<< <i>So to set this situation up in another scenario, what if you discovered a cave with a natural vein of high grade gold on your property. Would the government make you estimate it's worth and immediately force you to pay all taxes on it in the year it was discovered? Seems to me the gold would have to be mined, assayed, and sold before it can be taxed. If it is not sold then how can you really say what it is worth with any accuracy? >>
To compare to your example, the found gold coins have equivalently been mined and assayed, just not sold.
Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
And Heritage now has an auction venue for your new domain.
Given that any bank would only credit your account with the legal tender value of one of the double eagles, namely $20 in FRN, why should you be legally required to pay taxes on anything more than $20?
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
You didn't buy a domain. You bought the rights to exclusive use of the name of a website in the dot com domain. Big whoop. Now go buy saddleridgehoard.org, and saddleridgehoard.edu, and saddleridgehoard.net, and saddleridgehoard.biz and...well you get the drift.
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
And Heritage now has an auction venue for your new domain.
Given that any bank would only credit your account with the legal tender value of one of the double eagles, namely $20 in FRN, why should you be legally required to pay taxes on anything more than $20? >>
This was also part of my question like four pages back .
I do remember a story where a business tried to circumvent taxes by paying employees with gold coins of lower value.
Employee made $40 this week, etc.
-D
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
<< <i>So to set this situation up in another scenario, what if you discovered a cave with a natural vein of high grade gold on your property. Would the government make you estimate it's worth and immediately force you to pay all taxes on it in the year it was discovered? Seems to me the gold would have to be mined, assayed, and sold before it can be taxed. If it is not sold then how can you really say what it is worth with any accuracy? >>
There are numerous experts in the coin field that can accurately evaluate a collection's value to within 5-20%. The majority of the coins in this hoard are fairly easily valued when compared to other similar coins that have been sold in the market place. You'd be surprise how accurate these guys are. Auction houses have to do this all the time since they determine minimum reserve prices and what commission to charge you based on the expected market value of the coins. Kagin has been doing gold coins for decades and no doubt has numerous sources at this disposal. I would bet that potential buyers have beseiged him with offers on those coins. He's probably had a dozen offers on that 1886-s $10 Lib in MS66. Prior to this the highest graded was a 64...of which there plenty. I'd bet David Hall wish he has this one in his old $10 Lib set. Since one of Legend's customers bought that set intact, now they are probably lusting over that 86-s. There have been pop 1 MS66 or MS65 $10 Libs sold to get a good feel for the price. The date is available enough in MS63 and below. With 14 specimens in MS64 that's probably enough for all the high grade $10 Lib sets our there. But only one set builder can have the MS66.
<< <i>Let's say an earlier property owner hid gold in the ground and died, his heirs sell off the property not knowing the gold was left on the property. Decades later it is discovered. Who owns the gold?
I will be surprised if the finders are able to stay anonymous as there are people that will want to know the location for reasons of where it came from. >>
Just because someone may want to know who the property owners are, doesn't obligate anyone to tell them. It's possible I suppose if one strongly suspects that they have a right to the coins that they could get a court order to have them outed. >>
If someone strongly suspects they have a right to the coins they should know where the property is!!!!!!
I believe that these coins are the same coins from the Walter Dimmick robbery of the San Francisco mint in 1901. Here is my view:
The San Francisco Mint kept it's "older" gold coins in bags that were organized by the date the coin was minted. Each bag had about 250 coins, and there were multiple dates in each bag. The thief (Walter Dimmick) knew to take the bags with the oldest coins first, because he knew those had the highest value. According to the news stories, there were six mint bags stolen. According to the Kagin interview, there were six cans of coins that were found, which is identical to the number of missing mint bags.
If we knew where the gold was found, we could determine if the land had once been owned by an individual involved in the SF Mint.
I believe that the so-called "Saddlebrook Ridge Hoard" are coins that were stolen from the SF Mint. The owners probably know more than they are saying.
<< <i>Let's say an earlier property owner hid gold in the ground and died, his heirs sell off the property not knowing the gold was left on the property. Decades later it is discovered. Who owns the gold?
I will be surprised if the finders are able to stay anonymous as there are people that will want to know the location for reasons of where it came from. >>
Just because someone may want to know who the property owners are, doesn't obligate anyone to tell them. It's possible I suppose if one strongly suspects that they have a right to the coins that they could get a court order to have them outed. >>
If someone strongly suspects they have a right to the coins they should know where the property is!!!!!! >>
the one thing that bothers me about this story is the fact a MS66 along with 65s ,64s ,63s grades were plucked out out of these cans. ........almost as if these coins were handled with kids gloves.
<< <i>It's interesting to me how many people are upset about the taxes on a giant windfall.
Two scenarios:
1. You score a $5 million windfall, free and clear 2. You score a $5 million windfall, after taxes
#1 and #2 would make me equally happy >>
Surprised no one has mentioned how if John and Mary's finding of the coins had been just two months earlier [2012 instead of 2013] the maximum federal tax rate for filing jointly would have been 35% of the amount over $388,350,00.00. For 2013 that rate jumped to 39.6% for the amount over $225,000.00. That is approximately at least an additional
$600,000.00 in federal income taxes owed just because of the two month delay in discovery based upon a fair market value of ten million dollars for the Saddle Ridge Hoard.
Probably poetic justice though since it sounds like John and Mary had a pre discovery life style that fit the demographic of those who supported the take from the rich and share with the low or non earners via legislated donations imposed by recent tax rate increases.
(As the tax attorney on this thread has pointed out, they don't even get to benefit from
capital gains treatment though that might be an angle worth contending in tax court given what is at stake. )
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold. I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor? The evidence already seems very good. If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help.
<< <i>I believe that these coins are the same coins from the Walter Dimmick robbery of the San Francisco mint in 1901. Here is my view:
The San Francisco Mint kept it's "older" gold coins in bags that were organized by the date the coin was minted. Each bag had about 250 coins, and there were multiple dates in each bag. The thief (Walter Dimmick) knew to take the bags with the oldest coins first, because he knew those had the highest value. According to the news stories, there were six mint bags stolen. According to the Kagin interview, there were six cans of coins that were found, which is identical to the number of missing mint bags.
If we knew where the gold was found, we could determine if the land had once been owned by an individual involved in the SF Mint.
I believe that the so-called "Saddlebrook Ridge Hoard" are coins that were stolen from the SF Mint. The owners probably know more than they are saying. >>
On what documents do you base this history of how the San Francisco Mint stored its coins?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold. I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor? The evidence already seems very good. If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold. I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor? The evidence already seems very good. If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold. I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor? The evidence already seems very good. If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
Yes, and where are the other 73 coins? >>
There are actually well under 1,400 $20's in the hoard, the rest of the coins being $10's and $5's.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
You're all so crazy. You take a rather simple scenario and turn it into a Tom Clancy novel.
People ask about the one "D" coin but ignore the other 1426 coins. You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
Two big puzzles that all of a sudden fit each other like a perfect match. Go with the stronger case and work from that.
Henway, for someone as cynical as you I'm shocked that you're so protective and avoiding the quite powerful circumstantial evidence. Come on Captain.
And who cares about the taxes? It's about coins. This ain't no accounting forum. It means nothing.
I love this. I wish there was NO stolen coins. I would love to see these in auction. They are great coins. But as I said before, with every chest of treasure a pirate is attached.
Except it's more likely that the coins Dimmick is believed to have stolen would be mostly one date/mm.
An employee taking a little every now and then over several years might not be noticed right away.Since the dates on the Saddle Ridge coins span decades,if one leans towards the theory that the coins might have been stolen from the Mint vault,it must be that the coins were removed from an area in the vault where theft might tend to go unnoticed.The thief is buying time,in other words.
The vault containing some gold coins minted decades earlier from when the thefts occurred over their time span is a distinct possibility.I would think earlier minted coins would be pushed to the back of the vault to make room for new ones.
Who owned the land the coins were found on around 1900?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>You're all so crazy. You take a rather simple scenario and turn it into a Tom Clancy novel.
People ask about the one "D" coin but ignore the other 1426 coins. You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
Two big puzzles that all of a sudden fit each other like a perfect match. Go with the stronger case and work from that.
Henway, for someone as cynical as you I'm shocked that you're so protective and avoiding the quite powerful circumstantial evidence. Come on Captain.
And who cares about the taxes? It's about coins. This ain't no accounting forum. It means nothing.
I love this. I wish there was NO stolen coins. I would love to see these in auction. They are great coins. But as I said before, with every chest of treasure a pirate is attached.
Cheers! >>
Having once purchased a hoard of $20's in Chicago that was over $21,000 face value (see Bowers' book on coin hoards), and being told by the seller that that was only her share of the inheritance, I must reject any inane suspicion that any large hoard of gold must be stolen.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Any reports from Atlanta as to what dates and mint marks are on display at Kagin's booth?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< <i>Don't take it that way. I did say "people" and I have talked to a few people who have asked the same thing. My response was the same.
I'm merely an advocate of my opinion and not in attack mode. >>
There are other explanations that are just as likely, but it will be interesting to see if the mint records are good enough to prove you correct. There are a number of things that aren't known at this point also.
There don't seem to be any coins close to the time Dimmick committed the theft (1901?) - the most recent coin is 1894. Again, what kinds of coins would the SF mint have in 1901? Presumably coins minted that year.
The theft was reported in 1901.The theft or thefts could have happened several years,maybe even decades earlier.Who was the SF Mint Director around 1900?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
True - there is no inventory or description of the distribution of dates and mint marks in that lengthy web page I linked. I was using it for the overall quantity / face value, date of theft and location. I don't know the distribution of mint marks, except for brief mention of S mint coins in the Kagin article. And given that it was found in California, if there are many S mint it would not be a marker for theft from the SF mint. So the mint mark guess was a poor choice on my part.
I still think the time frame, dates, location, and quantities are an excellent match to the Dimmick theft. The match of the six bags to the six cans is intriguing also. [Edit to add:] Photos in the article below show cans of different sizes, so we shouldn't expect the can and bag count to match.
----- March 2 edit to add: ----- Here is some info on the distribution of mint marks and grades: "About a third of the coins, including this 1866 piece, were found to be in pristine condition when cleaned. Most were minted in S.F., and many were never circulated." from the caption for photo #8 in an article which interviewed David McCarthy at Kagin's: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Gold-Country-couple-discovers-10-million-in-5266314.php#photo-5937211
<< <i>Would it be possible to get these coins certified and brought to market without getting Kagin involved? >>
Why?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
My buddy has an antique store on SoCal and told me his opinion that at least one of those metal cans was a lot newer than the other ones. His "opinion".
On what documents do you base this history of how the San Francisco Mint stored its coins?
I don't have any documents, but I think that it's a reasonable method for the mint to store coins that it had minted but had not placed into circulation. The extra coins would be put in the oldest available bag for such coins. When the bag contained 250 coins, a new bag would be used.
It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. I think that each can represents a single stolen mint bag. It would make sense that a thief would just transfer the contents of each bag to a can, and then destroy the bags.
My theory also explains why there are so many high quality, mint-state coins in the "hoard". Those coins were created at the SF Mint and never placed into circulation. They were stolen from the mint's vault!
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6. You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins You do not know where the property is You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions.
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6. You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins You do not know where the property is You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Also, it could simply be an amount of coins equal to 6 bags worth. I wonder if transcripts of the trial are available.
Some articles said 6 cans, others say 8 cans. They don't say the exact split of coins per can, one says that one can held "a few" coins. One says that one can contained "several cans of coins" in it. One said there was one can hanging in the tree.
That would equal 8 cans and 6 had the coins. Anyone find a better description?
<< <i> You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable? >>
Bingo! Of course Dimmick would spend some to enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains. Just enough to be under the radar until the Mint found out what was missing. This is TOO darn coincidental and, if it is true these are the stolen coins (which is highly likely) it should be much easier to prove it than it was for the Langboard Saints.
I did a video interview with David McCarthy and Don Kagin this week at the National Money Show. It just went live on the ANA YouTube page if you want to check it out. The best part is listening to McCarthy describe all the work that went into getting the coins ready to send to PCGS -- the man has a tireless work ethic.
<< <i> You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable? >>
Bingo! Of course Dimmick would spend some to enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains. Just enough to be under the radar until the Mint found out what was missing. This is TOO darn coincidental and, if it is true these are the stolen coins (which is highly likely) it should be much easier to prove it than it was for the Langboard Saints. >>
One can imagine that John and Mary's attorneys are already checking out Dimmick's genealogy to see if he had any possible connection to the property through relatives, family or having lived in close proximity. Also the transcripts from the trial should be quite revealing as to how vault contents at the Mint were organized, maintained, counted, etc.
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6. You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins You do not know where the property is You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Well said.
And I had another thought. The Treasury Department operated a Subtreasury within the San Francisco Mint building. I would speculate that this was because it had wonderful security; what better place to run a Subtreasury?
I would further speculate that the Subtreasury had its own vault or vaults. I would further speculate that older, circulated coins coming into the Subtreasury in the normal course of business would be stored in its own vault(s), and not comingled with the coins in the Mint's vaults. If this speculation is correct, then the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
Dimmick worked for the Mint, and the contemporary accounts state that he stole from the Mint. The 1901 Mint Report, published late in that year, mentions that the San Francisco Mint was short $30,000 in its accounts, not the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco.
There is no logical reason to connect the Saddleridge Hoard with the Dimmick theft.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
There have been some suggestions that Dimmick or whoever stashed the coins had some numismatic knowledge.
I am uncertain if numismatic was even a word in 1901, and very few coins were worth more than their face value to the few collectors who might have had interest. There does seem to have been some interest in pre 1839 gold coins.
As an example, any $3 gold coin could have been had for $4 on a dealer price sheet from 1880.
For someone stealing or stashing around $30,000 face value in gold coins, the gold content would have dictated decisions.
<< <i>I did a video interview with David McCarthy and Don Kagin this week at the National Money Show. It just went live on the ANA YouTube page if you want to check it out. The best part is listening to McCarthy describe all the work that went into getting the coins ready to send to PCGS -- the man has a tireless work ethic.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
<< <i>So to set this situation up in another scenario, what if you discovered a cave with a natural vein of high grade gold on your property. Would the government make you estimate it's worth and immediately force you to pay all taxes on it in the year it was discovered? Seems to me the gold would have to be mined, assayed, and sold before it can be taxed. If it is not sold then how can you really say what it is worth with any accuracy? >>
To compare to your example, the found gold coins have equivalently been mined and assayed, just not sold.
Erik
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
And Heritage now has an auction venue for your new domain.
Given that any bank would only credit your account with the legal tender value of one of the double eagles, namely $20 in FRN, why should you be legally required to pay taxes on anything more than $20?
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
You didn't buy a domain. You bought the rights to exclusive use of the name of a website in the dot com domain. Big whoop. Now go buy saddleridgehoard.org, and saddleridgehoard.edu, and saddleridgehoard.net, and saddleridgehoard.biz and...well you get the drift.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
<< <i>
Need 72 blue boxes to hold them all.
<< <i>
<< <i>Cool story…I can't believe after reading this entire thread that domain www.thesaddleridgehoard.com was still available for purchase…so I bought it…$12 gamble
Erik >>
And Heritage now has an auction venue for your new domain.
Given that any bank would only credit your account with the legal tender value of one of the double eagles, namely $20 in FRN, why should you be legally required to pay taxes on anything more than $20?
This was also part of my question like four pages back
I do remember a story where a business tried to circumvent taxes by paying employees with gold coins of lower value.
Employee made $40 this week, etc.
-D
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
-Horace
We live in strange times.
<< <i>Just heard Don Kagin interviewed on NPR...
We live in strange times. >>
Why? What did he say?
<< <i>So to set this situation up in another scenario, what if you discovered a cave with a natural vein of high grade gold on your property. Would the government make you estimate it's worth and immediately force you to pay all taxes on it in the year it was discovered? Seems to me the gold would have to be mined, assayed, and sold before it can be taxed. If it is not sold then how can you really say what it is worth with any accuracy? >>
There are numerous experts in the coin field that can accurately evaluate a collection's value to within 5-20%. The majority of the coins in this hoard are fairly easily valued when compared to other similar coins that have been
sold in the market place. You'd be surprise how accurate these guys are. Auction houses have to do this all the time since they determine minimum reserve prices and what commission to charge you based on the expected
market value of the coins. Kagin has been doing gold coins for decades and no doubt has numerous sources at this disposal. I would bet that potential buyers have beseiged him with offers on those coins. He's probably had
a dozen offers on that 1886-s $10 Lib in MS66. Prior to this the highest graded was a 64...of which there plenty. I'd bet David Hall wish he has this one in his old $10 Lib set. Since one of Legend's customers bought that set
intact, now they are probably lusting over that 86-s. There have been pop 1 MS66 or MS65 $10 Libs sold to get a good feel for the price. The date is available enough in MS63 and below. With 14 specimens in MS64 that's
probably enough for all the high grade $10 Lib sets our there. But only one set builder can have the MS66.
<< <i>
<< <i>Let's say an earlier property owner hid gold in the ground and died, his heirs sell off the property not knowing the gold was left on the property. Decades later it is discovered. Who owns the gold?
I will be surprised if the finders are able to stay anonymous as there are people that will want to know the location for reasons of where it came from. >>
Just because someone may want to know who the property owners are, doesn't obligate anyone to tell them. It's possible I suppose if one strongly suspects that they have a right to the coins that they could get a court order to have them outed. >>
If someone strongly suspects they have a right to the coins they should know where the property is!!!!!!
The San Francisco Mint kept it's "older" gold coins in bags that were organized by the date the coin was minted. Each bag had about 250 coins, and there were multiple dates in each bag. The thief (Walter Dimmick) knew to take the bags with the oldest coins first, because he knew those had the highest value. According to the news stories, there were six mint bags stolen. According to the Kagin interview, there were six cans of coins that were found, which is identical to the number of missing mint bags.
If we knew where the gold was found, we could determine if the land had once been owned by an individual involved in the SF Mint.
I believe that the so-called "Saddlebrook Ridge Hoard" are coins that were stolen from the SF Mint. The owners probably know more than they are saying.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Let's say an earlier property owner hid gold in the ground and died, his heirs sell off the property not knowing the gold was left on the property. Decades later it is discovered. Who owns the gold?
I will be surprised if the finders are able to stay anonymous as there are people that will want to know the location for reasons of where it came from. >>
Just because someone may want to know who the property owners are, doesn't obligate anyone to tell them. It's possible I suppose if one strongly suspects that they have a right to the coins that they could get a court order to have them outed. >>
If someone strongly suspects they have a right to the coins they should know where the property is!!!!!! >>
You would think so.
Two scenarios:
1. You score a $5 million windfall, free and clear
2. You score a $5 million windfall, after taxes
#1 and #2 would make me equally happy
<< <i>It's interesting to me how many people are upset about the taxes on a giant windfall.
Two scenarios:
1. You score a $5 million windfall, free and clear
2. You score a $5 million windfall, after taxes
#1 and #2 would make me equally happy
Surprised no one has mentioned how if John and Mary's finding of the coins had been just two months earlier [2012 instead of 2013] the maximum federal tax rate for filing jointly would have been 35% of the amount over $388,350,00.00. For 2013 that rate jumped to 39.6% for the amount over $225,000.00. That is approximately at least an additional
$600,000.00 in federal income taxes owed just because of the two month delay in discovery based upon a fair market value of ten million dollars for the Saddle Ridge Hoard.
Probably poetic justice though since it sounds like John and Mary had a pre discovery life style that fit the demographic of those who supported the take from the rich and share with the low or non earners via legislated donations imposed by recent tax rate increases.
(As the tax attorney on this thread has pointed out, they don't even get to benefit from
capital gains treatment though that might be an angle worth contending in tax court given what is at stake. )
http://altereddimensions.net/2014/saddle-ridge-hoard-couple-discovers-10-million-old-1890-gold-coins-buried-backyard-mint-theft
I don't think it's necessary to link a mint employee with the property, but it's worth checking.
He could have simply chosen a remote spot to cache them.
If so, I wonder why he didn't retrieve them after he was released from prison.
Maybe he forgot the exact location?
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold.
I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor?
The evidence already seems very good.
If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help.
<< <i>I believe that these coins are the same coins from the Walter Dimmick robbery of the San Francisco mint in 1901. Here is my view:
The San Francisco Mint kept it's "older" gold coins in bags that were organized by the date the coin was minted. Each bag had about 250 coins, and there were multiple dates in each bag. The thief (Walter Dimmick) knew to take the bags with the oldest coins first, because he knew those had the highest value. According to the news stories, there were six mint bags stolen. According to the Kagin interview, there were six cans of coins that were found, which is identical to the number of missing mint bags.
If we knew where the gold was found, we could determine if the land had once been owned by an individual involved in the SF Mint.
I believe that the so-called "Saddlebrook Ridge Hoard" are coins that were stolen from the SF Mint. The owners probably know more than they are saying. >>
On what documents do you base this history of how the San Francisco Mint stored its coins?
<< <i>It's interesting to me how many people are upset about the taxes on a giant windfall.
Two scenarios:
1. You score a $5 million windfall, free and clear
2. You score a $5 million windfall, after taxes
#1 and #2 would make me equally happy
They did nothing to merit the taxes except to pass a law saying they could have it.
They are extremely wasteful and squanderous.
The private sector can do more good for more people with that money than the Government will.
<< <i>The quantity, dates, mintmarks and condition of the coins fits the Walter Dimmick theft.
http://altereddimensions.net/2014/saddle-ridge-hoard-couple-discovers-10-million-old-1890-gold-coins-buried-backyard-mint-theft
I don't think it's necessary to link a mint employee with the property, but it's worth checking.
He could have simply chosen a remote spot to cache them.
If so, I wonder why he didn't retrieve them after he was released from prison.
Maybe he forgot the exact location?
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold.
I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor?
The evidence already seems very good.
If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports?
<< <i>
<< <i>The quantity, dates, mintmarks and condition of the coins fits the Walter Dimmick theft.
http://altereddimensions.net/2014/saddle-ridge-hoard-couple-discovers-10-million-old-1890-gold-coins-buried-backyard-mint-theft
I don't think it's necessary to link a mint employee with the property, but it's worth checking.
He could have simply chosen a remote spot to cache them.
If so, I wonder why he didn't retrieve them after he was released from prison.
Maybe he forgot the exact location?
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold.
I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor?
The evidence already seems very good.
If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
Yes, and where are the other 73 coins?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The quantity, dates, mintmarks and condition of the coins fits the Walter Dimmick theft.
http://altereddimensions.net/2014/saddle-ridge-hoard-couple-discovers-10-million-old-1890-gold-coins-buried-backyard-mint-theft
I don't think it's necessary to link a mint employee with the property, but it's worth checking.
He could have simply chosen a remote spot to cache them.
If so, I wonder why he didn't retrieve them after he was released from prison.
Maybe he forgot the exact location?
It seems reasonable the Treasury would take legal action to claim the coins, and put the sale on hold.
I wonder what level of circumstantial evidence would be required to rule in their favor?
The evidence already seems very good.
If it could be proven the SF mint had an 1866-S No Motto in their vault at one time, that might also help. >>
I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
Yes, and where are the other 73 coins? >>
There are actually well under 1,400 $20's in the hoard, the rest of the coins being $10's and $5's.
People ask about the one "D" coin but ignore the other 1426 coins. You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
Two big puzzles that all of a sudden fit each other like a perfect match. Go with the stronger case and work from that.
Henway, for someone as cynical as you I'm shocked that you're so protective and avoiding the quite powerful circumstantial evidence. Come on Captain.
And who cares about the taxes? It's about coins. This ain't no accounting forum. It means nothing.
I love this. I wish there was NO stolen coins. I would love to see these in auction. They are great coins. But as I said before, with every chest of treasure a pirate is attached.
Cheers!
An employee taking a little every now and then over several years might not be noticed right away.Since the dates on the Saddle Ridge coins span decades,if one leans towards the theory that the coins might have been stolen from the Mint vault,it must be that the coins were removed from an area in the vault where theft might tend to go unnoticed.The thief is buying time,in other words.
The vault containing some gold coins minted decades earlier from when the thefts occurred over their time span is a distinct possibility.I would think earlier minted coins would be pushed to the back of the vault to make room for new ones.
Who owned the land the coins were found on around 1900?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>You're all so crazy. You take a rather simple scenario and turn it into a Tom Clancy novel.
People ask about the one "D" coin but ignore the other 1426 coins. You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
Two big puzzles that all of a sudden fit each other like a perfect match. Go with the stronger case and work from that.
Henway, for someone as cynical as you I'm shocked that you're so protective and avoiding the quite powerful circumstantial evidence. Come on Captain.
And who cares about the taxes? It's about coins. This ain't no accounting forum. It means nothing.
I love this. I wish there was NO stolen coins. I would love to see these in auction. They are great coins. But as I said before, with every chest of treasure a pirate is attached.
Cheers!
Having once purchased a hoard of $20's in Chicago that was over $21,000 face value (see Bowers' book on coin hoards), and being told by the seller that that was only her share of the inheritance, I must reject any inane suspicion that any large hoard of gold must be stolen.
100% Positive BST transactions
<< <i> People ask about the one "D" coin but ignore the other 1426 coins. >>
One person, me, asked about what date it might be, as I collect Half Eagles from the Southern Mints.
I wasn't aware asking such a simple question meant I was ignoring 1400 plus other coins.
I'm merely an advocate of my opinion and not in attack mode.
and the on-going interest surrounding this stash.
<< <i>Don't take it that way. I did say "people" and I have talked to a few people who have asked the same thing. My response was the same.
I'm merely an advocate of my opinion and not in attack mode.
There are other explanations that are just as likely, but it will be interesting to see if the mint records are good enough to prove you correct. There are a number of things that aren't known at this point also.
The theft was reported in 1901.The theft or thefts could have happened several years,maybe even decades earlier.Who was the SF Mint Director around 1900?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>I'm sorry, but where do you see any description of the quantities, dates, mint marks or conditions of the coins that Dimmick stole in the contemporary reports? >>
True - there is no inventory or description of the distribution of dates and mint marks in that lengthy web page I linked.
I was using it for the overall quantity / face value, date of theft and location.
I don't know the distribution of mint marks, except for brief mention of S mint coins in the Kagin article.
And given that it was found in California, if there are many S mint it would not be a marker for theft from the SF mint.
So the mint mark guess was a poor choice on my part.
I still think the time frame, dates, location, and quantities are an excellent match to the Dimmick theft.
The match of the six bags to the six cans is intriguing also.
[Edit to add:] Photos in the article below show cans of different sizes, so we shouldn't expect the can and bag count to match.
-----
March 2 edit to add:
-----
Here is some info on the distribution of mint marks and grades:
"About a third of the coins, including this 1866 piece, were found to be in pristine condition when cleaned.
Most were minted in S.F., and many were never circulated."
from the caption for photo #8 in an article which interviewed David McCarthy at Kagin's:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Gold-Country-couple-discovers-10-million-in-5266314.php#photo-5937211
<< <i>Would it be possible to get these coins certified and brought to market without getting Kagin involved? >>
Why?
other ones. His "opinion".
I don't have any documents, but I think that it's a reasonable method for the mint to store coins that it had minted but had not placed into circulation. The extra coins would be put in the oldest available bag for such coins. When the bag contained 250 coins, a new bag would be used.
It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. I think that each can represents a single stolen mint bag. It would make sense that a thief would just transfer the contents of each bag to a can, and then destroy the bags.
My theory also explains why there are so many high quality, mint-state coins in the "hoard". Those coins were created at the SF Mint and never placed into circulation. They were stolen from the mint's vault!
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6.
You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint
You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard
The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins
You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins
You do not know where the property is
You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins
You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6.
You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint
You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard
The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins
You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins
You do not know where the property is
You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins
You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Also, it could simply be an amount of coins equal to 6 bags worth. I wonder if transcripts of the trial are available.
<< <i>I say it's Dimmick. >>
...I say dead men tell no tales
Erik
They don't say the exact split of coins per can, one says that one can held "a few" coins.
One says that one can contained "several cans of coins" in it.
One said there was one can hanging in the tree.
That would equal 8 cans and 6 had the coins. Anyone find a better description?
<< <i> You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
>>
Bingo! Of course Dimmick would spend some to enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains. Just enough to be under the radar until the Mint found out what was missing. This is TOO darn coincidental and, if it is true these are the stolen coins (which is highly likely) it should be much easier to prove it than it was for the Langboard Saints.
What's the coolest thing in your booth? With Kagins and the Saddle Ridge hoard
Jake Sherlock, ANA staff member
Member, TEC
<< <i>
<< <i> You wonder what about the unnacounted coins as if it makes a difference. Hey, he spent a few bucks. Whiskey, whores and a fancy suit. Like that's unfathomable?
>>
Bingo! Of course Dimmick would spend some to enjoy the fruits of his ill-gotten gains. Just enough to be under the radar until the Mint found out what was missing. This is TOO darn coincidental and, if it is true these are the stolen coins (which is highly likely) it should be much easier to prove it than it was for the Langboard Saints. >>
One can imagine that John and Mary's attorneys are already checking out Dimmick's genealogy to see if he had any possible connection to the property through relatives, family or having lived in close proximity. Also the transcripts from the trial should be quite revealing as to how vault contents at the Mint were organized, maintained, counted, etc.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6.
You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint
You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard
The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins
You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins
You do not know where the property is
You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins
You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Well said.
And I had another thought. The Treasury Department operated a Subtreasury within the San Francisco Mint building. I would speculate that this was because it had wonderful security; what better place to run a Subtreasury?
I would further speculate that the Subtreasury had its own vault or vaults. I would further speculate that older, circulated coins coming into the Subtreasury in the normal course of business would be stored in its own vault(s), and not comingled with the coins in the Mint's vaults. If this speculation is correct, then the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
Dimmick worked for the Mint, and the contemporary accounts state that he stole from the Mint. The 1901 Mint Report, published late in that year, mentions that the San Francisco Mint was short $30,000 in its accounts, not the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco.
There is no logical reason to connect the Saddleridge Hoard with the Dimmick theft.
TD
I am uncertain if numismatic was even a word in 1901, and very few coins were worth more than their face value
to the few collectors who might have had interest. There does seem to have been some interest in pre 1839 gold coins.
As an example, any $3 gold coin could have been had for $4 on a dealer price sheet from 1880.
For someone stealing or stashing around $30,000 face value in gold coins, the gold content would have
dictated decisions.
<< <i>I did a video interview with David McCarthy and Don Kagin this week at the National Money Show. It just went live on the ANA YouTube page if you want to check it out. The best part is listening to McCarthy describe all the work that went into getting the coins ready to send to PCGS -- the man has a tireless work ethic.
What's the coolest thing in your booth? With Kagins and the Saddle Ridge hoard >>
Link does not work.