Bank Unwilling to Cash Check from Gold Sale

You are offering opinion, insults to others and logical fallacies as a reason to believe you. If you really think PMs are a bad buy now, you should at least try to offer more than that. Good advice does not need to discredit others. It either has a logical argument or it doesn't.

I have yet to meet a "hysterical" person who buys gold. I suppose others might feel these people might be stupid, idiots or morons for having bought gold, but IMO, it means the observer is compensating because it doesn't fit their view of the universe. So be it. My practice is to keep my side of the street clean and let the rest take care of itself. You might try this sometime.

Finally if you wish to point out something that I have stated that is incorrect, and can do so without passing opinion and personal acnedotes as fact, then I will be glad to discuss it. I admit I make mistakes and if so, then I will be glad to address it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

?

I was saying that many in the industry have been a broken record, and have said the same for 30+ years, as well as use scare tactics.

At the same time I was saying that you don't, so your points would be more valid.

I am truly sorry if my compliment offended you, it will not happen again.

Chris

 

In the csae of Bank of America, most of their new accounts have been through buy-outs. The customers at most of the acquired institutions were never asked if they wanted to become BoA customers, it was forced upon them. Case in point, my mom. She was very happy with LaSalle Bank, then along comes BoA and gobbles them up and starts jerking her around. Thing is, in some markets there is virtually no choice, you have to bank with a huge bank. This is especially true in south Florida. Here in Missouri, we still have some choices, rather the exception than the rule unfortunately.

 

I know that BoA and Wells Fargo have been extremely active in taking over small banks in recent years. My family used to bank at a smaller bank which Wells bought and the same thing happened...and they left. But, that's not what I was referring too. The post I was originally commenting on was about a member who went into a large bank (like BoA) and wanted to open a new account using a foreign address and the bank wouldn't go for it. I spent over a year working for a very large bank (they are the 5th largest in the US) and I can tell you that from my experience working there...sales were their #1 priority for their employees. We were told to sell, sell sell...accounts, credit cards and such. So, trust me when I say that banks want to open new accounts. The fact that they couldn't for that member who posted due to his foreign address is probably due to new federal regulations, not because the bank didn't want to. Trust me, they wanted to but couldn't.

 

There is absolutely no reason why someone needs that much physical money in their possession except for ill deed doing. If you want to buy a house, a yacht, a Ferrari, or any other host of expensive items, you only need the money in your account and available. Unless she is truly demented/senile and wants to lay around on a bed of cash?? Deposit the check, and use regular means to spend it (debit card, checks, issued cashier's checks) or transfer it electronically to your preferred online stock broker/investment site, other bank, etc.

 

Just remember, the last one into a bubble always takes the brunt of the bursting.

 

This doesn't make sense.

Getting around the inheritance would be better accomplished by his mom giving him the gold at face value (up to $9,999) as legal tender and then him selling it as collectables.

Now this completely ignores the spirit of the law, but that is what financial advisers and politicians do. They want more rules so politicians can choose who has to follow them and financial advisers profit from avoiding them and politicians profit from selling exemptions to them.

 

This has been ruled on and thrown out. The tax court has ruled that you cannot take face value of collectible coins and attempt to use the face value as its fair market value for gift and estate tax purposes. If I remember the case right, it was eggregious, a man buying chain cents and the like and attempting to say it was only a $.01 value for tax purposes since it was legal US coinage.

In short, what you advocate has already been ruled illegal, whether we do it or the politicians. Anyone caught doing this will be committing a felony, since its not a misinterpretation of tax rules. Since courts have ruled on this topic specifically, and there are clear collectible rules, anyone caught doing this will be treated as a felon tax evader.

 

So the tax authorities, etc., would regard any exchange of 90% silver, $50 gold eagles, etc., as at market value rather than face value? I have heard people recommend using such a ploy with a property purchase for tax purposes. So although a property might be on the town tax books as worth $1 million, if you paid in $50 gold eagles (543 of them), with a face value of just over $25K, the local, state or federal government would reject this?

So how is it that the government gets to under price their mint products, inflate the currency beyond belief, and then sue anyone who holds them to their word? Lewis Carrol would be amazed by this logic.

 

Also IRS considers such practices to be frivolous tax claims. Read # 13.

http://www.irs.gov/irb/2010-17_IRB/ar13.html

 

13) In a transaction using gold and silver coins, the value of the coins is excluded from income or the amount realized in the transaction is the face value of the coins and not their fair market value for purposes of determining taxable income (Frivolous argument (sic!).

 

But I am sure that there are many people who have used tangible assets in exchanges without fully valuing them and have escaped the scrutiny of the tax authorities. Or they could over value them for advantage also. Or barter trades could be done as "consideration".

For everyone who gets caught usually by being turned in by a disgruntled individual, you can be sure there are many times more that do not get caught. Still it is best to follow the law whenever able to do so.

 

You are correct. I am sure there are many who have escaped scrutiny. Valuing tangible assets is a large area for mistakes as well as outright fraud. My intent was not to add derision to the conversation, but to point out the perils of the idea of spending collectible coins at face value in transactions.

 

Excellent point as well sir. I had forgotten that aspect.

 

Yes sir of course. Many more have done this than have been caught, just like not reporting cash payments, like kind exchange abuse, etc etc. I am not even saying that this is used that much as an evasion scheme. I am simply sayign that if someone tries to say this is legitimate, they are misinformed at best.

I was not making light of the subject, or dismissing the fact that there are those out there who are saying this can be done. I am sure some have done it and never got caught so they think its acceptable. Its just not.

 

Explain that to everyone when they are simultaneously running all the banks in a state of panic. Your logic assumes such a scenario is a black swan event. Truth is, it isn't.

If you have any doubts about that, just ask the Russians or Argentinians. And no, their situation wasn't much different than our own current situation before their currency failed. And why did they demand currency when it looked apparent the currency itself was near failure? Because it was better than having nothing at all. Think Cuba 1959, suit cases stuffed with 100 Peso notes from the fallen regime turning up everywhere in Miami. The woman in this story isn't nearly as crazy as you seem to think she is. At least with the cash in hand, she can trade it for something --anything-- before it becomes entirely worthless had it been trapped in a failed institution at a time when the currency became hyperinflationairy.

 

The Russian currency failed because Reagan and Thatcher conspired with the world banking organizations to cut off all access to import/export credits -- economic warfare.

The Argentine currency failed because they operated under a currency board that pegged to the dollar at an unsustainable exchange rate.

Cuba experienced a coup.

The situation in the US isn't anything like any of the examples you cite as support. The woman isn't necessarily crazy, but she is receiving financial advice from people with crazy ideas, and the bank acted appropriately to head off another tragic story of a senior citizen bilked out of their savings.

 

The Russian bank run I was referring to occurred in September of 1993, long after Reagan left.

 

I can always count on you for a good conspiracy-theory laugh.

 

Countries don't collapse overnight.