U.S. government adopts Libyan import restrictions on coins

No idea how this might effect the market. Either way, it's still an interesting article.



https://www.coinworld.com/news/worl...libyan-import-restrictions-on-coins.all.html#

Citing the 1970 UNESCO Convention, the government of Libya sought and has received import restrictions for items entering the United States, including a broad range of coins.

The new “emergency” measures were adopted on Dec. 5, and posted at the Federal Register, which notes that the request was “imposed on certain archaeological and ethnological material, the pillage of which jeopardizes the cultural heritage of Libya.”

edited - copyright

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This only applies to individuals who have been in Libya, right?

 

The way I read it, any coin deemed to be "found" in Libya is covered. So, a coin that was found in a Libyan dig 7 years can't be sold to someone in the US when this goes into effect.

I'm sure someone who knows better will jump in and correct me.

 

This is becoming a trend in many Middle East countries, and you can expect it to grow exponentially. They're out to reclaim their "cultural heritage" even if it means confiscating pieces from Western nations' collectors.

 

Correct me if I am wrong on this. I have tried reading the original law under whose aegis this particular law applies, and, I can't figure it out. I think it might mean that these coins may not be exported from the country of origin, and that they may not be imported by those countries who sign on to this measure, such as the US. I have not seen anything to the affect that these coins have become contraband within the US and may not be lawfully possessed by Americans and could be seized by law enforcement officials. That I think is what many numismatists might be most concerned about, their becoming contraband and subject to seizure within the US. The original law is so broadly written that almost any coin that once circulated in an ancient country could be seized and the owner would have to demonstrate (the onus of proof is on the person owning the coin) that the coin's possession does not violate the arcanely worded law, sort of like proving a negative. Without turning this into a political platform Then please do not, it is political discussion as thus removed. drivel.

 

Exactly correct.

 

Constantinople is in Turkey

 

That struck me as odd, but it is exactly how the article read.

 

In my best Doc Brown voice, "The Libyans!" But seriously, are there lots of hoards that have come out of lybia? I've never had coins shipped from there but assume everything I buy is through a middle man or 3.

 

I don't like this at all. But what about Roman coins struck in the second century to the fifth century before the Byzantine period?

 

Funny. I was reading this and I thought I would send it to my friend Pete Tompa since he's very involved with this sort of thing, and then I see quotes from him on here. Figures. I'll ask him if he wants to come on here and comment further.

 

The last paragraph from Peter Tompa needs to be read and understood before you get paranoid. “The regulations contain some belated acknowledgement any restricted coins must also be ‘found’ there. (Previous import restrictions on coins have improperly equated where they are found with where they are minted, though they are items of commerce that typically circulated widely.)”

The point of this limitation is that the coin in question must be shown to have been removed from Libya improperly in order to be subject to the restrictions being imposed. Manufacture in Libya is not enough, since the normal use of coinage in antiquity would allow circulation outside the place of minting. There must be a direct connection to the artifact to demonstrate that it was removed from Libya in modern times.

Tompa has been hammering that home to lawmakers for well over a decade. [make that three decades]

 

I don't think his interpretation is correct. You can read the text of the regulation here: https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...logical-and-ethnological-materials-from-libya

It looks like these regulations work the same as all previous ones, namely that if a particular type of coin is on the restricted list it is restricted from import unless you have documentation that it was not recently illegally removed from the source country, either because you can show it was on the market before the imposition of import restrictions, on the market 10 years ago or earlier or you have an export certificate from the source country. Nothing in the official Federal Register notice suggests that there is any burden of proof on CBP to prove that a coin was found in Libya.

Laws have been in place for decades that will allow countries to repatriate anything that they can prove was illegally exported and that's exactly how it should work: with the burden of proof on the accuser (i.e. the US or foreign government). These import restrictions turn that on its head and place the burden of proof on the accused to prove that an object was not recently illegally exported.

 

Be in denial if you like, Edited Memoranda of Understanding are EXPANDING country of origin rights and SHRINKING country of collecting rights. It's "a process".

 

Stay out of political discussions violations! Any time you stray from the actual event occurring in the coin world to discussion on ( possible) political actions you believe is related is not allowed.

 

Everyone should read Peter Tompa's blog post from December 5th: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2017/12/emergency-restrictions-on-libyan.html

If you import anything minted in Libya into the US, even from Canada, you it would be good for you if the seller included in the envelope some kind of evidence that the coin was outside Libya before December 2017. This could mean a previous auction catalog appearance, or just a note saying that the seller believes it was on the market in Europe before December 2017, or a note that says the seller believes it was dug up outside Libya.

I suspect that if you import any Kyrene or Libyan Ottoman coins the country of origin should be Libya even if the coin has been sitting in a collector's cabinet in Germany since before there was a Libya or a Germany. If the seller declares for purposes of US Customs that the Kyrene coin you bought at a German auction was of German origin it might look like a smuggling attempt. But I have no legal knowledge of how this works.

 

Do these restrictions apply only to ancient or medieval coins from Libya or do they apply to coins from other Mediterranean countries as well? If so, or even if just from North Africa, how can collectors in the US protect themselves from coins acquired many years ago but the sale records of these purchases long gone? Many purchases are made at coin shows where such records are often not exchanged. Is there a danger that such coins could become (or already are) illegal to have? Some collectors, and dealers, have invested a great deal in ancient and medieval coins and may be adversely effected. What is the proper remedy for such collectors?

 

These are import restrictions. Nothing has changed for coins in the US before December 2017.

The United States currently has similar arrangements with Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, and Egypt. (Also China, but you asked about the Mediterranean countries). Each country has different periods. For example the Italian arrangement only covers the Greek and early Republican period, not Imperial coins.

If you have coins that were minted on the territory of these countries, or were buried in these countries, you should not try to take these out of the USA and then bring them back in without documentation. So if you have an Egyptian tetradrachm as a pocket piece, you should obtain paperwork and declare it upon returning from international travel. It is unclear what paperwork you would need which is why Peter Tompa and the ACCG tried to go to the supreme court.

 

So, am I correct if someone acquired coins minted or buried in those countries some time ago, even if they cannot document those purchases, they are lawful to possess within the US? What about ones from those countries they purchased within the US more recently? Do they need to document those purchases and how would they do that given they were bought or traded at coin shows? Bottom line for some collectors might be that they cannot document those long ago buys and might be concerned their very possession might be questionable under this regulation. Thanks very much for taking the time in helping to clear this up. Just reading the regulations can be unsettling.