A question about safety deposit boxes

Its funny how in the eyes of the law, the main concern with getting into a safe deposit box after someone has passed away is taxes. :rollling:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Did you really think they cared about you? They care about the money they can acquire, to create the power they wish to amass. All bureaucracies have always been so.

 

I think the focus is more on unreported income held as cash (in the box), or stolen merchandise, or chemical or biological agents, etc.

Less than 20% of estates pay any taxes.

The POINT is, no one should avoid keeping valuables like coins in a S.D. box merely because they're afraid of being taxed. On the other hand, I think I read that Homeland Security can easily get a subpoena to open your box, without notice to you, and without you being present, if they "suspect" you of terrorist activities.

So let's take it a step further - is that true??

Certainly the instant the badge's flashed, the banks cooperate 1000%, the **** with the customer of 30+ years.

 

Having a co-owner of the box eliminates this problem.

 

Yeah, but has other problems.

My next door neighbor in Iowa was a successful businessman, city councilman, all around great guy. His wife all of the sudden got a female "friend", and before he knew it switched teams and his SDB that contained about 50 ounces of old US gold coins was empty.

 

But only if it's your spouse. Otherwise, from the link awwatchdog posted:

At least in Pennsylvania...

 

Ouch!

I like this post, but I can't bring myself to click "like" because that might be confused with my liking what happened.

 

Yeah, it was brutal. It was weird, because just 6 months before a friend of mine had his wife switch teams on him and their 3 kids. Maybe the moral of the story is don't be friends with me!

 

I'm starting to like you less and less... :too-funny:

 

No, they did not search SDBs (unless looking for organized crime activity) and the gold recall was voluntary.

 

If you don't hold it, you don't own it. Regardless of whether your initial concerns are unfounded, in the event of a confiscation of any sort SDB's will be on the menu. They're not a terrible way to diversify the location of your holdings, but neither is a hole in the ground.

 

Hey! That's how I pronounce it...

schedule... eschew... Escher...

 

For infleXion, I agree, the SDB is not best. But I live in a big apartment house vulnerable to fire, flood, and tornado, and holes in the ground are out of the question, the maintenance man would stick a rosebush in every one, without warning.

That leaves SDB or a friend's B&M house. I trust the friends, but I don't trust their ability to keep their mouths shut, especially in case of home invasion.

I'm not too worried about theft in this building, any strangers would immediately encounter two dozen blue-hair grannies armed with plates of Mohs-8 snickerdoodles, brandishing pictures of their grandchildren, and flee in terror, empty-handed.

 

So no American was charged with a crime for not turning in gold? The 1933 law reads pretty clear?

 

Have you read Executive Order 6102? The exemptions granted the public are enormous and allowed the average citizen to essentially own more gold than they could actually afford to put aside.

 

I did read it last year, but I do NOT know gold 1933 legal case law of that time frame? One woman in San Francisco was charged with hording food in San Francisco (she had canned a pantry of food).:rollling: I find it hard to think no one was found and taken to court. New York State right now is offering $500 for anyone to turn in your friends on the new gun laws.

 

I know of only two court cases related to the Executive Order. One in NY where a depositor had something like 5,000 ounces of gold (or gold certificates, I am not certain which) at Chase National and the bank refused to deliver gold when requested and the other when a non-US citizen had 10,000 ounces of gold at a bank. The Federal government failed in its prosecution of the NY depositor, but the depositor was not able to redeem his claim in gold, either. In the other case, the non-US citizen was not able to get his 10,000 ounces of gold. The Executive Orders that followed 6102 appeared to heavily concentrate on the idea that gold should not be allowed into the hands of foreign governments and I would think that non-US citizens would have a tougher time at that point.

 

Of course not. You've been listening to too much talk radio. The gov't 'talked' about confiscation but from everything I've read, no one EVER had any gold 'confiscated' and the gov't didn't go door to door. It was an honor system redemption.

And then as now and as in the future, it's not which party is going to steal your chickens . . . it's both parties, grasshopper. You can go back for several presidents from both sides of the aisle and congresses (from both sides of the aisle) and they are ALL THE SAME. There is no difference. I've never really been able to tell the difference between Obama and Bush Jr. And for the elected congress, they're so busy lining their pockets and campaign coffers, they couldn't vote straight on an issue to save their grandkids lives.

Washington isn't broken, it works very well. It just happens to be bought and paid for.

peace,

rono



And while I've voted democrat most of my life, I'm currently an elected republican official.

 

I agree both parties are here to rip you off, its just what flavor of spending are they in favor of. Sad state of affairs to not have anyone to believe in anymore.

Regarding the gold, I understand it was an "honor system", but that is not what matters. If you make gold basically illegal to be used and sold, (most coin dealers did not want to buy any gold during this period), you effectively have already done what you wished to accomplish. You do not NEED to take all of the gold, you simply need to prevent it from being an alternate currency. That was their goal, and it was easily accomplished. Same could easily be done today. What good is it to hold PM if you risk arrest if you try to use it?

Regarding SDB, I understand your concerns Inflexion. I weighed those concerns, but considering I post here, some family members know I collect coins, I belong to coin clubs, I figured the risk of a home invasion is higher and more severe than such government action. So, I keep any PM in a SDB. Anyone showing up on my doorstep will just find a combat vet and a loaded shotgun. However, I just cannot risk my family by keeping PM in the house.

 

Gold was still legal tender and could be used in commercial transactions. Where gold was siphoned out of the commercial realm was when it was deposited into the banking system. It appears that much of what the Executive Orders touched upon during this time period was the idea that exportation of gold would hurt the country and they were attempting to keep gold physically within the US.