I do empathize with the OP as stated previously, but I also know that insurance tries to deny claims whenever possible. Plausible deniability is what they play. On one level, it makes sense, otherwise they would be insolvent paying on every single claim (including the fraudulent ones). Declaring the coin to be bullion was a way to deny OP the payout, so they used it. If OP pushes the issue, they will have to relent, but it was worth their try. I am sure just about everyone here has experienced their legitimate claim to be denied by both auto and health insurance companies at some point in their lives.
"So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve
@Justacommeman said:
Collectible silver and gold bars aren’t covered either. I found out the hard away.
m
Call them antique or vintage paperweights or door stops.
You still have to prove their worth complete with receipts. Most if not all of my collector bars were paid in cash at rest areas or the back of an alley where receipts are rarer then a Roger Burdette compliment to Daniel Carr.
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Another point in the OP's favor occurred to me while I was swilling a beer at the Mexican restaurant.
If, as mentioned above, bullion bars are not insurable even if they have collectable value, then coins should not count as bullion even if they are worth only bullion value.
@JBK said:
Another point in the OP's favor occurred to me while I was swilling a beer at the Mexican restaurant.
If, as mentioned above, bullion bars are not insurable even if they have collectable value, then coins should not count as bullion even if they are worth only bullion value.
The USPS can't have it both ways.
I don't follow that at all. How many beers did you have?
They are denying that both forms of gold are bullion with no collectible value.
@JBK said:
Another point in the OP's favor occurred to me while I was swilling a beer at the Mexican restaurant.
If, as mentioned above, bullion bars are not insurable even if they have collectable value, then coins should not count as bullion even if they are worth only bullion value.
The USPS can't have it both ways.
I don't follow that at all. How many beers did you have?
They are denying that both forms of gold are bullion with no collectible value.
It makes perfect sense to me.
USPS seems to say....
1) Bullion bar = bullion, regardless of collectable premium.
2) Collectable coin = numismatic item, but only if value is significantly over bullion.
Point #2 above is not reasonable or consistent based on their position on #1. If bullion is considered bullion no matter the value, then a coin should be considered a coin regardless of value.
There are 3 different "Govt" versions of what constitutes the category that a 1924 MS 64 Saint falls under.
Already mentioned earlier by me via the 1934 Gold Reserve Act. ALL pre-1933 US Gold Coins are collectible and of special importance. None of them are "bullion." That's a slam dunk for the OP.
Patriot Act 2 requires reporting on "bullion-related" items. Those things are gold coins that get at least 50% of their value from the intrinsic metal. That's a slam dunk for the USPS. But this is a "reporting" requirement to cover money-laundering, not valuing US rare coins.
Informal IRS rulings (from some coin dealers and their accountants) have often supported that a 15% premium to melt takes a gold coin out of bullion status. This would be important in defining what can be involved in "like-kind exchanges." But the IRS has also lumped gold into the "collectible coin category" for capital gains tax treatment (a higher rate than say securities). At current pricing to gold melt, a PCGS MS64 Saint carries a 12.9% premium per Heritage gold fax sell prices. You could easily find a retailer like Ampex or others selling for well above a 15% premium. In fact the lowest Ampex price on MS64 Saints is an NGC 64 1924 at $2075.18.......a 21.5% premium.
So those are your choices and "ammo." Don't mention #2 in your write up. I would agree with all those who have said that any MS64 Saint, even if cracked out, is a numismatic-collectible coin. You may need to produce a buyer's invoice for that coin....or some proof that you were shipping to a coin dealer or other buyer. If the coin was being sent to a dealer for purchase, that's pretty good proof right there. They often have posted buy prices and would support your claim of what you were sending to them and why. I don't think an original purchase receipt is a necessity when you paid for insurance and shipped a coin out to a verifiable buyer. No reason you shouldn't win this case if persistent.
I also wonder why the insurance selected on this package was $1599.99. The daily closing value of gold bullion (NY) since April 13th has been $1680/oz or higher every day since then. And it has been significantly higher most of the time with choice unc Saints up in the $1800+ range. Who were you selling to via the mail at a $200 discount? Or were you shipping the coin out to get graded/slabbed? Seems to me you could have walked that raw coin down to a local coin shop, gotten more, and saved on shipping.
Did you know that if you ship a $1million package by registered mail you will be charged an exorbitant fee based on this value (which must be declared), but the insured value is capped at $50k? You could save many hundreds of dollars by declaring it worth just $50k.
I've never understood this. Some have said the exorbitant fee provides for added security...like someone is watching more carefully. Or maybe transport is video-recorded, or the mail truck is followed.
I think it's nonsense. I don't waste money on USPS insurance anymore unless a photography customer wants it. What I've saved will more than cover a loss, should that ever happen. Insurance is a very profitable business.
Lance.
Unfortunately, it is on the buyer to do due diligence before buying a product. Any product. Last November, I was supposed to go on a trip of my lifetime, to South Georgia Island and hang out with hundreds of thousands of penguins. It was a very pricey trip, and I took out a trip cancellation insurance policy.
Sure enough, the expedition boat operator went BK four days before I was supposed to fly out to Patagonia and catch the boat. I promptly filed a claim to recover my out of pocket cost with the insurance policy. You'd be amazed what kind of incidents are excluded from trip cancellation policy coverage.
The bankruptcy of a tour operator / trip provider was specifically covered, I got in their faces about it, and promptly was reimbursed. I was made whole. However, fast forward to today, many people who booked trips for this summer or fall are discovering now that their trip cancellation insurance policy has an exclusion for an international pandemic, act of God, etc.
Before you do anything which for you is pricey, check it out. Ask the right questions, and keep asking them until you are satisfied that the answers make sense to you. And if the don't make sense to you, or you don't like them, walk.
Thanks for sharing your experiences. Its upsetting that even when you had a clear cut case in your claim that you still had to get in their faces about it. These kinds of narratives are not unfamiliar to me.
"So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve
@derryb said:
If a $20 gold saint is bullion, why isn't gold jewelry?
Exactly. Add that to my scenario; that had also occurred to me.
Jewelry is not bullion, regardless of mark up.
If a bullion bar is bullion, and jewelry is jewelry, then it stands to reason a numismatic coin is a coin (regardless of value relative to bullion content).
@derryb said:
If a $20 gold saint is bullion, why isn't gold jewelry?
Exactly. Add that to my scenario; that had also occurred to me.
Jewelry is not bullion, regardless of mark up.
If a bullion bar is bullion, and jewelry is jewelry, then it stands to reason a numismatic coin is a coin (regardless of value relative to bullion content).
Except that would make Eagles numismatic.
Admittedly, the definition of this has been problematic for a long as I can remember.
Jewelry is different. It is not assayed and marked with weight like bars and bullion coins. Pre-1933 gold is not, and used to be considered numismatic in a lot of instances. But it really is not s clear cut as we want it to be. When pre-33 $20s were selling for $15 over spot over the winter, it is hard to argue they are anything but bullion.
Under your definition if I get a gold necklace on sale at spot, it becomes bullion. US mint differentiates between "collector coin" and "bullion" concerning eagles.
@derryb said:
If a $20 gold saint is bullion, why isn't gold jewelry?
Exactly. Add that to my scenario; that had also occurred to me.
Jewelry is not bullion, regardless of mark up.
If a bullion bar is bullion, and jewelry is jewelry, then it stands to reason a numismatic coin is a coin (regardless of value relative to bullion content).
Except that would make Eagles numismatic.
Admittedly, the definition of this has been problematic for a long as I can remember.
Jewelry is different. It is not assayed and marked with weight like bars and bullion coins. Pre-1933 gold is not, and used to be considered numismatic in a lot of instances. But it really is not s clear cut as we want it to be. When pre-33 $20s were selling for $15 over spot over the winter, it is hard to argue they are anything but bullion.
I have to respectfully disagree, although I certainly recognize that the USPS might try to use your arguments.
It is not reasonable for a pre-1933 gold coin to potentially drift in and out of bullion status due to the daily price of gold.
As for Eagles... There are a few ways to argue that case. As mentioned already, the Eagles he mint sell are special issues and sell for a clear premium above spot. Luckily, this case does not involve Eagles. And, as you mentioned, pre-1933 US gold is not marked with weight and purity.
I too have shipped coins with insurance (not always with Registered mail) and read this thread with interest. I concur with the others above who wrote that you should have a strong appeal case if you can show proof of purchase and value of a collectible, numismatic coin rather than bullion.
Just imagine how many have sent bullion through means other than Registered Mail? Just two weeks ago I mailed a half oz gold Apollo 11 Robbins Restrike medal for grading with insurance (but not via Registered Mail). I think that would be harder to prove as 'numismatic' compared to a Pre-33 Saint Gaudens Double Eagle.
This is what I found from the USPS website:
4.0 Claims
4.1 Payable Claim
Insurance for loss or damage to insured, COD, or Registered Mail within the amount covered by the fee paid, or the indemnity limits for Priority Mail, or Priority Mail Express (under 4.2), is payable for the following:
... For stamps and coins of philatelic or numismatic value; the fair market value is determined by a recognized stamp or coin dealer or current coin and stamp collectors’ newsletters and trade papers. The date of the fair market value determination must be current and prior to the mailing date.
...
** Except for Registered Mail, the maximum indemnity for negotiable items (defined as instruments that can be converted to cash without resort to forgery), currency, or bullion, is $15.00.**
...
** For collectible items, a sales receipt, paid invoice or bill of sale, or statement of value from a reputable dealer(i.e., a licensed business owner who is qualified to estimate value or cost of repairs for the item) must be provided as described in 3.2a.**
4.2 Payable Priority Mail Express Claim
In addition to the payable claims in 4.1, the following are payable for Priority Mail Express mailpieces:
...
** For negotiable items, currency, or bullion, the maximum indemnity is $15.00.**
@derryb said:
non-bullion eagles (Mint bought collector coins) are numismatic. Bullion eagles become numismatic when graded.
A graded bullion eagle is simply a slabbed bullion coin. There is absolutely nothing numismatic about it. Uncirculated bullion purchased directly from the mint is more gimmick imo but I guess it would technically define as numismatic.
I'll stick with bullion and with selling anything locally. The USPS can pound sand in regards to their criminal insurance policiy.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
@derryb said:
If a $20 gold saint is bullion, why isn't gold jewelry?
Exactly. Add that to my scenario; that had also occurred to me.
Jewelry is not bullion, regardless of mark up.
If a bullion bar is bullion, and jewelry is jewelry, then it stands to reason a numismatic coin is a coin (regardless of value relative to bullion content).
Except that would make Eagles numismatic.
Admittedly, the definition of this has been problematic for a long as I can remember.
Jewelry is different. It is not assayed and marked with weight like bars and bullion coins. Pre-1933 gold is not, and used to be considered numismatic in a lot of instances. But it really is not s clear cut as we want it to be. When pre-33 $20s were selling for $15 over spot over the winter, it is hard to argue they are anything but bullion.
Lawyers always like intent. You could easily make an argument that the pre-1933 gold coins were made specifically for commerce and thus are numismatic. Modern Eagles have a nominal value because they come out of the Mint, but it's well known that their face value has never been tied to their purchasing power. That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
If my prize is a gold coin of some kind, please send it by Registered Mail.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
That wasn't quite the point I was going for. Let's simplify it and say that a 1924 double eagle and 2020 $50 American Eagle contain the same amount of gold and same purity. The face value of the 1924 coin is a reflection of the fact that when it was produced, it was intended to be used as regular currency. The face value of the 2020 coin is a reflection of the fact that bullion products produced by the Mint carry a face value, but it is woefully low because the coins are never intended to be used in commerce. While some may buy the 1924 coin for its metal content alone, each one is unique, and you will find buyers who differentiate coins within a grade or at different grade levels by assigning them different values. Yes, the same will happen with the 2020 coin, but apart from a damaged one, any raw coin will trade at the same price as any other.
Now, if you really want to go the technical route, consider the word "value." Such value need not be specifically monetary value, but rather importance. The DMM statesm "For stamps and coins of philatelic or numismatic value; the fair market value is determined by a recognized stamp or coin dealer or current coin and stamp collectors’ newsletters and trade papers." It doesn't say that numismatic value is a monetary premium. Later it mentions a fair market value, but we're talking about lawyers. If they wanted to be crystal clear that they intended "numismatic value" to mean a premium over the intrinsic value of an item, they would/should have written that out.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
Not at all.
If gold went to $1 an ounce that pre-1933 MS gold coin would be worth more than its gold content (and more than face value, for that matter). That is because it is a numismatic collectable.
Gold has gone high enough that it swallowed up most of the numismatic premium over bullion value.
The same way that a gold ring is still jewelry even if it trades at bullion value, a 1924 gold coin is a numismatic coin regardless of what its value is.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
That wasn't quite the point I was going for. Let's simplify it and say that a 1924 double eagle and 2020 $50 American Eagle contain the same amount of gold and same purity. The face value of the 1924 coin is a reflection of the fact that when it was produced, it was intended to be used as regular currency. The face value of the 2020 coin is a reflection of the fact that bullion products produced by the Mint carry a face value, but it is woefully low because the coins are never intended to be used in commerce. While some may buy the 1924 coin for its metal content alone, each one is unique, and you will find buyers who differentiate coins within a grade or at different grade levels by assigning them different values. Yes, the same will happen with the 2020 coin, but apart from a damaged one, any raw coin will trade at the same price as any other.
Now, if you really want to go the technical route, consider the word "value." Such value need not be specifically monetary value, but rather importance. The DMM statesm "For stamps and coins of philatelic or numismatic value; the fair market value is determined by a recognized stamp or coin dealer or current coin and stamp collectors’ newsletters and trade papers." It doesn't say that numismatic value is a monetary premium. Later it mentions a fair market value, but we're talking about lawyers. If they wanted to be crystal clear that they intended "numismatic value" to mean a premium over the intrinsic value of an item, they would/should have written that out.
I agree. But that's where price is an issue. If I sell a coin, no matter what the type, and it trades at face value, you can't easily argue that it has any numismatic value. If I sell a coin, no matter what the type, and it trades at intrinsic bullion value, you can't easily argue that it has any numismatic value.
The coin folks here are interpreting "value" in the more abstract, aesthetic sense. I doubt very much that the government is going to feel the same way. To them, I think price is going to count for a lot.
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
Not at all.
If gold went to $1 an ounce that pre-1933 MS gold coin would be worth more than its gold content (and more than face value, for that matter). That is because it is a numismatic collectable.
Gold has gone high enough that it swallowed up most of the numismatic premium over bullion value.
The same way that a gold ring is still jewelry even if it trades at bullion value, a 1924 gold coin is a numismatic coin regardless of what its value is.
You are thinking like a coin collector, not a lawyer or politician. You are also imputing a value that you can't know would be true. For all you know, pre-1933 gold would be selling at $20 (face value) if gold were $1 an ounce.
There is ZERO "numismatic premium" on common date $20 libs in grades under MS-64. When it trades as bullion, it is hard to argue it isn't bullion.
In fact, oddly enough, the PREMIUM on American Gold Eagles has been higher than pre-1933 gold lately. So pre-1933 gold seems to have a negative "numismatic premium".
@airplanenut said:
That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
Not at all.
If gold went to $1 an ounce that pre-1933 MS gold coin would be worth more than its gold content (and more than face value, for that matter). That is because it is a numismatic collectable.
Gold has gone high enough that it swallowed up most of the numismatic premium over bullion value.
The same way that a gold ring is still jewelry even if it trades at bullion value, a 1924 gold coin is a numismatic coin regardless of what its value is.
Again, it could go either way. It is not in our purview to define it. But I can certainly see the case and make the case that it is bullion.
I would also point out that pre-1933 gold was held as BULLION RESERVES by banks into modern times.
Not gold, I know, but... back in the late 19th/early 20th century, did the government make all those silver dollars because they were needed as coins? Why were they still in bags in government vaults 80 years later?
The bottom line is that pre-1933 gold was not confiscated or banned in 1933 because it was considered to be of numismatic value, and much of it was only worth face value. That's not my opinion, that was the government's position.
@JBK said:
The bottom line is that pre-1933 gold was not confiscated or banned in 1933 because it was considered to be of numismatic value, and much of it was only worth face value. That's not my opinion, that was the government's position.
Was all of it? I don't believe that is accurate. Excess gold coin was banned unless exempted.
@MasonG said:
Not gold, I know, but... back in the late 19th/early 20th century, did the government make all those silver dollars because they were needed as coins? Why were they still in bags in government vaults 80 years later?
Well, some of that was just payoffs to the silver lobby.
@JBK said:
That's not my opinion, that was the government's position.
In 1933.
Just sayin'.
Precedent.
I think you misread the precedent. Almost all gold in 1933 was pre-33 gold. Most of that coin had to be considered illegal at the time or FDRs edict was meaningless.
I don't know how they established the exemption in 1933
@jmlanzaf said:
Well, some of that was just payoffs to the silver lobby.
Yep. Point being- just because they minted the coins doesn't necessarily mean they were meant to be used as coins.
True which is why I think the definition is not so obvious.
Look at NCLT coins. They are not meant to circulate. They are not always precious metal. Some are precious metal and trade as bullion.
All of that pre-1933 gold that came out of Europe spent 90 years as bank reserves and now sells as bullion. Hard to ascribe any numismatic value to it, even though some people collect it.
@Bodin said:
At NO POINT am I asked or told as I purchase insurance that coins/bullion is NOT insured for more than $15.
But lease feel free to buy as much as you would like!
Actually, you ARE told, implicitly. It is in the conditions and terms which you accept when you purchase the insurance. Always read the fine print.
Thanks for the comment. My issue isn't that I've lost the money, but instead that I'm sold insurance that does not cover what I'm paying for.
That's the point - nobody wants the 3rd degree about what is in the package. And it's generally none of their business. They ask if you are mailing prohibited materials (but they don't open the package to check). If the clerk has to recite a long list of insurance rules, it will take an hour to mail each package. Instead, they offer it on all shipments and depend on you to have read the rules.
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Never trust an agency where the federal government took control , nor their policies. But.... who else can you go to ? The buck started and stopped there. There's no insurance that pays better than the assurance of gold, in your possession.
@amwldcoin said:
Express mail insurance rates are now the same as 1st class. I used to ship express mail instead
phew. a lot of posts to this thread since i last check.
i randomly saw your comment and if you ship enough, seek out private insurance. i know a few people that did that as they use the tpg a lot and have buyers spending quite respectable amounts and the costs so average out as to be inconsequential by comparison; not to mention the claim process, if procedures/protocols are followed is much more agreeable.
what it basically boils down to is for the shipper to know the rules (not just to assume them) and to understand the small print.
If you do not know the rules, have any daubt about them, or simply just assume you know the rules, it is the shippers responsibility to ASK. Or to go online and read up on it... it is all there, or even ask the almighty Google. Google told me yesterday what Panko Breadcrumbs are made of, literally within less than 10 seconds.
It is not a postal clerk's job to ask about the contents of a shipment unless the shipper opens communication regarding insurance costs or whatever the question might be.
I am sorry about your loss, but IMO, your only appeal now is to say or proof that the content was actually a collectors item.
ANF, OR, do not discount that the USA have a election year and your political representative might have an open ear.
good luck
@JBK said:
How often is pre-1933 US gold (unless danaged) sent to the refiner to be made into pure ingots and rounds?
Not often? Why would that be?
Because it can be sold for approximately melt value without having to do that.
This!
It has nothing to do with numismatic value. It's because it is essentially assayed and guaranteed by the government. Why would you spend money melting it just to get the same price?
"Almost all gold in 1933 was pre-33 gold. Most of that coin had to be considered illegal at the time or FDRs edict was meaningless."
=========================
Nope. You pretty much got all that mixed up.
The pre-1933 gold was perfectly legal if part of one's collection or in the amount of up to $100 face value if you were not a collector. Supposedly collectors couldn't have more than 5 of the same coin (duplicates). The big gold coin collectors of that period (Bass, Newman, James Stack, Pittman etc.) didn't turn any gold in, they bought even more.
Yes, FDR's March 1933 gold edict was basically meaningless. But, 98% of the common folk didn't know that. They were scared because of the "potential" fines and imprisonment. And many did turn in their gold. In fact FDR's March 1933 gold edict was completely ILLEGAL. That was because such edicts had to be signed by the Secretary of the Treasury.....William Woodin.....not FDR. Oops. This was brought out in a court case at that time. So by late 1933 FGR had Woodin re-issue and SIGN the gold order as required. But that still wasn't quite enough. And when written into law for the Jan 1934 Gold Reserve Act an exemption was allowed for pre-1933 gold coins of particular importance and rarity.......and generally at the time interpreted to mean ALL pre-1933 US gold coins.
No one was ever prosecuted for hanging on to their gold coins. There was one case where the owner of a bank safety deposit box with $3000-$5000 in gold coins took the govt to court to get his gold back after the bank confiscated it. That's when they all discovered the govt had an illegal executive order in play. Following this court case they fixed the edict but still kept the guy's coins. Apparently, it wasn't a collection. Just a pile of gold coins.
You can read the particulars on this via Attorney (and coin collector) David Ganz's articles on the subject. Very well researched and easily available. I've reference them here numerous times if you care to look. Ganz was a long time member of the ANA Board of Governors.
"Almost all gold in 1933 was pre-33 gold. Most of that coin had to be considered illegal at the time or FDRs edict was meaningless."
=========================
Nope. You pretty much got all that mixed up.
The pre-1933 gold was perfectly legal if part of one's collection or in the amount of up to $100 face value if you were not a collector. Supposedly collectors couldn't have more than 5 of the same coin (duplicates). The big gold coin collectors of that period (Bass, Newman, James Stack, Pittman etc.) didn't turn any gold in, they bought even more.
Yes, FDR's March 1933 gold edict was basically meaningless. But, 98% of the common folk didn't know that. They were scared because of the "potential" fines and imprisonment. And many turn in their gold. In fact FDR's March 1933 gold edict was ILLEGAL. 100% ILLEGAL. That was because such edicts had to be signed by the Secretary of the Treasury.....William Woodin. This was brought out in a court case at that time. So in Sept/Oct 1933 FGR has Woodin re-issue and SIGN the gold order. But that still wasn't quite enough. And when written into law for the Jan 1934 Gold Reserve Act an exemption was allowed for pre-1933 gold coins of particular importance and rarity.......and generally at the time interpreted to mean ALL pre-1933 US gold coins.
No one was ever prosecuted for hanging on to their gold coins. There was one case where the owner of a bank safety deposit box with $3000-$5000 in gold coins took the govt to court to get his gold back after the bank confiscated it. That's when they all discovered the govt had an illegal edict in play. Following this court case they fixed the edict but still kept the guy's coins. It wasn't a collection either. Just a pile of gold.
You can read the particulars on this via Attorney (and coin collector) David Ganz's articles on the subject. Very well researched and easily available. I've reference them here numerous times if you care to look. Ganz was a long time member of the ANA Board of Governors.
"Litigation arising from GRA
The passage of the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 signified that the American people could no longer hold gold, with the exception of jewelry and collectors' coins. After the passage of the Gold Reserve Act several people were indicted for violating the clauses that restricted gold ownership and trade. Frederick Barber Campbell (who was actually convicted under the Gold Reserve Act's predecessor, Executive Order 6102), was convicted of hoarding gold when he tried to withdraw 5,000 troy ounces of gold he had at Chase National Bank. Gus Farber, a diamond and jewelry merchant was arrested with his father and 12 others for illegally selling $20 gold coins without a license. The Baraban family was arrested for operating a gold scrap business under a false license. Foreign companies even had their gold confiscated. The Uebersee Finanz-Korporation, a Swiss banking company, had $1,250,000 in gold coins that were being held in the United States.
In the Consolidated Gold Clause Cases (independently known as Perry v. U.S., U.S. v. Bankers Trust Co., Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., Nortz v. U.S.), the Gold Reserve Act was subject to scrutiny by the United States Supreme Court, which narrowly upheld Roosevelt's gold confiscation policy."
Comments
I do empathize with the OP as stated previously, but I also know that insurance tries to deny claims whenever possible. Plausible deniability is what they play. On one level, it makes sense, otherwise they would be insolvent paying on every single claim (including the fraudulent ones). Declaring the coin to be bullion was a way to deny OP the payout, so they used it. If OP pushes the issue, they will have to relent, but it was worth their try. I am sure just about everyone here has experienced their legitimate claim to be denied by both auto and health insurance companies at some point in their lives.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
You still have to prove their worth complete with receipts. Most if not all of my collector bars were paid in cash at rest areas or the back of an alley where receipts are rarer then a Roger Burdette compliment to Daniel Carr.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Another point in the OP's favor occurred to me while I was swilling a beer at the Mexican restaurant.
If, as mentioned above, bullion bars are not insurable even if they have collectable value, then coins should not count as bullion even if they are worth only bullion value.
The USPS can't have it both ways.
I don't follow that at all. How many beers did you have?
They are denying that both forms of gold are bullion with no collectible value.
It makes perfect sense to me.
USPS seems to say....
1) Bullion bar = bullion, regardless of collectable premium.
2) Collectable coin = numismatic item, but only if value is significantly over bullion.
Point #2 above is not reasonable or consistent based on their position on #1. If bullion is considered bullion no matter the value, then a coin should be considered a coin regardless of value.
If a $20 gold saint is bullion, why isn't gold jewelry?
Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong
There are 3 different "Govt" versions of what constitutes the category that a 1924 MS 64 Saint falls under.
Already mentioned earlier by me via the 1934 Gold Reserve Act. ALL pre-1933 US Gold Coins are collectible and of special importance. None of them are "bullion." That's a slam dunk for the OP.
Patriot Act 2 requires reporting on "bullion-related" items. Those things are gold coins that get at least 50% of their value from the intrinsic metal. That's a slam dunk for the USPS. But this is a "reporting" requirement to cover money-laundering, not valuing US rare coins.
Informal IRS rulings (from some coin dealers and their accountants) have often supported that a 15% premium to melt takes a gold coin out of bullion status. This would be important in defining what can be involved in "like-kind exchanges." But the IRS has also lumped gold into the "collectible coin category" for capital gains tax treatment (a higher rate than say securities). At current pricing to gold melt, a PCGS MS64 Saint carries a 12.9% premium per Heritage gold fax sell prices. You could easily find a retailer like Ampex or others selling for well above a 15% premium. In fact the lowest Ampex price on MS64 Saints is an NGC 64 1924 at $2075.18.......a 21.5% premium.
So those are your choices and "ammo." Don't mention #2 in your write up. I would agree with all those who have said that any MS64 Saint, even if cracked out, is a numismatic-collectible coin. You may need to produce a buyer's invoice for that coin....or some proof that you were shipping to a coin dealer or other buyer. If the coin was being sent to a dealer for purchase, that's pretty good proof right there. They often have posted buy prices and would support your claim of what you were sending to them and why. I don't think an original purchase receipt is a necessity when you paid for insurance and shipped a coin out to a verifiable buyer. No reason you shouldn't win this case if persistent.
I also wonder why the insurance selected on this package was $1599.99. The daily closing value of gold bullion (NY) since April 13th has been $1680/oz or higher every day since then. And it has been significantly higher most of the time with choice unc Saints up in the $1800+ range. Who were you selling to via the mail at a $200 discount? Or were you shipping the coin out to get graded/slabbed? Seems to me you could have walked that raw coin down to a local coin shop, gotten more, and saved on shipping.
Postal insurance is a bit of a game, isn't it?
Did you know that if you ship a $1million package by registered mail you will be charged an exorbitant fee based on this value (which must be declared), but the insured value is capped at $50k? You could save many hundreds of dollars by declaring it worth just $50k.
I've never understood this. Some have said the exorbitant fee provides for added security...like someone is watching more carefully. Or maybe transport is video-recorded, or the mail truck is followed.
I think it's nonsense. I don't waste money on USPS insurance anymore unless a photography customer wants it. What I've saved will more than cover a loss, should that ever happen. Insurance is a very profitable business.
Lance.
Unfortunately, it is on the buyer to do due diligence before buying a product. Any product. Last November, I was supposed to go on a trip of my lifetime, to South Georgia Island and hang out with hundreds of thousands of penguins. It was a very pricey trip, and I took out a trip cancellation insurance policy.
Sure enough, the expedition boat operator went BK four days before I was supposed to fly out to Patagonia and catch the boat. I promptly filed a claim to recover my out of pocket cost with the insurance policy. You'd be amazed what kind of incidents are excluded from trip cancellation policy coverage.
The bankruptcy of a tour operator / trip provider was specifically covered, I got in their faces about it, and promptly was reimbursed. I was made whole. However, fast forward to today, many people who booked trips for this summer or fall are discovering now that their trip cancellation insurance policy has an exclusion for an international pandemic, act of God, etc.
Before you do anything which for you is pricey, check it out. Ask the right questions, and keep asking them until you are satisfied that the answers make sense to you. And if the don't make sense to you, or you don't like them, walk.
Elcontador,
Thanks for sharing your experiences. Its upsetting that even when you had a clear cut case in your claim that you still had to get in their faces about it. These kinds of narratives are not unfamiliar to me.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
Exactly. Add that to my scenario; that had also occurred to me.
Jewelry is not bullion, regardless of mark up.
If a bullion bar is bullion, and jewelry is jewelry, then it stands to reason a numismatic coin is a coin (regardless of value relative to bullion content).
Except that would make Eagles numismatic.
Admittedly, the definition of this has been problematic for a long as I can remember.
Jewelry is different. It is not assayed and marked with weight like bars and bullion coins. Pre-1933 gold is not, and used to be considered numismatic in a lot of instances. But it really is not s clear cut as we want it to be. When pre-33 $20s were selling for $15 over spot over the winter, it is hard to argue they are anything but bullion.
non-bullion eagles (Mint bought collector coins) are numismatic. Bullion eagles become numismatic when graded.
Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong
That is your opinion only. I've seen regulations that specifically define bullion based on value above intrinsic.
Really hard to argue that even a proof 1st spouse coin is anything but bullion.
Under your definition if I get a gold necklace on sale at spot, it becomes bullion. US mint differentiates between "collector coin" and "bullion" concerning eagles.
US Mint's definition of bullion coins found here
Capital investment depends on confidence. - Martin Armstrong
I have to respectfully disagree, although I certainly recognize that the USPS might try to use your arguments.
It is not reasonable for a pre-1933 gold coin to potentially drift in and out of bullion status due to the daily price of gold.
As for Eagles... There are a few ways to argue that case. As mentioned already, the Eagles he mint sell are special issues and sell for a clear premium above spot. Luckily, this case does not involve Eagles. And, as you mentioned, pre-1933 US gold is not marked with weight and purity.
I too have shipped coins with insurance (not always with Registered mail) and read this thread with interest. I concur with the others above who wrote that you should have a strong appeal case if you can show proof of purchase and value of a collectible, numismatic coin rather than bullion.
Just imagine how many have sent bullion through means other than Registered Mail? Just two weeks ago I mailed a half oz gold Apollo 11 Robbins Restrike medal for grading with insurance (but not via Registered Mail). I think that would be harder to prove as 'numismatic' compared to a Pre-33 Saint Gaudens Double Eagle.
This is what I found from the USPS website:
4.0 Claims
4.1 Payable Claim
Insurance for loss or damage to insured, COD, or Registered Mail within the amount covered by the fee paid, or the indemnity limits for Priority Mail, or Priority Mail Express (under 4.2), is payable for the following:
...
For stamps and coins of philatelic or numismatic value; the fair market value is determined by a recognized stamp or coin dealer or current coin and stamp collectors’ newsletters and trade papers. The date of the fair market value determination must be current and prior to the mailing date.
...
** Except for Registered Mail, the maximum indemnity for negotiable items (defined as instruments that can be converted to cash without resort to forgery), currency, or bullion, is $15.00.**
...
** For collectible items, a sales receipt, paid invoice or bill of sale, or statement of value from a reputable dealer(i.e., a licensed business owner who is qualified to estimate value or cost of repairs for the item) must be provided as described in 3.2a.**
4.2 Payable Priority Mail Express Claim
In addition to the payable claims in 4.1, the following are payable for Priority Mail Express mailpieces:
...
** For negotiable items, currency, or bullion, the maximum indemnity is $15.00.**
A graded bullion eagle is simply a slabbed bullion coin. There is absolutely nothing numismatic about it. Uncirculated bullion purchased directly from the mint is more gimmick imo but I guess it would technically define as numismatic.
I'll stick with bullion and with selling anything locally. The USPS can pound sand in regards to their criminal insurance policiy.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Lawyers always like intent. You could easily make an argument that the pre-1933 gold coins were made specifically for commerce and thus are numismatic. Modern Eagles have a nominal value because they come out of the Mint, but it's well known that their face value has never been tied to their purchasing power. That a pre-1933 gold coin is worth around bullion value now and way more valuable than face is a reflection of the change in value of gold, not the purpose of the coin.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
If my prize is a gold coin of some kind, please send it by Registered Mail.
Except that argues for bullion not numismatic. You have a face-value commerce coun that now trades at the price of gold. That does not inherently make it numismatic.
That wasn't quite the point I was going for. Let's simplify it and say that a 1924 double eagle and 2020 $50 American Eagle contain the same amount of gold and same purity. The face value of the 1924 coin is a reflection of the fact that when it was produced, it was intended to be used as regular currency. The face value of the 2020 coin is a reflection of the fact that bullion products produced by the Mint carry a face value, but it is woefully low because the coins are never intended to be used in commerce. While some may buy the 1924 coin for its metal content alone, each one is unique, and you will find buyers who differentiate coins within a grade or at different grade levels by assigning them different values. Yes, the same will happen with the 2020 coin, but apart from a damaged one, any raw coin will trade at the same price as any other.
Now, if you really want to go the technical route, consider the word "value." Such value need not be specifically monetary value, but rather importance. The DMM statesm "For stamps and coins of philatelic or numismatic value; the fair market value is determined by a recognized stamp or coin dealer or current coin and stamp collectors’ newsletters and trade papers." It doesn't say that numismatic value is a monetary premium. Later it mentions a fair market value, but we're talking about lawyers. If they wanted to be crystal clear that they intended "numismatic value" to mean a premium over the intrinsic value of an item, they would/should have written that out.
Not at all.
If gold went to $1 an ounce that pre-1933 MS gold coin would be worth more than its gold content (and more than face value, for that matter). That is because it is a numismatic collectable.
Gold has gone high enough that it swallowed up most of the numismatic premium over bullion value.
The same way that a gold ring is still jewelry even if it trades at bullion value, a 1924 gold coin is a numismatic coin regardless of what its value is.
I agree. But that's where price is an issue. If I sell a coin, no matter what the type, and it trades at face value, you can't easily argue that it has any numismatic value. If I sell a coin, no matter what the type, and it trades at intrinsic bullion value, you can't easily argue that it has any numismatic value.
The coin folks here are interpreting "value" in the more abstract, aesthetic sense. I doubt very much that the government is going to feel the same way. To them, I think price is going to count for a lot.
You are thinking like a coin collector, not a lawyer or politician. You are also imputing a value that you can't know would be true. For all you know, pre-1933 gold would be selling at $20 (face value) if gold were $1 an ounce.
There is ZERO "numismatic premium" on common date $20 libs in grades under MS-64. When it trades as bullion, it is hard to argue it isn't bullion.
In fact, oddly enough, the PREMIUM on American Gold Eagles has been higher than pre-1933 gold lately. So pre-1933 gold seems to have a negative "numismatic premium".
Again, it could go either way. It is not in our purview to define it. But I can certainly see the case and make the case that it is bullion.
I would also point out that pre-1933 gold was held as BULLION RESERVES by banks into modern times.
Looks, walks, and talks like a Scrooge McDuck.
Not gold, I know, but... back in the late 19th/early 20th century, did the government make all those silver dollars because they were needed as coins? Why were they still in bags in government vaults 80 years later?
The bottom line is that pre-1933 gold was not confiscated or banned in 1933 because it was considered to be of numismatic value, and much of it was only worth face value. That's not my opinion, that was the government's position.
In 1933.
Just sayin'.
Precedent.
Was all of it? I don't believe that is accurate. Excess gold coin was banned unless exempted.
Well, some of that was just payoffs to the silver lobby.
I think you misread the precedent. Almost all gold in 1933 was pre-33 gold. Most of that coin had to be considered illegal at the time or FDRs edict was meaningless.
I don't know how they established the exemption in 1933
Yep. Point being- just because they minted the coins doesn't necessarily mean they were meant to be used as coins.
The OP hasn't posted recently so I guess it's a moot point.
He has the basis for his appeal in the responses to his post if he wants to fight the USPS over the issue.
True which is why I think the definition is not so obvious.
Look at NCLT coins. They are not meant to circulate. They are not always precious metal. Some are precious metal and trade as bullion.
All of that pre-1933 gold that came out of Europe spent 90 years as bank reserves and now sells as bullion. Hard to ascribe any numismatic value to it, even though some people collect it.
That's the point - nobody wants the 3rd degree about what is in the package. And it's generally none of their business. They ask if you are mailing prohibited materials (but they don't open the package to check). If the clerk has to recite a long list of insurance rules, it will take an hour to mail each package. Instead, they offer it on all shipments and depend on you to have read the rules.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
How often is pre-1933 US gold (unless danaged) sent to the refiner to be made into pure ingots and rounds?
Not often? Why would that be?
Because it can be sold for approximately melt value without having to do that.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Never trust an agency where the federal government took control , nor their policies. But.... who else can you go to ? The buck started and stopped there. There's no insurance that pays better than the assurance of gold, in your possession.
phew. a lot of posts to this thread since i last check.
i randomly saw your comment and if you ship enough, seek out private insurance. i know a few people that did that as they use the tpg a lot and have buyers spending quite respectable amounts and the costs so average out as to be inconsequential by comparison; not to mention the claim process, if procedures/protocols are followed is much more agreeable.
Many of you guys would know this better than me, but is pre-33 gold tossed loose into bags the way 90% silver is?
what it basically boils down to is for the shipper to know the rules (not just to assume them) and to understand the small print.
If you do not know the rules, have any daubt about them, or simply just assume you know the rules, it is the shippers responsibility to ASK. Or to go online and read up on it... it is all there, or even ask the almighty Google. Google told me yesterday what Panko Breadcrumbs are made of, literally within less than 10 seconds.
It is not a postal clerk's job to ask about the contents of a shipment unless the shipper opens communication regarding insurance costs or whatever the question might be.
I am sorry about your loss, but IMO, your only appeal now is to say or proof that the content was actually a collectors item.
ANF, OR, do not discount that the USA have a election year and your political representative might have an open ear.
good luck
This!
It has nothing to do with numismatic value. It's because it is essentially assayed and guaranteed by the government. Why would you spend money melting it just to get the same price?
90% silver is the same issue.
Usually in tubes. A 500 coin or 1000 coin bag would be a high dollar item.
jmlanzaf said:
"Almost all gold in 1933 was pre-33 gold. Most of that coin had to be considered illegal at the time or FDRs edict was meaningless."
=========================
Nope. You pretty much got all that mixed up.
The pre-1933 gold was perfectly legal if part of one's collection or in the amount of up to $100 face value if you were not a collector. Supposedly collectors couldn't have more than 5 of the same coin (duplicates). The big gold coin collectors of that period (Bass, Newman, James Stack, Pittman etc.) didn't turn any gold in, they bought even more.
Yes, FDR's March 1933 gold edict was basically meaningless. But, 98% of the common folk didn't know that. They were scared because of the "potential" fines and imprisonment. And many did turn in their gold. In fact FDR's March 1933 gold edict was completely ILLEGAL. That was because such edicts had to be signed by the Secretary of the Treasury.....William Woodin.....not FDR. Oops. This was brought out in a court case at that time. So by late 1933 FGR had Woodin re-issue and SIGN the gold order as required. But that still wasn't quite enough. And when written into law for the Jan 1934 Gold Reserve Act an exemption was allowed for pre-1933 gold coins of particular importance and rarity.......and generally at the time interpreted to mean ALL pre-1933 US gold coins.
No one was ever prosecuted for hanging on to their gold coins. There was one case where the owner of a bank safety deposit box with $3000-$5000 in gold coins took the govt to court to get his gold back after the bank confiscated it. That's when they all discovered the govt had an illegal executive order in play. Following this court case they fixed the edict but still kept the guy's coins. Apparently, it wasn't a collection. Just a pile of gold coins.
You can read the particulars on this via Attorney (and coin collector) David Ganz's articles on the subject. Very well researched and easily available. I've reference them here numerous times if you care to look. Ganz was a long time member of the ANA Board of Governors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#:~:text=in%20the%20world.-,Prosecutions%20related%20to%20Executive%20Order%206102,Gold%20Reserve%20Act%20of%201934.
"Litigation arising from GRA
The passage of the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 signified that the American people could no longer hold gold, with the exception of jewelry and collectors' coins. After the passage of the Gold Reserve Act several people were indicted for violating the clauses that restricted gold ownership and trade. Frederick Barber Campbell (who was actually convicted under the Gold Reserve Act's predecessor, Executive Order 6102), was convicted of hoarding gold when he tried to withdraw 5,000 troy ounces of gold he had at Chase National Bank. Gus Farber, a diamond and jewelry merchant was arrested with his father and 12 others for illegally selling $20 gold coins without a license. The Baraban family was arrested for operating a gold scrap business under a false license. Foreign companies even had their gold confiscated. The Uebersee Finanz-Korporation, a Swiss banking company, had $1,250,000 in gold coins that were being held in the United States.
In the Consolidated Gold Clause Cases (independently known as Perry v. U.S., U.S. v. Bankers Trust Co., Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., Nortz v. U.S.), the Gold Reserve Act was subject to scrutiny by the United States Supreme Court, which narrowly upheld Roosevelt's gold confiscation policy."
Appears you've got your facts mixed up.
There is NOTHING clear cut in this arena.