can the government seize precious metals again?

konsole · April 25, 2006 9:05AM

I remember hearing that sometime during the early to mid 1900's, the U.S. government seized gold. I don't know exactly why but I do remember hearing about it. So my question is can the government seize precious metals, like gold and silver, again? I'm mainly interested in silver and I've been reading alot of its ever declining quantities, but before I and others spend our money and invest in it, I wanna know if it can be seized again due to rarity or whatever. The potential that it can be seized probably wont stop me from buying it but I would still like to know. So does anyone have any info on what happened back then and if it can happen again?

Russ · April 25, 2006 9:06AM

They could, but it is highly unlikely that they will.

Russ, NCNE

streeter · April 25, 2006 9:27AM

They may not be interested in seizing it but they can do what other countries do and require documentation that you own it legally and require you to prove your identity in order to publically sell it.

And they can do what California does in certain Real Estate transfers---make the buyer responsible for withholding a certain amount of money in order to insure the seller pays taxes.

It's about the money, honey.

Jcarney · April 25, 2006 9:45AM

As Russ said, they could. Personally, I doubt if they ever would. What would be the point? The entire gold/silver markets are a minute fraction of the economic activity of this country and seizing one or two commodities would make no difference in the direction of an economy of this size.

BTW, the reason Roosevelt confiscated gold was to be able to inflate our fiat currency at will. The Fed can do that today without worrying about gold at all.

topstuf · April 25, 2006 9:54AM

Not until China shows up with a fractionally backed Renminbi.

This rise in gold has SOMETHING behind it besides a buncha "bugs" goin nuts.

I spose we'll find out what it is fairly soon.

morgannut2 · April 25, 2006 9:55AM

The opposite can occur and is more common. As when President Grant released Gold to stop the Wall Street boys from cornering the market. Same thing again to 2 of the Hunt Brothers when they tried to corner the silver futures market in the 1980's. They're broke--don't mess with Uncle Sam!!

CalGold · April 25, 2006 10:10AM

They could be lately they've been more interested in seizing other countries.

CG

Jcarney · April 25, 2006 10:13AM

<< This rise in gold has SOMETHING behind it besides a buncha "bugs" goin nuts. >>

Well, sure. Gold still acts, as it always has, as a hedge against inflation for those who own it, but it's usefulness as a strategic financial instrument used by governments of large economies is limited due to the sheer size of those economies.

roadrunner · April 25, 2006 11:55AM

We only have 8000 supposed tons of gold reserves to back our TRILLIONs in paper assets. The backing is about 50 to 1. A little more couldn't hurt. Gold did not act much like an inflation hedge for much of the 1980's and 1990's. CB sales of up to 15,000 tonnes of gold did not help much either. If that was the intent, which it probably was, it did the job.

Why gold may not be confiscated as FDR did in the the 1930's, the govt could put a windfall profits tax on PM sales to do basically the same thing......keep people away from gold.

roadrunner

mrearlygold · April 25, 2006 11:57AM

Government can do whatever it wants to do. You were thinking you live in a free country?

coinman420 · April 25, 2006 12:15PM

i remember a post... post a pick of a gold coin or a gun.... lotsa both. i wouldn`t wanna knock on YOUR door and ask to look through your personal belongings for your stash of gold and silver. just my 2 cents. peace

Coinosaurus · April 25, 2006 12:26PM

I doubt it. Roosevelt's deal in 1933 was really a one-shot. Because the economy was based on gold to begin with, he had to get the gold out of the way in order to force people to trust paper. Wouldn't have worked if he kept the gold around, as that would have inhibited the trade since everyone would try to demand gold and avoid paper. He wanted paper only so he could start pumping the money supply and maintain the public trust.

Now that we trust paper, there is nowhere else to go

CC2GO · April 25, 2006 1:46PM

Someone I know who is "in the know" about "underground" activities by the U.S. government told me
a couple months ago some feds went into a bank...confiscated all coins from all the safe deposit boxes....
and left! I'm not sure of the rest of the details or if the bank customers were reimbursed or "credited"
in some way.

Also, there was a story I read just a few weeks ago about a $10,000.00 BILL that was
found in someone's safe deposit box and apparently the inheritors of the contents didn't know it was
worth around $80,000.00!!! Needless to say, the bank offered them $10,000.00 and I think the feds
got hold of the bill if I remember right - and claimed it government property. But I may not be totally
accurate on that last statement.

BigAl · April 25, 2006 5:55PM

i don't see why they would, our currency is no longer backed by gold (since LBJ). gold is simply a commodity and is traded as such on the markets. I think the gov't would instead prefer to reduce their stockpiles.

rec78 · April 25, 2006 6:17PM

They could, but i doubt it- Back in 1933 something had to be done-but i dont agree that it was the right thing to do. People back then in the depression had to eat and could probably care less about owning gold. If they tried it now it would cause such an outrage that it just wouldn't happen. What politician would take that chance? Besides what would be the purpose?

MAD4MORGANS · April 25, 2006 9:03PM

The Government can do anything it wants. Coinage belongs to them. You just get to use it for awhile.

But since 1933 they have devised better ways to take your wealth.

Jcarney · April 25, 2006 9:22PM

<< Gold did not act much like an inflation hedge for much of the 1980's and 1990's. CB sales of up to 15,000 tonnes of gold did not help much either. If that was the intent, which it probably was, it did the job. >>

Bingo. I should have said "In a fair market, gold still acts, as it always has, as a hedge against inflation for those who own it"

Gemineye · April 25, 2006 10:50PM

**The Gold Standard Act of the United States was passed in 1900 (ratified on March 14) and established gold as the only standard for redeeming paper money, stopping bimetallism (which had allowed silver in exchange for gold). **

If they send out the Secret Agents ....they're gonna need a lot......they can't even find all the illegal aliens...............

OldReading · April 25, 2006 11:04PM

Forget gold and silver, the gov't should be confiscating dollar bills.

13PacesEast · April 25, 2006 11:18PM

someone "in the know"....

"underground" activities....

that was worth the price of admission.

you sure you shouldn't be posting on abovetopsecret.com ?

CC2GO · April 26, 2006 12:30AM

<< someone "in the know".... >>

At least I'm sure we can all agree that I certainly
wasn't talking about George Bush!!!

Whitby · April 26, 2006 12:34AM

Yes, they are the government. They have the right of seignoirage (sp?) and yes, they could at anytime do just that. However, will they? Doubtful at best. IMO That would basically cripple commodities trading within 24 hours on a global scale and if you thought the gold window closed in 73, you havent seen anything yet.

Cladiator · April 26, 2006 12:35AM

They can try.

TwoSides2aCoin · April 26, 2006 12:37AM

Over my dead body !

Yes.... render unto Ceasar

PerryHall · April 26, 2006 1:09AM

Gold??? What gold??? I don't own any gold.

Jcarney · April 26, 2006 1:24AM

<< They have the right of seignoirage >>

Seigniorage really has nothing to do with a government's will or ability to confiscate gold/silver. It's merely the difference between the face value of money and the cost to produce it.

Barry · April 26, 2006 1:27AM

<< Government can do whatever it wants to do. You were thinking you live in a free country? >>

Tom's right.
Familiar with eminent domain? They can seize land for the "public good." Around here, they exercised eminent domain to build a township-owned golf course!

Whitby · April 26, 2006 1:33AM

<< 

<< They have the right of seignoirage >>

Seigniorage really has nothing to do with a government's will or ability to confiscate gold/silver. It's merely the difference between the face value of money and the cost to produce it. >>

The government can and has done just that. They will however cite that right and its domain to determine this statement. Best example was the early 50's within exonumia. While, the main legal argument was fraud, the feds also stated that if the articles were treated as a currency which they were as they had an equivalenty use, their right had been violated. Therfore, the items were seized or destroyed. In the case of a precoius material, My guess is they would seize it. The cost to mint and the value of a currency is defined as a fiat. Yes, by fiat the goverment may define the value of a currency within its right of seignoirage.....

Jcarney · April 26, 2006 1:43AM

Barry, are you talking about Warminster?

Whitby · April 26, 2006 1:47AM

<< Barry, are you talking about Warminster? >>

I have the case law at home and can look it up. It was and IMO, still is a cool read. The whole deal in that case did not center on the governments concern, the whole thing was really a matter of larger issuing authorities going broke. Folsk would buy, perhaps 50 bucks in toikens and insist on redeeming them at their face value whioch easily exceeded 10 grand. THEN, the government became involved. Were it not for larger corporate greed it is feasible that this system could still be in existence.

OldReading · April 26, 2006 1:55AM

<< 

<< Government can do whatever it wants to do. You were thinking you live in a free country? >>

Tom's right.
Familiar with eminent domain? They can seize land for the "public good." Around here, they exercised eminent domain to build a township-owned golf course! >>

Are you a fellow Berks Countian by chance?

Deadhorse · April 26, 2006 2:03AM

Considering that the sale of it is a cash cow for the US Mint, and the fact that they promote it as something to fill your IRA with, I'd say it seems VERY unlikely.

Further, to do so would be a PR disaster of biblical proportions and that the citizens would do everything they could to hide it anyway, I'd say it seems as remote as rounding up all the illegal aliens and would probably be even less successful than that endeavor.

There are far more things to worry about concerning our inept leaders actions than the confiscation of a metal that represents a miniscule percentage of the wealth in this country.

It would be a field day for lawyers though. I can see the arguements of equivalency now. Why bullion coins and not wedding rings and jewelry? What's numismatic and whats not? From a legal standpoint, what's the difference between a slabbed 93W GAE graded MS70 that sells for a mountain of money and a slabbed 1927 in MS63 that sells for a fraction?

It's a can of worms that I doubt they even want to consider. Better to track sales like they are doing now and get their pound of flesh through taxation than to kill the golden goose.

It's just not going to happen.

Besides, I don't have any gold to worry about.

Conder101 · April 26, 2006 5:29AM

<< Same thing again to 2 of the Hunt Brothers when they tried to corner the silver futures market in the 1980's. They're broke--don't mess with Uncle Sam!! >>

They are still worth plenty I believe. And the family is still worth over 2.5 billion. Oh to be broke like that.

<< We only have 8000 supposed tons of gold reserves to back our TRILLIONs in paper assets. >>

That gold does not back the paper assets.

<< Also, there was a story I read just a few weeks ago about a $10,000.00 BILL that was
found in someone's safe deposit box and apparently the inheritors of the contents didn't know it was
worth around $80,000.00!!! Needless to say, the bank offered them $10,000.00 and I think the feds
got hold of the bill if I remember right - and claimed it government property. But I may not be totally
accurate on that last statement. >>

The inheritors offered the bill to the bank for deposit. All the bank could give them for it was $10,000. And they probably didn't know it was worth that much over face. And the Feds probably did get ahold of it because he banks are required to turn over to the Fed any note larger than $100 that is deposited.

<< **The Gold Standard Act of the United States was passed in 1900 (ratified on March 14) and established gold as the only standard for redeeming paper money, stopping bimetallism (which had allowed silver in exchange for gold). ** >>

And the Gold Standard Act was rendered moot by the Gold Recall Order of 1933.

MAD4MORGANS · April 26, 2006 8:57AM

Find some buried treasure or a shipwreck and see the vultures start hovering.

trozau · April 26, 2006 9:00AM

No.

Barry · April 26, 2006 9:41AM

<< Barry, are you talking about Warminster? >>

Lower Makefield

Are you a fellow Berks Countian by chance?
Close, but not exactly - Bucks Countian.

streeter · April 26, 2006 9:41AM

Sometimes you guys just don't remember history.
Ebay auction # 8400320782

ACHTUNG: Wir liefern mit Rechnung und Ausweis der gesetzlichen Mehrwertsteuer !

translated: ATTENTION: We deliver with calculation and identification card of the legal value-added tax!

And how about requiring your SSN on gold sales where the bullion value is 50% or greater than the cost of the coin....LIKE 63/64 Saints.

First they ID you as the owner....then they take the next step.

WAKE UP LADS

flaminio · April 26, 2006 9:44AM

Vote Libertarian. We won't take your gold.

(maybe that can be a campaign slogan?)

roadrunner · April 26, 2006 12:53PM

<< We only have 8000 supposed tons of gold reserves to back our TRILLIONs in paper assets. >>

That gold does not back the paper assets.

Technically, on "paper" it does not since Nixon closed the gold window in 1971. But in reality it certainly does. If it doesn't, then why the heck do we keep a non-peforming asset that has done "nothing" for 25 years and is routinely ridiculed by most. Wouldn't it be better to have sold off that 8000 tons and invested in foreign properties, US properties, corporations,Google, etc.?

So if it doesn't help defend our paper currency and debt, why do we have 8000 tons of inventory. Or should I say why do we have a "supposed" 8000 tons of a barbarous, non-performing gold inventory? The Brits were "right," they sold all theirs for $265/ounce to help keep the world's price down about 5 years ago. Look where it got them!

roadrunner

BlindedByEgo · April 26, 2006 2:36PM

Ha.

HaHaHaHaHa

Conspiricy... Gubmint... Our Gubmint cain't even control our freakin' borders! Real actions take manpower.

The value of all of the worldwide gold reserves represent a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the financial markets including derivatives.

Quick Ma, git me mah tinfoil hat, ahm ready to read that there L. Ron Hubbard book.

HaHaHa.

Tarmac · April 26, 2006 2:49PM

Anything can happen again.

However, the times are different today. Currency is no longer backed by gold.

More importantly, gold represents a tiny tiny fraction of global assets. Most Americans do not even own gold other than the amount in their computers.

Second, what would confiscating gold actually accomplish in the world as it exists today? Very little as gold represents an archaic asset with little following. That could change but gold would then become a $1,500/oz asset and I seriously doubt it.

There won't be any gov't seizures; however, the gov't should regulate more closely derivatives and GSEs!! If we have a blow up this is where it will be. And it would dawrf all other finanical collapses.

relayer · April 26, 2006 3:07PM

King George can decree anything he wants

can the government seize precious metals again?

Comments

Leave a Comment