calling all other collectors of the "forbidden"
ebaybuyer
Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭
anyone that currently collects or may consider in the future the collecting of contemporary counterfeit US coins should feel a bit concerned about the new proposed legislation regarding the hobby protection act, should we sit by quietly and cross our fingers that our elected officials have the common sense to exclude items that were produced decades ago and are not a threat to the numismatic community ? or should we engage and have our say ? i personally would rather not have to buy a "copy" stamp just to be in compliance with a law that in my opinion shouldnt apply to items that are not a threat to the hobby, a hundred year old counterfeit is likely to be worth MORE than a genuine and as such should not be regarded as a threat to anything other that the owner's buying budget. this may be an opportunity that will allow us to collect what we like without fear of any misguided intervention in the name of "protecting others" what say you ?
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
0
Comments
What's different in the proposal? Can you copy/paste the text or, better yet, post a link to the text you are concerned about?
Would Scoville Fugios or Micro-O Morgans be included? What about Henning nickels and Omega Double Eagles?
<< <i>or should we engage and have our say ? >>
people should certainly stand up for what they believe in even if their mind changes from time to time
<< <i>have the common sense to exclude items that were produced decades ago and are not a threat to the numismatic community >>
i am not on board with this no matter how cool, how important the person was that made the counterfeit, a fake is a fake to me period. just my personal view on the subject and i do like a few of them.
it would be nice to see a great debate from both angles and am sure there are pros and cons for both sides
.
edited because my spacing was too high
<< <i>
i am not on board with this no matter how cool, how important the person was that made the counterfeit, a fake is a fake to me period. just my personal view on the subject and i do like a few of them.
it would be nice to see a great debate from both angles and am sure there are pros and cons for both sides >>
Time of manufacture is very important. I recently sold a boatload of contemporary counterfeit colonials and Mexican/Spanish colonial silver. While these coins aren't real and they ranged from crude to expertly crafted, they are no doubt a huge part of history and the money of that era. Many were well worn, showing how they were used in commerce, and instead of being one-offs from criminals, they were made in enough bulk that serious die studies can be done on them.
I'm not so much a fan of modern counterfeits just to fill a hole or fool a collector, but the contemporary ones were money, even if not authorized as such, and that provides historical value.
type2,CCHunter.
Simply stupid.
For example 3CS contemporary counterfeits are well documented and easy to discern and for certain collectors are highly collectible as-is.
<< <i>my concern is that this legislation will blanket coins such as the henning nickels, micro o dollars and all other contemporary counterfeits that sell well above what comparable "genuine" coin of the same date and design will sell for and its not what the item is "worth" financially, its the historical value of the pieces that are lumped together with chinese replicas. modern replicas are clearly a danger to the hobby, far too many people wont for whatever reason educate themselves and still are unaware of them, understandably, they are a threat, but i dont agree that contemporary counterfeits are a threat to the hobby, and they should not be regarded the same as modern fakes. >>
But then they will start counterfeiting the counterfeits!
<< <i>"But then they will start counterfeiting the counterfeits" <<<< good luck to them. the chinese cannot even replicate the regular issue coins closely enough to fool anyone that has even the slightest knowledge of what they should look like. >>
I beg to differ with you! Even PCGS has certified some of the better counterfeits! You would be surprised at the quality of some of the counterfeits. I have a dealer friend that actually buys the better counterfeits so he can keep on top of them. I gripe at him for doing so...but I guess the only way you will know is to be able to examine them.
And sorry Dan but that includes you.
When dealers won't buy Morgans because they can not tell if they are real a large group of collections are going down the tubes.
BTW I know of a dealer in this state that will not buy RAW Morgans now.
<< <i>I have a fairly good size collection of counterfeits myself. Some were lesson learners and some were not! I would happily give up my ability to sell these counterfeits(which are not for sale) if it would stop all the counterfeits coming from China or where ever! I've said this before and I'll say it now. The technology is out there to produce counterfeits that will fool the best. It will ruin our hobby if something isn't done. >>
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
Personally, I feel this is the single greatest threat to the future of the hobby and the monetary "value" of our collections. If there are suddenly millions of gorgeous, lustrous Peace Dollars floating around that cannot, by any available means, be distinguished from the genuine article, they become by default genuine coins themselves. My collection doesn't lose any of its visual appeal or interest, but it suddenly becomes monetarily valueless. Even a strong provenance won't save something that is in fact, no longer rare.
What do we call dreck? Coins so common that they don't create any real demand. Heavily counterfeited pieces will soon fall in the same boat.
More laws might be slightly interesting, but the US has adopted a limp-noodle response to foreign counterfeits. You really can't get too heavy-handed with your primary source of borrowed money.
<< <i>why not stop all importing of coins from china? would that prevent them from getting here? >>
If we do this, counterfeits will then go from China to a third country (say Japan) before imported to the USA. Should we ban all coins importation from Japan also?
<< <i>the only way to stop the flow of counterfeits is for people to educate themselves and not buy them. >>
I doubt it. I collect world coin series that were heavily counterfeited. And I become really good at detecting counterfeits by buying counterfeits to study them.
Just because you do not see a coin as counterfeit does not mean it isn't. Major series and key dates in almost all series and even certified coins are being produced that have fooled collectors, dealers, and even the professional graders. Even eBay with their hands off attitude have got on the wagon to combat the problem.
Sorry but if it takes the curtailing of the Contemporary counterfeit trade that may be the price.
Counterfeits are counterfeits regardless of when they were made.
I do not expect my Congressperson to know the ins and outs of detecting "when" a specific counterfeit was made and as such, if folks want modifications to current laws that require the copy stamp on counterfeit or copy coins then they'll have to figure out a way of dealing with whats written OR have a hand in WHATS written.
Without input, expect Congress to write a Black and White Law.
Like Matthew McConaughey said in the Movie "Magic Mike", "It's against the law to touch..............but I think I see a room full of Law Breakers".
Personally, I think it all boils down to knowledge. If PCGS can figure out that the coin is counterfeit, then the collector should be able to as well.
And if you don't know..........................don't buy.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>There is no such thing as counterfeits anymore, the are called fantasy pieces and their makers are artists. Please stay current >>
You have come long way young grasshopper.
<< <i>why not make it illegal to collect coins ? that would solve the problem entirely. i dont collect coins and i dont feel anyone should collect coins so making them illegal to own, buy or sell will solve the counterfeit problem. >>
Careful what you suggest even in jest as it will be giving "them" ideas. They actually tried it before for different reasons. Here is a link to a post (1st post of page 2) that mentions the 1965 Alan Bible bill to outlaw coin collecting. Seem to recall that it was very close to passing.
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=771014&STARTPAGE=2
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
<< <i>"The Rules and Regulations under the Hobby Protection Act require that all imitation numismatic and imitation political items sold in, or imported into, the United States be marked with the word “Copy” or the year of manufacture" <<<< seems cut and dry to me. so if i have a counterfeit dime dated of 1861 that was most likely made in 1861 it is therefore compliant with the hobby protection act as it is currently worded. >>
The note on year of manufacture is interesting. I haven't seen that before. Can you link to or point to the reference that you quoted as I'm interested to see the context.
Here's the text from 15 US Code (USC) § 2101 which doesn't appear to give an allowance for "year of manufacture":
<< <i>(b) Coins and other numismatic items
The manufacture in the United States, or the importation into the United States, for introduction into or distribution in commerce of any imitation numismatic item which is not plainly and permanently marked “copy”, is unlawful and is an unfair or deceptive act or practice in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act [15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.]. >>
Here's some follow-up text from 16 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 304.6:
<< <i>§ 304.6 Marking requirements for imitation numismatic items.
(a) An imitation numismatic item which is manufactured in the United States, or imported into the United States for introduction into or distribution in commerce, shall be plainly and permanently marked “COPY” >>
Both existing 15 USC § 2101 and 16 CFR § 304 do not seem to make allowances for "year of manufacture." However, the out for many is that they seem to apply to manufacture and importation, so if you are selling the item within the US, you may be "ok" under the law. If you manufactured or imported an item before the law that may be ok as well. From a practical perspective, the Hobby Protection Act only seems to kick in for pre-HPA contemporary counterfeits if you import them.
While the Hobby Protection Act does not appear to make a special provision for year of manufacture, I think the CHS and FSNC pieces use the date stamp to avoid being classified as an "Imitation Numismatic Item" under 15 USC § 2106.
Here's what the CHS piece looks like:
So it may be true that the HPA makes allowances for any piece that isn't an "imitation numismatic item," but doesn't make a special provision for year of manufacture.
Of course, technically, the CHS and FSNC pieces may not need the year of manufacture because (a) the CHS piece has different text on the ribbon and (b) an original version of the FSNC piece does not appear to exist.
Currently a contemporary counterfeit may avoid the need for COPY if it is manufactured before 1973 and is not subsequently imported into the US.
With HR 5977, sales of contemporary counterfeits in the US (not just importing) going forward are covered as well. It appears the bill seeks to add the bold text to 15 USC § 2101:
<< <i>The manufacture in the United States, or the importation into the United States, for introduction into or distribution in commerce, or the sale in commerce of any imitation numismatic item which is not plainly and permanently marked “copy”, is unlawful and is an unfair or deceptive act or practice in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act [15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.]. >>
Basically HR 5977 seeks to eliminate the allowance of sales for grandfathered pieces within the US.
That being said, counterfeits are still covered under anti-counterfeiting laws.
Zero tolerance......
and if you want to collect, trade and sell this stuff for your own personal reasons just trade it in the black market. Nobody with handcuffs will come looking for you.
My biggest concern with respect to this issue is the modern counterfeits that are sometimes passed as contemporary counterfeits.
BTW, does everybody here understand that (in numismatic circles) "contemporary" refers to the time at which the coins would have passed as money, not the "present day"?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>So it may be true that the HPA makes allowances for any piece that isn't an "imitation numismatic item," but doesn't make special provision for year of manufacture. >>
Don't know if a date was expressed in the text of the statute, but the 'exemption' is for
items manufactured or imported into the US *before* the enactment of the HPA. >>
I agree with respect to the HPA. With the current statue, pieces are exempt if they were manufactured or imported before the enactment (1973). With the new HR 5977 proposal, even pieces that were manufactured or imported before the original 1973 enactment would need to have the COPY inscription if they are sold after the update.
However, one needs to remember that with contemporary counterfeits, they are still counterfeits and subject to other laws and regulations.
<< <i>I collect contemporary counterfeits and love them. They are every bit as historically important as the coins that they passed as.
My biggest concern with respect to this issue is the modern counterfeits that are sometimes passed as contemporary counterfeits.
BTW, does everybody here understand that (in numismatic circles) "contemporary" refers to the time at which the coins would have passed as money, not the "present day"? >>
Interesting distinction Andy. While there is a difference, some of the terminologly should be adjusted a little as there do exist present day, modern counterfeits that are contemporary counterfeits, such as the counterfeit Sacs currently in circulation in South and Central America.
It might be useful to have a distinction along the lines of "currency counterfeit" vs. "collectible counterfeit" intent. One is to fool the general public while the other is to fool collectors.
BTW, does everybody here understand that (in numismatic circles) "contemporary" refers to the time at which the coins would have passed as money, not the "present day"? >>
I do understand that and I still don't care, to me there is nothing significant about a piece of counterfeit anything that I find important except maybe to educate people what to look out for. They we're made to dupe people plain and simple just like today, I don't support or care for anything that is used in this way no matter how old it is or how it was used. I still see contemporary counterfeits pop up that are being sold as the real thing probably by people who don't even know they are fake, so how are they not hurting the present day market.
type2,CCHunter.
However, even with a proper reference book and research, I think it may be a bit hard to convince Congressmen that some counterfeits are acceptable.
You're entitled to you opinion. However, the story of money would be incomplete without a discussion of contemporary counterfeits. And if one is inclined to illustrate the story of money with a coin collection, counterfeits can play a very useful role.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Free transfer of such counterfeit pieces may satisfy education efforts.
<< <i> >>
BTW, does everybody here understand that (in numismatic circles) "contemporary" refers to the time at which the coins would have passed as money, not the "present day"? >>
I do understand that and I still don't care, to me there is nothing significant about a piece of counterfeit anything that I find important except maybe to educate people what to look out for. They we're made to dupe people plain and simple just like today, I don't support or care for anything that is used in this way no matter how old it is or how it was used. I still see contemporary counterfeits pop up that are being sold as the real thing probably by people who don't even know they are fake, so how are they not hurting the present day market. >>
Welllllll! I will come to bat for the counterfeit collectors. It's 1 thing to dupe people for a rare or better date coin. But it is an entirely different subject when the coin was meant to dupe 1 for face value. Contemporary counterfeits from the older days are very collectable. It is a part of history. But I will hold with what I said before...I would happily give up the ability to sell the ones I have(which are not forsale) if it would stop the rampant counterfeiting going on today!
Nope, just the history of some scam artist, I would rather hear about the 1792 half dimse or the Gobrecht dollar. Even if traded at face value back in the day or even now it still ended up being part of ripping people off even at face value now someone was on the receiving end of a piece of contraband illegal in the eyes of the law as it should be. Look at how long the micro o morgans we're accepted as being genuine, now people who bought them instead have been duped or the omega gold pieces realistic enough to pass for quite awhile and probably both of these issues will still be believed to be real by unsuspecting people, not because they are dumb but because these are good counterfeits, so its damaging no matter what. Counterfeit belong in a place where they can be studied maybe yes, traded and collected or even sold no. What happens when a collector of contemporary counterfeits dies and these are not clearly noted or marked or the next custodian doesn't care?
When it really comes down to it counterfeits from all generations hurt someone at one time, period.
type2,CCHunter.