Government rules force coin store to close

I thought people here would be interested in reading about this. My local coin store is closing two of its three branches because of new rules either in effect or being considered by local government. The owner describes the issue on this Google doc: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B28H5Gc-EgI-OGhlRFNlTTJodkk/edit.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Absolute BS! Pawn shops survive by selling stolen goods – that’s the real problem, not constitutional issues.

 

Sounds like he's whining about stricter laws to me... Those rules are COMMON around much of the country. I operate a shop under a very similar set of rules. Sure it's a pain in the butt... but that's the costs of doing business. I for one find the laws to be helpful in deterring thieves from bringing in stolen goods...

 

I don't know what I think about it. On the one hand, it seems like a bit of an overreaction, but it seems like some of the rules are onerous to comply with. Especially the text of the bill under consideration that says that to buy from someone, the seller must show proof of ownership, and they can't pay in cash. How many sellers can or will go along with that? How would I prove ownership of my coins?

 

I love these .... "sorry guys but the big bad govt is making be close down" stories? Really, why not accept some personal responsibility. Rules are rules and just because you refuse to follow them ... it's not your fault? Sure Record keeping is a pain but it's part of the business. Maybe you should open a Cheese Shop to go along with the Whine.

 

I'm probably the only person who feels this way, but if I saw that posted on a store, I'd never shop at any store owned by that individual again. Essentially, he's complaining that the government isn't paying him to collect the information to stay within regulation. Normally, businesses will merely fold those costs into the purchase or sale price of the items. I'm sure he's doing the same.

Also, beyond all of that, do you have a link to the actual legislation, HD? It seemed that post was merely the owner's interpretation of the events.

 

Where does he not accept responsibility? He is stating the reasons why he is shutting down two of his shops. Probably has already made enough money and dealing with all the new regulations makes it not worth it anymore. Did you read his list of 12 things?

He said he had to spend 1900 man hours on the new rules. Once you consider all the costs of an employee, I'd say $15 an hour would probably be on the low side, but we'll say $15. 1900 hours x $15 an hour = $28,500

 

I'd actually be more likely to shop at his store since he seems concerned with issues of privacy and freedom :thumb:

 

Until someone steals your coin collection, and the police tell you "Sorry bud. We don't have any leads. Check craigslist or eBay."

 

Getting my post in before the inevitable lockdown on this thread...

 

Don't care, I don't support these regulations and I'll take the risk.

 

Yeah... I know it's hard guys... but keep the politically charged discussions out of it please.

 

You conveniently missed that his gripe on 1900 man hours was driven by his getting fined $1000 for not doing the job (which he writes as "their job") right. Also, I'm assuming he's not paying $15/hr the data entry. He said he has staff law enforcement officers. That sounds like grandiose phrasing for security guards. They're usually paid minimum wage. In Illinois, the minimum wage is $8.25.

On top of that, the bill, insofar as I can tell, died in session. The House amended it several times, and the Senate ended session. So, essentially, he's claiming he had to pay a $1000 fine as a result of this "law" (which was never enacted). That's simply not possible. He can't be fined for non-compliance with a law that doesn't exist.

As I said, if I saw that sign on the door of a shop, I would never do business with that owner again. It's clear that he's blaming the government for his misunderstanding (or misapplication) of existing laws. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been fined. The "1900 man hours" (which really seems like an exaggeration) was likely the result of the owner being asked to provide proof of acquisition of the stolen goods.

Also, for the "proof of ownership" requirement in the proposed Act, included is the "affidavit of ownership" clause. That basically means that the buyer needs a written statement from the individual selling the item (whose identification has been collected in the form of a scan/copy of the driver's license) that they are the owner of the item. Additional allowances are receipts of sale. Usually an individual will keep receipts or similar paperwork for insurance purposes.

Again, the legislation was intended for regulation of the purchase/sale of precious metals. Essentially, the legislation would apply to businesses not accountable to the pawnbroker laws of Illinois. I'm actually surprised that a coin store wasn't already subject to pawnbroker laws, but I'm admittedly not versed in Illinois commerce law.

Also, I think the biggest contention with the law is the $250 cap on cash purchase. This might make it difficult for the store owner to convince people to sell coins to them, since they can only pay up to $250 in cash for any items containing a precious metal. That said, the law doesn't seem to apply to non-precious metal coins, so the LCS could still buy base metal coins for thousands of dollars in cash. I'd assume that would be a point of contention for someone voting on the legislation who actually collects coins or understands numismatics.

 

Ah...some fermented curd...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJhq9eq_eJg

 

Before I accept this statement at face value, I'd like to see some actual numbers that prove how these sort of laws have helped reduce theft of precious metals, or increase recovery of stolen precious metals in the communities where these laws are already in effect, because I don't believe these sort of laws would have any effect on either.

I can only assume that these laws were sold to the public as being "for your own protection" because precious metals are so easily exchanged for cash. You know what is even easier to exchange for cash? Cash! They should write a law like this that would cover all cash transactions. No more paying cash without showing a photo ID and making a record of the transaction. Maybe even require merchants to photograph or scan the cash involved. That way, if someone steals a pile of cash from your stash, there might be a chance the police could recover it for you!

Here's my experience with police and stolen property. My $1500 mountain bike was stolen back in 1999. I reported it stolen. I had the serial number. I had photographs. They took a report and basically said they weren't going to do anything to try and find it (i.e. Check in with or even put the word out to pawn shops, bike shops, etc) but if they happened to stumble upon it, they'd let me know. Guess what. It was never recovered. Big surprise there.

So, here's another idea: Be careful with anything that is valuable, highly liquid, and portable, like cash, precious metals, jewelry, bikes, etc.

 

Yeah, I wouldn't shop there either. These "crazies" always latch on to a cause, in the name of "freedom" and misrepresent the facts. Under the name of "freedom", I quess we should all be free to do whatever we want, regardless of how it harms others.

Aside from the issue of making it harder to sell stolen merchandise, is the issue of limiting cash payments, which puts a wrench in facilitating the underground economy, which is fine with me. Why should I have to pay others’ taxes, when they don’t because they transact in unreported cash?

 

Let me break down you what is involved with my store... and see how it compares.

I am licensed with the city of Lawrence (which is a suburb of Indianapolis). There is a yearly licence fee. Upon the deal I am required to take a picture of the persons ID, a picture of the item, and their thumbprint. I also have 13 cameras in the shop that record video of the transaction (not required but I still do it). They also must sign a form stating that they are the legal owner of the items that they are selling. I then must hold this item for 7 days before I sell it. I am SUPPOSED to turn in all of my sheets to my city clerks office EVERY NIGHT after business hours. I however have worked it out with the city that we will store them here in house and the police can come to me and I can provide all of them over the past 6 months... which I do.

The first violation fine is $150, the second is $2,500, and the third is $10,000.

My city recently put a Cash For Gold shop out of business after they found them falsifying their paperwork to buy knowingly stolen goods.

The city does not limit how much cash I can pay out... but I do... I try not to keep much in house to be safe.

It's just the name of the game these days....

 

Sad game. Sorry but I would never sell to a store if they had to take my thumbprint.

The problem in MN is a new law to go into effect in 2014. It requires anyone buynig or selling $1000 or more in anything containing 1% or more PM to be licensed in the state, and post a $15,000 bond. We seriously do not know if it applies to coin collectors or not. If I buy a denarius for $1000, am I "buying or selling" pm? It appears by the law I am.

 

Here you go:

http://www.law.umich.edu/centersandprograms/lawandeconomics/workshops/Documents/Winter2008/miles.pdf

Edit: It concludes that pawnshop openings correlate with increases in larceny crimes. I would conclude that restricting what a pawnshop can buy (in terms of stolen goods regulation) would, in turn, reduce the future crime rates, with respect to larceny.