears held by the news site’s intended readers. The reality is that regulatory enforcement against banks is increasing and banks are filing more Suspicious Activity Reports and are self-limiting their risk by closing potentially suspicious accounts at rates that nobody has ever seen before. When a liberal news site writes this story, they write it about immigrants having their accounts closed. When a conservative news site writes this story, they write it about gun stores and bullion dealers. Almost nobody writes a story that lots of different people from all walks of life with all kinds of businesses and people with regular consumer checking accounts are having them closed. Lots of this is happening because computer monitoring has gotten so good at running models looking for all sorts of potentially suspicious activity. What those models (and AI) don’t do a good job of identifying is ACTUAL illegal activity. Instead, they flag anything that could possibly be illegal, and then the bank just makes a decision to close it because it’s better to be safe than sorry. It could be a Pakistani college student getting cash deposits from home or it could be a bullion dealer or a gun store owner.
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
Exactly IMO also! Does our country really think that the border crossers are using banks. Millions of them. Cash is king to them and that’s how they do business. IMO I don’t see them controlling them anytime soon.
@RiveraFamilyCollect said:
The article reads like it was written intentionally to mislead people and pander to a populist fear about big banks wanting to control us with a cashless economy. The facts are very light, so a small regional credit union suspended their business and personal accounts. That isn't very suspicious. What is suspicious is to drum up a conspiracy about cashless dictatorships.
I find the whole line of reasoning suspect. It is more likely that the accounts ran afoul of the credit unions rules. Maybe and just a theory here the accounts were shut down for correct reasons and the people are being a bit dishonest? Certainly, reads like a populist call to arms.
Just my read of the article.
Gateway Pundit is a garbage fear and rage porn website.
Should have ended here. Kept accuracy.
Maybe so, but a fellow dealer in my town still has no clue why his account was shut down. I don't care which reporting outlet spins the tale. When the truth is true, what do you do ?
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
The bank, if they shut him down has to give him a reason. If they do not then they would be liable for damages. Damaging his business. Possibly he is not telling the truth or he has neglected to speak with the correct person. Or if he is absolutely correct then he should hire an attorney and seek damages. It's as simple as this really, also we are not close to being Rome so I would not worry about a collapse.
Comments
Those pushing central bank digital currency are counting on the naive to start to clear a path forward... You do understand the differences between CBDC and forms of currency such as crypto, right?
Mark
The US is the largest money laundering country in the world: https://www.zippia.com/advice/money-laundering-statistics/#:~:text=Money laundering in the U.S. makes up 15%-38,and $2 trillion laundered annually.
But most of that is digital transactions, great big transactions bank to bank, internationally with the largest banks. That was the point of my earlier post about the IRS clamping down on complicated financial transactions:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/us/politics/irs-deploys-artificial-intelligence-to-target-rich-partnerships.html?searchResultPosition=2
"The agency said it would open examinations into 75 of the nation’s largest partnerships, which were identified with the help of artificial intelligence, by the end of the month. The partnerships all have more than $10 billion in assets and will receive audit notices in the coming weeks.
"More audits are likely to come. In October, the I.R.S. will send 500 notifications, known as compliance alerts, to other large partnerships indicating that the agency has found discrepancies in their balance sheets. These partnerships could also face audits if they cannot explain the differences in their balances from the end of one year to the start of the next.
"The focus on partnerships is part of a broader push by the I.R.S. to scrutinize wealthier taxpayers in 2024. Mr. Werfel said that the agency is dedicating dozens of revenue officers to pursue 1,600 millionaires who the I.R.S. believes owe at least $250,000 in unpaid taxes.
"In the coming year, the I.R.S. said it plans to increase scrutiny of digital assets as a vehicle for tax evasion and investigate how high-income taxpayers are using foreign bank accounts to avoid disclosing their financial information."
If someone is de-banked, I'd think there are plenty of other ones that would want their business.
Absolutely not, the characterization that large denomination currencies were discontinued by the cashless cabal conspiracy is totally outside the realm of rational thought and I won't hear otherwise.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
I never saw crypto as currency, they were always securities or commodities in my eyes. And the crypto market and exchanges behaved like the 19th century stock exchanges, filled with graft. A lot of the "old timey" stock schemes made a come back with crypto.
They never functioned like currency the exchanges were inconvenient.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
Personally, I want no part of either. I have never owned a penny of crypto but at least it is a decentralized form of "currency" possessed and held by those with the mining power. With CBDC, the controllers of the issuance will have complete power over the use and movement of "currency" if so desired. In my opinion, the more we move to a cashless system, the quicker we will end up with a central bank digital currency which I like even less.
Mark
The exchanges were commodity markets. That's different than peer-to-peer payments.
I don't see cash going anywhere until the criminals and politicians find an easier way to do it digital. Then sure all bets are off, until then it's all trending digital but that might go like thumb implants you can add a bank card too instead of totalitarianism.
A lot people do enjoy a good economic collapse LARP
Fun mind exercise at least.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
There is a difference between being able to do something and choosing to do it.
FWIW, the last time I dealt with the ACH system on the inside, transactions were limited to $99,999,999.99. We had to break larger transactions up into chunks. There were also protections against duplicate transactions (same source, destination, date, and amount), we couldn't just break $250,000,000.00 into 5 x $50,000,000.00.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Thank God the 500 Euro not makes the $250 million transfer easier than the $100 million ACH.
Hmmm... you went from complaining about conspiracy theorists to spinning a conspiracy theory. Good job!
The Fed Now digital currency has begun. I know of several Wells Fargo customers that have received a letter stating that they are making changes to the way their (your) currency is being held. Nothing will change, for now they said.
I see the CBDC coming and a slow roll out is necessary to work out any kinks. I think that coin and currency will become less and less important as people adjust to paying the Lemonade Stand Kid his $2 in digital.
I suspect in ten years the Mint will stop making coin for you and me... perhaps just for collectors.
As long as you can document it. If you won millions in the lottery and decided that you wanted to have $100k in cash just because you could what's wrong with that? Just don't redeposit it at $5K per week which you could of course also explain.
frankly, best to remove post and ignore thread.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Hey folks! I just IGNORED my first user.
IGNORE
My research shows the cashless cabal did Kennedy, 9/11, stolen election, clot shot and billions to Ukraine while America rots.
users can IGNORE me, admins can delete my account if necessary. I'm not into old, tarnished coins anyways, I just want fat stack of raw AGEs!
Why would you need to document it. It’s up to the government to prove you obtained it illegally correct?
Martin
You may correct me if I am saying anything inaccurate but Fed Now appears to be the Fed transfer portion of a full blown CBDC. It is NOT a CBDC! Funds are still transferred to and from the decentralized institutions.
Don't confuse paying a kid $2 for lemonade with your Zelle or Paypal and CBDC where the entire transaction remains centralized with (In the US) the Fed.
BTW, with the flip of a switch Fed Now could become a CBDC.
Mark
EU still has a EU 500 note in circulation..
H
You would WANT to be able to document it just in case you would ever NEED to. There are plenty of stories out there about folks having large sums of money confiscated, some never getting it back. Would be smart to keep it at home.
Maybe so, but a fellow dealer in my town still has no clue why his account was shut down. I don't care which reporting outlet spins the tale. When the truth is true, what do you do ?
Remember : "when in Rome, do as the Romans". Collapse.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ECB stop issuing 500 (and 200?) euro banknotes?
Do the banks recirculate the ones that come in or do they return them to the ECB?
They are still legal tender but no longer issued, sort of like $500 and $1000 dollar notes in the US.
I believe the 500E is still legal tender but is no longer printed.
I believe the Swiss still print 200F and 1000F notes which are respectively worth slightly more in US dollars.
I think a big reason for the discontinuation of large notes in most countries is the risk of counterfeiting.
Could be something nefarious. But isn't it much more likely that it's some combination of the bank is incompetent, the bank employees undertrained, bank/regulatory policies are unclear, the dealer doesn't read (or comprehend) regulatory mailings from his bank, or the dealer hasn't asked the right person/question?
I have been in the banking/finance industry for my entire adult life and I can tell you that 99.99% of the time the explanation is above. For the other 0.01% of the time it's someone like Jeffrey Epstein or El Chapo. Except for "unsavory businesses" (like porn) or illegal businesses, the bank could not care less about the type of business or the amount of cash involved. If it's too much cash to handle the bank will charge for it. But, they absolutely cannot take any chances with regulations/regulators. And no client who crosses that line is worth the civil (and perhaps criminal) penalties.
So, if someone appears to be structuring, or not reporting, or not submitting to Know Your Client rules (sound like a significant subset of coin/PM dealers?) they will immediately shut down the accounts, and rightfully so. It's an existential danger to the banks' business.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
So what would be a realistic remedy? Instead of depositing $7,000 weekly you wait and deposit $14,000 bi-weekly so it doesn't look like you fit the structuring profile?
Any attempt to change deposit or withdrawal amounts specifically to avoid regulatory issues is in itself problematic. Just deposit what you need and have some sort of reasonable basis to be able to back yourself up if the bank asks questions. If they ask where the funds are from or try to get information about the deposits and you say that's none of your business, things are less likely to end well.
Edit for grammar
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
Depends on which law you're referring to.
A lady from Arnold's Park, Iowa who ran a restaurant was accused by the IRS of structuring. They confiscated her funds, but she eventually won her case.
The problem with these kinds of “articles” is that they intentionally cherry-pick instances of specific types of people having their bank accounts dropped to target specific fears held by the news site’s intended readers. The reality is that regulatory enforcement against banks is increasing and banks are filing more Suspicious Activity Reports and are self-limiting their risk by closing potentially suspicious accounts at rates that nobody has ever seen before. When a liberal news site writes this story, they write it about immigrants having their accounts closed. When a conservative news site writes this story, they write it about gun stores and bullion dealers. Almost nobody writes a story that lots of different people from all walks of life with all kinds of businesses and people with regular consumer checking accounts are having them closed. Lots of this is happening because computer monitoring has gotten so good at running models looking for all sorts of potentially suspicious activity. What those models (and AI) don’t do a good job of identifying is ACTUAL illegal activity. Instead, they flag anything that could possibly be illegal, and then the bank just makes a decision to close it because it’s better to be safe than sorry. It could be a Pakistani college student getting cash deposits from home or it could be a bullion dealer or a gun store owner.
Exactly IMO also! Does our country really think that the border crossers are using banks. Millions of them. Cash is king to them and that’s how they do business. IMO I don’t see them controlling them anytime soon.
The bank, if they shut him down has to give him a reason. If they do not then they would be liable for damages. Damaging his business. Possibly he is not telling the truth or he has neglected to speak with the correct person. Or if he is absolutely correct then he should hire an attorney and seek damages. It's as simple as this really, also we are not close to being Rome so I would not worry about a collapse.