Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: brimic on October 06, 2013, 09:26:38 PM
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/26/dehko-bullied-by-the-irs/
"
I’ve always paid my taxes and have never been arrested or charged with any crime in my life. I am a successful small-business man. But in January of this year, I woke up to find that my business’ entire bank account — more than $35,000 — had been wrongly seized.
Later that same day, I was writing checks to my vendors. A federal agent strolls in. She tells me my hard-earned cash was taken by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). I was shocked. I’ve broken no law, committed no crime and was never warned my store could be in trouble. I asked her how I can keep managing my business when my account has been seized. She responded, “I don’t care.”
"The government falsely accused me of violating federal banking laws by making frequent cash deposits of less than $10,000. It is illegal to make deposits of less than $10,000 in cash if you are doing it to avoid regulations that require the banks to report larger deposits to the IRS. It’s not against the law, though, to make smaller deposits when there is a legitimate, legal business reason. That is exactly what I have been doing.
My clerks routinely deposited cash earned at Schott’s at a bank right across the street. It’s never a good idea to risk letting too much money accumulate on-site. Like many other small businesses, my store’s insurance policy specifically limits coverage for cash losses to $10,000."
"Remarkably, the government doesn’t even have to charge me with any wrongdoing to keep my money. Many people know about criminal forfeiture, which allows police to seize the ill-gotten gains of convicted criminals. In my case, the government used civil forfeiture, which lets the government take money from people who have never been charged with any crime.
Adding insult to injury, federal civil forfeiture law does not even grant me a hearing before or soon after they snatched my account."
-
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/09/25/grocery-store-detroit-irs-column/2868797/
Somehow, I don't see this problem getting any better with the IRS extending its greasy tentacles further into everyone's lives with the implementation of obamacare. Those bitcoins are looking a whole lot shinier right now.
-
Is it too early to stop using the ballot box and the jury box and start reaching for the cartridge box? >:D
[tinfoil]
(Only thinking out loud here, guys. No actual harm is intended to any government goon.)
-
I have never understood how any of the "civil forfeiture" (i.e. theft under color of law) laws survive even rudimentary constitutional scrutiny. What ever happened to "due process"?
-
There's not much point in keeping money in a bank account nowadays, anyways.
Yeah, it's FDIC insured to $250k... but it gains no interest to be worth mentioning. And you're subject to random supreme authoritah seizure of it. When it's in a controlled location of your own, it's subject to fire or theft, but that can be severely minimized with intelligent storage.
That, and banks shyt themselves when people become their own cash storage. There literally isn't enough cash for it to happen. You know things are bad when there isn't enough FAKE PAPER MONEY for people to hold onto.
-
Civil asset seizure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_in_rem
Basic scam is pretty simple. Cops arrest the objects, and the government prosecutes the property. Allegedly, the government has to prove the guilt, and thus establish that the property is subject to forfeiture by a "preponderance of the evidence." In reality, they make it a pain for the owner to first show standing (that he or she can sue to get their property back), and then prove that the object(s) were legally acquired. In some places, the cops keep the loot. In other places, the cops and prosecutors split the loot. A handful of states require the loot be given over to the general revenue, or schools or whatnot. Usually the cops/prosecutors find a way not to turn over all the loot. Expenses, you know.
-
"for he has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent forth a swarm of officers to harass us and eat out our substance."
sound familiar?
-
There's not much point in keeping money in a bank account nowadays, anyways.
Yeah, it's FDIC insured to $250k... but it gains no interest to be worth mentioning. And you're subject to random supreme authoritah seizure of it. When it's in a controlled location of your own, it's subject to fire or theft, but that can be severely minimized with intelligent storage.
That, and banks shyt themselves when people become their own cash storage. There literally isn't enough cash for it to happen. You know things are bad when there isn't enough FAKE PAPER MONEY for people to hold onto.
One reason I'm really interested in trying to hold on to at least some of my son's silver ounces and bitcoins once the estate is settled.
-
One reason I'm really interested in trying to hold on to at least some of my son's silver ounces and bitcoins once the estate is settled.
Some? The details of your personal situation are none of my business, but IMHO so long as the heirs/next of kin can work things out themselves, there's no reason why ALL of the non-deeded, tangible (portable!) assets can't remain in the family. This includes (but isn't limited to) cash, non-NFA guns, precious metals, jewelry, artwork, electronics, etc.
-
Some? The details of your personal situation are none of my business, but IMHO so long as the heirs/next of kin can work things out themselves, there's no reason why ALL of the non-deeded, tangible (portable!) assets can't remain in the family. This includes (but isn't limited to) cash, non-NFA guns, precious metals, jewelry, artwork, electronics, etc.
His debts exceed assets. Unless I find something unexpected, the estate will be run to zero.
-
Debt is cheap when the currency is inflating. I have no idea what your situation is, but I'm just sayin'.
I keep trying to convince my parents that paying off their loans is really not a big deal since their interest rate is lower than my own estimation of the "real" inflation rate. You might as well make the minimum payment in that situation.
-
Debt is cheap when the currency is inflating. I have no idea what your situation is, but I'm just sayin'.
I keep trying to convince my parents that paying off their loans is really not a big deal since their interest rate is lower than my own estimation of the "real" inflation rate. You might as well make the minimum payment in that situation.
Until something happens and you have debts you have to pay and no money in the bank, instead of no debt burden and piles of cash (or neat stuff you bought) with the money that would've been burned on payments.
-
Debts exceed assets. Unless I find something unexpected, the estate will be run to zero.
Understood. Bank accounts and deeded assets (real estate, motor vehicles, etc.) are recorded and readily seized by creditors. And of course, co-signers are on the hook for the loans, too. But its difficult for a creditor to attach a non-titled asset he doesn't know about or have access to.
-
I'm intent on doing it right.
-
I'm intent on doing it right.
An honest debt is an honest debt.
Probably something you already know, but remember that you or anyone else not a co-signer to the debt are in no way responsible or liable for any debts in excess of the value of his estate.