Forum Moderators: phranque
I know fed law says $10,000 cash or more has to be reported by banks, businesses.... (U.S.) to feds. But, I was not aware that the Patriot Act added more reg to that.
Has anyone in the UPS club or who has large Adsense payments, had their bank hold the Google check for 14, 21, 30 days, or more and quote the Patriot Act and fed reporting as the reason? Also, does anyone where we might find the text related to the Patriot Act, without reading hundreds of pages to get to the meat of the topic... are they going to hold Google checks for extended periods of time while they report us, to see if we are all terrorist earning google money and funneling it to people who live in caves?
Just wondering what we can expect later this year when earnings are expected to really rise.
I appreciate the input.
If they do though, then it would appear the terrorists are winning though since a little bit of freedom is being chipped away one bit at a time.
I could ask...but today's answer will likely mean nothing tomorrow here. Nobody ever seems to know the facts, and so one can something, another will say something else.
What I am really wondering is if the P.A has that kind of language. I read through the P.A. on banking, and saw nothing that was different than the old fed $10k rule that was for catching drug money. Yet, I am hearing at this restaurant, church money being held. Thinking I missed something in the P.A... anybody?
Cash deposits may be under even more scrutiny as well, but that's probably not the case here as presumably the bank doesn't actually put a "hold" on cash deposits. (Someone tell me if I'm wrong on the latter point; I could use a good laugh.)
I've regularly deposit checks from $10,000 to $50,000 and rarely see any sort of hold. I don't deal with cash, so that's never an issue for me.
They indicated the fed was cracking down on them because the offshore cig companys were funneling internet cig sales revenues to terrorist and the mob. The mob was then funneling it to terrorist as well. So, the P.A was used to stop this practice, by regulating the banks issuing credit cards, and holding them accountable, for those up to $1 million in fines, quoted in the P.A. for the failure of financial institutions to comply and report potential offenses of the P.A.
Secondly, they quoted the fact that online credit card sales of cigs was making it easier for minors to buy cigs, illegally. That, was of course a laugh, as I don't think we have a problem in the U.S with issuing large volumns of credit cards to minors. While they will issue one to the occassional dog, cat, or urn of ashes, and I suppose the occasssional child, it is not something worth regulation, base on one child here or there who snuck through the system. More kids can get a friend 18 years to buy them, and get them quicker than internet shopping. What kid do you know that plans for their cigs a week or two in advance. Most can't plan today.
The third reason, and most likely the real reason for the crack down on credit card companys was the loss of revenue to the states, in cig taxes, because internet sales were circumventing the state cig taxes. Perhaps they used the P.A as a scapegoat for the real reason. They can't tax internet sales in another state, so they just shut down an internet industry and quote the P.A. We thought the cig sales were dominated by reservations, who dont' charge taxes on cigs on res sales to begin with. It looked to me more like a way to cut back res sales, than to cut of terrorists selling cigs on the internet. A check of many WHOIS, came back to reservations, not offshore foreign corps.
But, if the P.A is being used for cash, and for credit card, then is it being used for checks as well. I read the P.A and seen no provision at all for credit card transactions. I did see language for offshore banking, and wonder if that is how the P.A. is begin applied to credit card transactions, or if there is some other loose language that applies to any payments, in large amounts, including cash, credit card, or checks? Clearly the banks issuing credit cards are scared.
If it does apply to checks, could it apply to Google Adsense checks? Is that where we are heading... any large amount from anywhere in any form is going to be held up?
You guys have awfully nice banks. I've recently encountered 10 day holds on checks in the $7k - $10k range. So again, I advise to check with your specific bank -- they are free to set policies more restrictive (longer hold) than the minimum required by law.
I was told by my bank that a hold is at the discretion of the teller. When you make a large deposit ($5,000 or more), they're given information about your balances, typical deposit sizes, recent overdrafts, whether the checks are local or not, whether or not you're redepositing bounced checks, etc. Using that information, they determine whether or not to place a hold. Deposits in new accounts may have special rules, too. There are also laws about the maximum holds that vary from state to state.
So, smile and be friendly to your tellers. I've also found it's a good opportunity to tell them about your sites. Have some promotional items to give them. I use pens, post it notes, and promotional business cards.
We thought the cig sales were dominated by reservations, who dont' charge taxes on cigs on res sales to begin with.
They do charge taxes on cigarettes here in Nevada, although up until a couple of years ago they didn't.
That is interesting. You are correct. The tellers are held responsible for transactions that end in problems for the bank. Here, I have seen a teller personally call the account holder to tell them a check they deposited bounced, and that is a common procedure. She accepted the deposit, she has to make it right, and do the account collections on it.
I never really thought of smoozing the tellers, they seem to be more of an annoyance to me than anything, most are incompetent. To qualify, you only to know the right people, not have training or a brain, in these towns. That is why I do 99.99% of my banking electronically, and only with the Adsense checks have I had to go to the bank in many years.
But, I have switched to electronic transfer of Adsense payments. So, does that mean my electronic transfer is treated as a check, or cash for the purpose of the P.A? Or is it a seperate category from cash and checks, and over $10k will be subject to hold for P.A. enforcement?
An EFT should be more readily available than a check.
If you receive large sum regularly from a very well-known company as a paycheck or just a check, it will go thorugh smoothly.
I'm incorporated in the US, and I called a bank that I've dealt with in the past, all profitable business and no problems. They still wouldn't give me an account. The primary issue was a lack of an SSN but when I suggested I had no difficulty in the past I was quoted the PA as the reason.
FWIW, as a Canadian with most of my customers in the US, my intention was to open a US account, then start running my American customers through the US company. The reason I wanted to do this was so that I paid US taxes on income from my US customers. It wouldn't have made any difference in my final tax bill. Given the PA not allowing me to get a bank account, I'm forced to continue to run all my biz through Canada and not pay any US taxes.
It seems more logical to me not to give a Canadian living in Canada a U.S. bank account, then to refuse a Canadian a Canadian bank account, just because he is not living at home.
One bank actually told us it was because he needed to pay tax on the interest he would earn on the account, and since he was in the U.S, he didn't have to pay Canadian taxes. That makes sense. I guess it would apply to the U.S refusal to a Canadian, for the same reason.
