1944 Gold Coin Memorandum from Treasury

Key points, and at points it gets ambiguous and you almost need to be a lawyer to decipher it , but I note the following:

*The memo concerns the Gold Reserve Act, which pretty much codified FDR's EOs on gold ownership.

*The memo was from Ansel F. Luxford who worked for the Treasury Dept. under Robert Morgenthau, Jr. in the 1930's and 1940's.

*Appeared that even during the war NYC coin dealers were selling coins to anybody at a premium to $35/oz.

*Notice that they didn't want anybody using a loophole to collect Quarter-Eagles, $2.50 in gold.....you could only have 4 of them from the same year and mint and as part of a larger collection/display.

*Quarter-Eagles aside...the memo is basically telling the NY office of the Secret Service that their interpretation is that ANY amount of gold coins with numismatic value could be bought by ANYBODY so long as the Quarter-Eagles provisions weren't violated (I wonder if they focused on the $2.50 gold coin because that's what most Americans could have afforded at most both pre- and during the war).

*In addition, you didn't need to be a "collector" and the coins didn't have to be part of a formal collection.
Section 20 apparently is the enforcement mechanism to "force" Americans to turn in their gold coins under EO's for April 5th, August 28th, and Treasury Order of December 28, 1933.

*Coin must have been rare as of December 28th, 1933 (the regulation is getting political and legal and confusing at this point in time, contradicting itself from sentences earlier or making it confusing, IMO).

*Treasury basically admits that any gold coin which sells at a premium to $35/oz. is clearly possessing of rare and numismatic value. In fact, there appears to be a court case which the government accepts and which Treasury said would certainly prevent seizure of any coins sold at a premium as well as any civil or criminal penalties, as there was no intent to violate the relevant laws by buying/selling gold coins at bullion value, only at higher prices indicating numismatic and rare value.

Net-Net, the memo tells the Secret Service to NOT seize the dealers gold coins (I guess that was under consideration) since they said we we don't have a case under the existing EO's and rules and court cases.

@johnny9434 said:
contraband section on the top left, interesting item ya got there

Thank RWB, he found the memo in the NARA or Newman archives.

What is fascinating is that it shows that even though the early actions of FDR in 1933-34 may have SEEMED clear -- no gold ownership except for special circumstances -- you can see here that Treasury is being very lenient.

You could have a common gold coin and as long as the dealer "ripped you off" by charging a high price....VOILA !! It was a numismatic coin.

The one thing not specified: how much of a premium to escape scrutiny. Based on prices that many of you remember from the 1960's, I would say the price in the 1940's (remember, there was a war going on) was probably in the $40's.

Somewhat related to the 1944 Memo....I'm seeing and hearing more and more of people wanting something portable that they can move easily and/or hide from what they consider confiscatory theft policies of certain politicians. I'm talking wealth taxes and and this demonization of the so-called "haves." More and more talk from people who are more and more convinced that all this talk about "tax the rich" is really meant to go after hard-working men and women like them.

These are new gold and silver buyers. These aren't ammo-canned goods-survivalist types, either. They're hard-working people who see the Mayor of NYC talk about taking down the exemption limit for estate taxes in NY State from $7 MM to $750,000. $750,000 won't buy you a home in most areas of Staten Island or Queens. Then you have a "wealth tax" in California which is more akin to asset expropriation.

Financial assets have to go through probate (as I have learned the last few years assisting on estates) and it's all trackable. A significant gold or even silver coin/bullion collection can be given to someone with no paper trail.

The Rich have homes all over the country and the world plus trusts, Cayman bank accounts, etc. Plus their wealth is so large not sure 2-10% in coins or bars is feasible. But for people with a net worth < $10 MM....it's doable and apparently increasing.

In 1933, they said keep everything but turn in your gold. Now it seems like it's turn in everything so maybe get some gold ?

@oreville said:
It was available at the Heritage Eliasberg foreign coin auction in New York City. Graded by NGC after the sale.

Fascinating, thanks for the info. When did you buy the coin, Oreville ?

@oreville said:
My memory must be faulty. I seem to recall Heritage did the Eliasberg sale?

I believe the search function on HA allows you to search by label pedigree. I'll see if I can find it, I believe their archives goes back to 1995 or 1996.

@oreville said:
I would have to ask Andy Lustig as I competed against him in person for a bunch of Eliasberg Latin America gold >coins and enjoyed the process.

This was the 1980's, right ?

Were you in-person in NYC or wherever it was held or could you phone in bids ?

@CaptHenway said:
This 49.04 ounce United States Assay Office New York bar used to be a part of my birth year collection

CH, did you buy it at a show or was it at an auction by one of the high-end auction houses ?

@cinque1543 said:
I suspect there were many ways to circumvent FDR’s anti-hoarding order.

Yup, as Treasury told Secret Service...any premium means it's numismatic.

Imagine this conversation, circa 1944:

DEALER TO BUYER: "Here's a 1-oz. Saint for $35, official bullion price."

SECRET SERVICE: "You're under arrest for circumventing EO 6102 !!"

DEALER TO BUYER: "Here's a 1-oz. Saint for $50, it's what I charge all my best customers"

SECRET SERVICE: "Congratulations on your fine numismatic purchase, Sir"