Known Provenance and Legality of Owning 1933 Double Eagles

The government says that the coins are illegal to own. The switched the legal standard to the Langbord's having to PROVE that Izzy Switt did NOT steal them rather than prove he DID.

In other words.....Guilty until proven Innocent...and you can't prove you're innocent !!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes

Yes.

Here are two major identifying marks:

This is gold we are talking about. It hadn’t toned between 1933 and 2002, so why do you think it would be any different in the present/future?

Also, the person who bought it paid $7.59 million for it. I don’t know about you, but I would take care of something that cost that much.

You are starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist. How would anyone in their right mind refute pictures of the very coin the US government authorized to be sold? Your thought process makes no sense to me.

 

Someone spending that much on a coin is going to get something to establish the provenance with it.

 

The person is almost certainly a billionaire and their desire for anonymity and donation of the coin to museums means they could care less about the price.

 

They may not care about the money but they care about the coin. They are also likely not a fool. The Farouk example isn't just going to be traded about like a common coin at a flea market.

 

There are? Where did this high high resolution image come from? And to be sure it is of the Farouk coin it would have had to have been taken between 1944 and 1954. Aan image made of the Fenton coin doesn't count because it was conjectured to be the Farouk coin. My understanding is that someone who was actually at the 1954 sale said that the Fenton coin was NOT the Faruk coin. (Unfortunately I believe everyone who was at the sale and saw the Farouk coin is dead now.)

 

Unless the Farouk coin has gone "missing" and another 1933 DE took its "place" I think it's OK to assume that the Fenton coin which sold for $7.6 MM in 2002 is the Farouk coin.

 

Well the Farouk coin went missing in 1954, and there is as far as I know, no proof the Fenton coin is the Farouk coin. So another claimed Farouk coin could still appear. Would be interesting if one did that actually had evidence to show it was the Farouk coin (Say withthe King's agents copy of the export license.). Where would that leave the Fenton coin? Probably still legal to own because the government did "monetize" it.

 

Legally I believe the Fenton coin is considered to be the Farouk coin. Whether it was the Farouk coin originally is immaterial. Either way, if another coin appeared claiming to be the Farouk coin, it would be USG property.

 

Would it? Your back to the same question they had with the Fenton coin. If it has evidence that it IS the Farouk coin you are back to the problem that the government issued an export license for it, so it could be legal.

 

So the government just made a mistake....big deal.

All they do is de-monetize the other coin....and return their share of the $6.6 MM that they got from the auction.

What do you want to bet that the Mint's share of the loot went to annual bonuses and easy "performance reviews" !!!

 

lol no chance that happens under any circumstances