Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Greg
Greg Lyon, ANA Board of Governors 2011-2017 -- The views represented here are my own personal opinions and do not represent those of the American Numismatic Association.
Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Terrible law. Some people have the false idea that you can force morality with laws. You can't, all you do is make it harder for honest people to make a living. And you open up the Government to all kinds of lobbying and favors for special treatment.
The govt's will continue to toss out these bills hoping that one will stick. It's more about putting a leash on cash sales (esp. bullion). They won't give up.
One quote in there leads me to wonder if this will be more harmful than good.
<< <i>I think it was ill-prepared,” Adkins said. “The result is that it will probably put some smaller dealers that have done nothing wrong out of business.” >>
"One quote in there leads me to wonder if this will be more harmful than good."
From my perspective, those driving this law had little if any in interest listening to input which could have been helpful in arriving at a law that addressed the real problems that existing laws may not address well enough, but they did not. I know several people, including Gary, that tried to provide this input but it was not of real interest to those driving the legislation. In addition, I contacted my State rep's office and walked through the problems/unintended consequences/unfairness to good dealers, unfairness to small dealers, and even how it adversely affected in several ways consumers and the public (including the very people it is purported to protect). My State rep. office person listened and voted against it- not saying my points helped her decide, but her office did listen, and she voted against it. On the other had, I also contacted by State Senator, who voted in favor of the law, to do the same, and there was zero interest in even listening. I also contacted the AG's office's person driving this, and like the State Senator, he had zero interest in even listening.
The cost to comply with this law from August 1,2013-July 31, 2014 is a minimum of a few hundred dollars, excluding any personnel costs to do the paper work, and the legal advice fees- I cringe when I hear some of interpretations some have come up with on their own believing this law does not apply to them. The annual cost beginning August 1, 2014 appears to be about $1200 for a single person firm, again excluding legal advice fees, with annual transactions of not greater than $250,000 (i.e., that is the minimum cost). Several small local dealers believe they are exempt from the new law because they do "occasional" (a term not defined in the law) shows, although depending how the State enforces this, and who has the burden to show what, it may be cheaper to comply, which then also allows for transactions outside of "occasional" shows. Referring to a post above about surety bonds, the maxi=mum bond under the law is $200,000, so even if the volume were $500,000 per month ($6MM per year), the bond required caps out at $2MM- hence the maximum bond is $200,000
On the receipt that must include, among other things, the precious metal content of bullion coins, an 1893-S Morgan in any grade qualifies a bullion coin ... who really cares what the the precious metal content of an 1893-S Morgan in a PCGS slab graded VF-25, and how do you figure that out when the coin is in a slab? We know the weight of silver it contained as stuck, but what about a VF-25?
Golden Gopher Wieners ... what will those lawmakers think of next ? Forcing YNs to sell Coindoms at Kool Aid Stands in the event a consumer could be screwed out of a spoon of sugar by lawmakers ? Let's sweeten the deal for the consumers. It's already dead. Why beat a dead horse ?
Bout time they clean up that telemarketing cesspool of nefarious bullion & coin dealers in Minnesota. If it works, they need to do the same thing here in Texas.
I've never been impressed that Minn. is pro-business. They have a very socialist approach to issues (lived there 13 years).
"My friends who see my collection sometimes ask what something costs. I tell them and they are in awe at my stupidity." (Baccaruda, 12/03).I find it hard to believe that he (Trump) rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world. (Putin 1/17) Gone but not forgotten. IGWT, Speedy, Bear, BigE, HokieFore, John Burns, Russ, TahoeDale, Dahlonega, Astrorat, Stewart Blay, Oldhoopster, Broadstruck, Ricko.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: In an emergency press conference, the American Numismatic Association announced Monday, July 29, 2013, at 9:21 PM CST, that it is absolutely, positively, 100% AGAINST rouge PCGS forum poster dbcoin jumping off of the Brooklyn Bridge. More news at 10.
Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Greg >>
If the ANA is against it, I am for it. >>
Why would you be for it just because the ANA feels it needs some work and poses potential problems for YOU if you happen to sell bullion or something that could be defined as bullion to a buyer in Minnesota?
Additionally, wouldn't this law require online eBay coin sellers that sell SAE's and GAE'S to folks in Minnesota to apply with the state and post said surety bonds?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Though I am not a dealer, my worry is that these Minnesota laws well be thought of as being functionally sound by other law makers and adopted in other state as well. If that happens, then there will be an even large mess. One must wonder if these laws were meant to generate more state income and not meant to protect the innocent from unscrupulous bullion dealers.
<< <i>Additionally, wouldn't this law require online eBay coin sellers that sell SAE's and GAE'S to folks in Minnesota to apply with the state and post said surety bonds? >>
I believe it would require that dealers who not only sell SAE's and GAE's but even someone who sells a coin that is 1% silver to do so.
Greg
Greg Lyon, ANA Board of Governors 2011-2017 -- The views represented here are my own personal opinions and do not represent those of the American Numismatic Association.
Continuing legislation against business (that which increases cost) will drive more and more business underground. Federal legislation drives manufacturing to other countries due to cost.... It is really painful to watch such laws enacted by people who have no understanding of business/commerce or even remotely research the effects of said law prior to enactment. Overreaching government (state or federal) is killing business - the very engine that made this country great. Cheers, RickO
dbcoin - Are you really that stupid? Nothing personal. Just curious. >>
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you...........
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you........... >>
OK genius, so know one says their coin is worth $300 to submit under Economy? I guess that never happens right? If you want to make up ridiculous stats to prove your point, anyone can. Go support the ANA with your buddy Andy
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you........... >>
OK genius, so know one says their coin is worth $300 to submit under Economy? I guess that never happens right? If you want to make up ridiculous stats to prove your point, anyone can. Go support the ANA with your buddy Andy >>
I should post his private messages to me, but I can't. Does anyone know who his parents are? They need to wash his mouth out with soap, and give him a timeout.
"One must wonder if these laws were meant to generate more state income"
The registration fee is currently $25, but we'll see what they do with that in the future. The cost for compliance is for the background check(s), surety bond, paperwork, and legal advice.
It will likely decrease the number of people that can interact with the MN public, and give the consumers fewer choices (i.e., fewer dealers to buy to and buy from).
Telemarketing was mentioned in a post above. The law is not targeted toward telemarketing, but does impact many dealers that do not do any telemarketing.
Edited to add: Turns out the $25 fee is not really the fee ... that is just of of effectively several fees: The initial registration fee is $30.00. In accordance with Minn. Stat. §16E.22, this fee includes a $5.00 OET surcharge (i.e., there is a $5 fee on top of the $25 fee), which is being collected on behalf of the Minnesota Office of Enterprise Technology to fund a statewide electronic licensing system. In addition to the registration fee, the online system vendor also charges a $9.95 transaction fee and a $1.00 credit card fee ... the real total is 64% more.
Any update on this? A friend in Minnesota was trying to get the people who wrote the law to realize that they screwed up. There were specific complaints...legitimate...about people selling BULLION coins, taking the money and not delivering (similar to Tulving) and the intention was to make these sellers put up a bond to reimburse buyers who didn't get the merchandise.
Certainly weeding out bullion dealers who have criminal records, or went bankrupt and shafted customers out of millions, then reopened under a similar name (rinse and repeat) is a good thing. But making a seller of a single silver dime put up a $25,000 bond is crazy! (there is no "floor" amount at all...the first tier requiring a $25,000 bond is $0 to $200,000....which technically requires you to post the bond if you buy or sell ZERO!)
My friend was assured that this was to regulate the high pressure high commission high volume sellers and hotel-motel scammers...there was no intention to cover numismatic coins of 90% silver or 90% gold, only the bullion-related stuff. Confusion among the lawmakers about .999 and .9999, then learning that gold Krugerrands and Eagles are .9167 fine, and then trying to define it as the non-precious alloy being no more than 1% of the VALUE, and seeing the MISLEADING ads offering to sell gold bullion at 1% over "cost" thinking it meant 1% over bullion value.... the final bill defined a bullion coin as anything more than 1% precious metal. Just totally bungled. Where are these 1% gold or 1% silver bars and coins?
Has this law been corrected to the normal definition of a "bullion coin." ICTA sent several press releases just throwing up their hands in defeat because of those pesky anti-business Democrats. (No party has a monopoly on botched legislation. Texas lawmakers, trying to ban gay marriage, passed a law, and Gov Perry signed it, that bans ALL marriage)
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
While I agree that the law goes way over the line, I can report to you that one of the lowlife's mentioned ripped of a man for his life savings. A salt of the early ww2 vet who lives in a small house in Milton fl. These thieves belong in jail.
The state has now issued forms for dealers to register within the next 60 days to be operational by July 1, 2014. If you buy or sell a 1792 silver-center-cent in Minnesota, you have to notify the customer of the silver content of that coin. If you are the U. S. Mint, selling a silver eagle in Minnesota, you will have to notify the customer in the same way. If you are Heritage, or any other auction house, you will have to notify Minnesota buyers of the precious metal content of any coin sold. I will be very interested to see how many dealers comply with the registration requirements by July 1.
The worst part of this piece of legislation (and I would not mind being licensed in the beautiful state of Minnesota), is having to read " YOU must, YOU must, YOU must, YOU must, YOU must, YOU must…. without one thing except prosecution, fines, and possible jail time if YOU Don't….
Still, regulations and protocol must be necessary to catch a thief. So thank the spurious dealers, people Let's not blame our members here like dbcoin. Just because we have strong opinions doesn't mean we need to hire thugs to hunt us down for them. And the law is designed, essentially to keep "integrity and honesty" in business.
It's just too bad there has to be sooooooooo much red tape telling YOU what YOU must do.
Signing out.
On another note, April 2, 2014, Governor Heineman (sp) of Nebraska signed LB 867 (that's legislative bill # 867 ) into law. This law ends ALL sales tax on coins, currency and bullion (celebrate today)
This is a horrible law. The only thing this will do is drive all the crooked dealers out of Minnesota, and the honest dealers who stay and try to comply with this rediculous law will be run out of business, or simply become an easy target for law enforcement. Where was ICTA/ANA when this law was being proposed? The same place they always are when restrictive and oppresive laws have been passed that put honest dealers out of business. They simply will not get involved, but are quick to take the credit after a few dealers bust their butts, and empty their cash registers to get some of these rediculous laws overturned. There were already enough laws in Minnesota to prosecute the bad dealers and put them out of business for their illegal activites. Now, Minnesota law enforcement will have a field day going after ALL COIN DEALERS who will be struggling to stay in business, and have their vaulable business time gobbled up by having to do all this new reporting that law enforcement demands they do. Don't expect this kind of B.S. to stop in Minnesota. You can bet it will be passed elsewhere as it takes the burden of investigation off of law enforcement, and puts if squarely on the coin dealer. Let's not overlook the fact that the reporting that Minnesota now requires is a complete invasion of privacy of the collector or buyer, all well as the dealer, and opens the door to search and seizure protection that is guarenteed by the U. S. Constitution. I would also expect that Coin Shows will probably disappear from Minnesota when law enforcements insists that out-of-state dealers have to comply with this totally offensive law. A very sad day.
So if you are a seller on ebay you should put in your description that you do not sell in this state and will not be able to honor any sales to said state.
"So if you are a seller on ebay you should put in your description that you do not sell in this state and will not be able to honor any sales to said state."
One of the people assigned to enforce this law mentioned in a meeting last October, they would be monitoring transactions by those out of state selling into MN, including transactions of this type.
bronzemat
Posts: 2,605 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
<< <i>This should be nationwide.
Article >>
Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Greg
bullion sales?
They said criminal financial activities and then proceed to mention felons, forgers, burglers and thieves. How does that jive?
Hmmmmm,
Am I a dealer if I sell a coin to a senior in MN (I live in NV)?
bob
<< <i>
<< <i>This should be nationwide.
Article >>
Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Greg >>
If the ANA is against it, I am for it.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
lobbying and favors for special treatment.
Free Trial
The owner has a very good credit rating and has never been sued for business reasons.
Because it is a biz that deals with untraceable, highly liquid items .....
A surety bond can easily run 5%. Probably more.
Sooooo ..... Our little shop now has a NEW monthly expense of $2500. [ $500,000 x .10 [ 10% requirement] = $50,000 x .05 [ 5% rate ] = $2,500. ]
Try making that up on Silver Eagles .... when your customers already "walk" when the dealer is paying $3 over and is asking $4 over.
Have any of these political geniuses ever bought a piece of jewelry and tried to sell it a year later?
Were they "Cheated"? ..... Have they ever tried to sell any collectable after they bought it?
......................................................
Rant over.
********************
Silver is the mortar that binds the bricks of loyalty.
<< <i>I think it was ill-prepared,” Adkins said. “The result is that it will probably put some smaller dealers that have done nothing wrong out of business.” >>
dbcoin - Are you really that stupid? Nothing personal. Just curious.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
From my perspective, those driving this law had little if any in interest listening to input which could have been helpful in arriving at a law that addressed the real problems that existing laws may not address well enough, but they did not. I know several people, including Gary, that tried to provide this input but it was not of real interest to those driving the legislation. In addition, I contacted my State rep's office and walked through the problems/unintended consequences/unfairness to good dealers, unfairness to small dealers, and even how it adversely affected in several ways consumers and the public (including the very people it is purported to protect). My State rep. office person listened and voted against it- not saying my points helped her decide, but her office did listen, and she voted against it. On the other had, I also contacted by State Senator, who voted in favor of the law, to do the same, and there was zero interest in even listening. I also contacted the AG's office's person driving this, and like the State Senator, he had zero interest in even listening.
The cost to comply with this law from August 1,2013-July 31, 2014 is a minimum of a few hundred dollars, excluding any personnel costs to do the paper work, and the legal advice fees- I cringe when I hear some of interpretations some have come up with on their own believing this law does not apply to them. The annual cost beginning August 1, 2014 appears to be about $1200 for a single person firm, again excluding legal advice fees, with annual transactions of not greater than $250,000 (i.e., that is the minimum cost). Several small local dealers believe they are exempt from the new law because they do "occasional" (a term not defined in the law) shows, although depending how the State enforces this, and who has the burden to show what, it may be cheaper to comply, which then also allows for transactions outside of "occasional" shows. Referring to a post above about surety bonds, the maxi=mum bond under the law is $200,000, so even if the volume were $500,000 per month ($6MM per year), the bond required caps out at $2MM- hence the maximum bond is $200,000
On the receipt that must include, among other things, the precious metal content of bullion coins, an 1893-S Morgan in any grade qualifies a bullion coin ... who really cares what the the precious metal content of an 1893-S Morgan in a PCGS slab graded VF-25, and how do you figure that out when the coin is in a slab? We know the weight of silver it contained as stuck, but what about a VF-25?
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
dbcoin: If the ANA is against it, I am for it.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: In an emergency press conference, the American Numismatic Association announced Monday, July 29, 2013, at 9:21 PM CST, that it is absolutely, positively, 100% AGAINST rouge PCGS forum poster dbcoin jumping off of the Brooklyn Bridge. More news at 10.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>This should be nationwide.
Article >>
Before you call for that, I'd hope you realize the negative impact this bill will have -- especially on dealers of ancient coins. It will make it practically impossible to sell ancient coins in Minnesota.
Why?
1) The bill defines a bullion coin as "any coin containing more than one percent by weight of silver, gold, platinum, or other precious metal."
2) It requires dealers to "prior to a transaction regarding bullion coins, or concurrent with the delivery thereof, [...] provide to the consumer in writing, in a clear and conspicuous manner, the sale or purchase price and the precious metal content of the bullion coins involved in the transaction."
That's pretty easy for an American Silver Eagle or any other coin minted with a regulated fineness. But, next to impossible for coins which were not minted with standard weights / measures.
The ANA is working with ICTA to make the state legislators aware of the problems with this new law.
Greg >>
If the ANA is against it, I am for it. >>
Why would you be for it just because the ANA feels it needs some work and poses potential problems for YOU if you happen to sell bullion or something that could be defined as bullion to a buyer in Minnesota?
Additionally, wouldn't this law require online eBay coin sellers that sell SAE's and GAE'S to folks in Minnesota to apply with the state and post said surety bonds?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Additionally, wouldn't this law require online eBay coin sellers that sell SAE's and GAE'S to folks in Minnesota to apply with the state and post said surety bonds? >>
I believe it would require that dealers who not only sell SAE's and GAE's but even someone who sells a coin that is 1% silver to do so.
Greg
<< <i>If the ANA is against it, I am for it.
dbcoin - Are you really that stupid? Nothing personal. Just curious. >>
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you...........
<< <i>
<< <i>
>>
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you........... >>
OK genius, so know one says their coin is worth $300 to submit under Economy? I guess that never happens right? If you want to make up ridiculous stats to prove your point, anyone can. Go support the ANA with your buddy Andy
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
>>
The other day he said that PCGS submitters purposely put a lower value on their coins to save on the return shipping insurance charges. To go from $5000.00 to $15000.00 will cost you a whopping 5 bucks! To lose $15000.00 of coins when you only have $5000.00 of coverage will cost you........... >>
OK genius, so know one says their coin is worth $300 to submit under Economy? I guess that never happens right? If you want to make up ridiculous stats to prove your point, anyone can. Go support the ANA with your buddy Andy >>
I should post his private messages to me, but I can't. Does anyone know who his parents are? They need to wash his mouth out with soap, and give him a timeout.
<< <i>If the ANA is against it, I am for it.
dbcoin - Are you really that stupid? Nothing personal. Just curious. >>
Well, judging from his sig line he can't count to three, so....
The registration fee is currently $25, but we'll see what they do with that in the future. The cost for compliance is for the background check(s), surety bond, paperwork, and legal advice.
It will likely decrease the number of people that can interact with the MN public, and give the consumers fewer choices (i.e., fewer dealers to buy to and buy from).
Telemarketing was mentioned in a post above. The law is not targeted toward telemarketing, but does impact many dealers that do not do any telemarketing.
Edited to add: Turns out the $25 fee is not really the fee ... that is just of of effectively several fees: The initial registration fee is $30.00. In accordance with Minn. Stat. §16E.22, this fee includes a $5.00 OET surcharge (i.e., there is a $5 fee on top of the $25 fee), which is being collected on behalf of the Minnesota Office of Enterprise Technology to fund a statewide electronic licensing system. In addition to the registration fee, the online system vendor also charges a $9.95 transaction fee and a $1.00 credit card fee ... the real total is 64% more.
<< <i>
<< <i>If the ANA is against it, I am for it.
dbcoin - Are you really that stupid? Nothing personal. Just curious. >>
Well, judging from his sig line he can't count to three, so.... >>
Keep your eye on your PM. He seems to think he owns this board with the threats and language he used in my messages.
Certainly weeding out bullion dealers who have criminal records, or went bankrupt and shafted customers out of millions, then reopened under a similar name (rinse and repeat) is a good thing. But making a seller of a single silver dime put up a $25,000 bond is crazy! (there is no "floor" amount at all...the first tier requiring a $25,000 bond is $0 to $200,000....which technically requires you to post the bond if you buy or sell ZERO!)
My friend was assured that this was to regulate the high pressure high commission high volume sellers and hotel-motel scammers...there was no intention to cover numismatic coins of 90% silver or 90% gold, only the bullion-related stuff. Confusion among the lawmakers about .999 and .9999, then learning that gold Krugerrands and Eagles are .9167 fine, and then trying to define it as the non-precious alloy being no more than 1% of the VALUE, and seeing the MISLEADING ads offering to sell gold bullion at 1% over "cost" thinking it meant 1% over bullion value.... the final bill defined a bullion coin as anything more than 1% precious metal. Just totally bungled. Where are these 1% gold or 1% silver bars and coins?
Has this law been corrected to the normal definition of a "bullion coin." ICTA sent several press releases just throwing up their hands in defeat because of
those pesky anti-business Democrats. (No party has a monopoly on botched legislation. Texas lawmakers, trying to ban gay marriage, passed a law, and Gov Perry signed
it, that bans ALL marriage)
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
And here is a summary of what is dealers are to do: Checklist
Still, regulations and protocol must be necessary to catch a thief. So thank the spurious dealers, people
It's just too bad there has to be sooooooooo much red tape telling YOU what YOU must do.
Signing out.
On another note, April 2, 2014, Governor Heineman (sp) of Nebraska signed LB 867 (that's legislative bill # 867 ) into law. This law ends ALL sales tax on coins, currency and bullion (celebrate today)
crooked dealers out of Minnesota, and the honest dealers who
stay and try to comply with this rediculous law will be run out of
business, or simply become an easy target for law enforcement.
Where was ICTA/ANA when this law was being proposed? The
same place they always are when restrictive and oppresive laws
have been passed that put honest dealers out of business.
They simply will not get involved, but are quick to take the credit
after a few dealers bust their butts, and empty their cash registers
to get some of these rediculous laws overturned.
There were already enough laws in Minnesota to prosecute the
bad dealers and put them out of business for their illegal activites.
Now, Minnesota law enforcement will have a field day going after
ALL COIN DEALERS who will be struggling to stay in business,
and have their vaulable business time gobbled up by having to
do all this new reporting that law enforcement demands they do.
Don't expect this kind of B.S. to stop in Minnesota. You can bet
it will be passed elsewhere as it takes the burden of investigation
off of law enforcement, and puts if squarely on the coin dealer.
Let's not overlook the fact that the reporting that Minnesota
now requires is a complete invasion of privacy of the collector
or buyer, all well as the dealer, and opens the door to search
and seizure protection that is guarenteed by the U. S. Constitution.
I would also expect that Coin Shows will probably disappear from Minnesota when law enforcements insists that out-of-state dealers
have to comply with this totally offensive law. A very sad day.
One of the people assigned to enforce this law mentioned in a meeting last October, they would be monitoring transactions by those out of state selling into MN, including transactions of this type.