New Minnesota coin law targets shady dealers
bronzemat
Posts: 2,675 ✭✭✭✭✭
0
bronzemat
Posts: 2,675 ✭✭✭✭✭
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?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
"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)
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
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.