Be Honest..Is It Legal or Not ??

"Spot" as of this afternoon is $12.44. $18-24 is actually quite a lot of pennies over spot.

If you want to buy Morgans at pennies over spot, your best bet is to open your own pawn shop. Or throw a "We Buy Gold & Silver" party at a local hotel. Just make sure your ethics are stored securely.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I wasn't buying them this afternoon if I were they would buying them for pennies over spot professor!

 

Where (in general terms, not to reveal your super-secret sources), and how much?

With silver putting the melt price of a Morgan at $12.44, Provident is offering to buy culls at $16.99 each. If you can buy them "any time" for (say) $13, which is fifty or so "pennies over spot", why in the world aren't you buying them all and then shipping them off to Provident for $4 profit per coin?

The premium is real.

 

The how's and why's I do business is none of yours. End of story....

 

That's fine. At the end of the story, you're unwilling to back up the claim that you can buy Morgans any time at pennies over melt.

I've presented evidence of at least one large-scale buyer who is paying much more than that for cull dollars. Does that mean nobody can ever buy them for less? Of course not -- ask any pawn shop. Given that there are people willing to spend silver dollars at face value or cash them in at a bank, there are obviously people who are willing to sell them for less than they're worth. But you can't find them "any time", because the many people who do know what they're worth will usually snatch them up before you get to them.

 

I respond, but not to Tommyboy's language!! rim's cents has stated that a law is now in effect, of some sorts, could you be more specific?? Another question, to whomever can answer..... Is it illegal to own a counterfeit without "copy" on it, even as a study specimen???? [and do quote a current law if replying].
Thank you.

 

"Though the legalities regarding ownership of bogus coins aren't completely clear, there's nothing in the statutory or case law in the U.S. that indicates simple possession is illegal. Two areas of U.S. statuatory law deal with counterfeit coins. Title 18, Part I, Chapter 25 (Counterfeiting and Forgery) of the U.S. Code, Sections 485, 489, and 492 deal with counterfeits of U.S. and world coins. The Hobby Protection Act of 1973 (Title 15, Chapter 48, Sections 2101 through 2106 of the U.S. Code, plus 1988 amendments) deals with counterfeits of ancient coins.

Similarly, no court in the U.S. has ever ruled that possession of counterfeits of collectable coins is illegal. What's more, at least two circuit courts have ruled that possession of counterfeit coins without intent to defraud doesn't violate the section of the U.S. Code on counterfeiting U.S. coins (United States v. Cardillo, 708 F.2d 29 [1983], and United States v. Ratner, 464 F.2d 169 [1972]), according to collector and lawyer Michael Benveniste.

"The statutes do not criminalize mere possession of counterfeit money," concluded Armen R. Vartian in a November 5, 2001, Coin World column titled "Owning Counterfeits." As a lawyer, numismatist, Coin World legal columnist, and author of the book A Legal Guide to Buying and Selling Art and Collectibles, Vartian is the most visible numismatic legal expert in the U.S." http://coinsguide.reidgold.com/counterfeits.html

And there are several other sources out there.

 

"Owning Counterfeits." As a lawyer, numismatist, Coin World legal columnist, and author of the book A Legal Guide to Buying and Selling Art and Collectibles, Vartian is the most visible numismatic legal expert in the U.S." http://coinsguide.reidgold.com/counterfeits.html

And there are several other sources out there.[/QUOTE]

Thanks!! You pointed me in the right direction. No nightmares of waking up with cuffs on.

 

Sec 489 and 492 are interesting though. 489 does seem to say that possession is legal as long as you intend to keep them (giving them away is not legal)

In Sec 492 even though Sec 489 says possession is legal, refusing to surrender them to authorities if they are requested IS illegal.

 

Surrender what ??

 

Sorry, counterfeit or unmarked post 1973 copies or devices for making the same. Counterfeit/counterfeiting paraphernalia.

Sec 489

Whoever, within the United States, makes or brings therein from any foreign country, or possesses with intent to sell, give away, or in any other manner uses the same, except under authority of the Secretary of the Treasury or other proper officer of the United States, any token, disk, or device in the likeness or similitude as to design, color, or the inscription thereon of any of the coins of the United States or of any foreign country issued as money, either under the authority of the United States or under the authority of any foreign government shall be fined under this title.

I wonder if holding for study counts under "in any other manner uses the same"?

Sec 492

All counterfeits of any coins or obligations or other securities of the United States or of any foreign government, or any articles, devices, and other things made, possessed, or used in violation of this chapter or of sections 331–333, 335,336, 642 or 1720, of this title, or any material or apparatus used or fitted or intended to be used, in the making of such counterfeits, articles, devices or things, found in the possession of any person without authority from the Secretary of the Treasury or other proper officer, shall be forfeited to the United States.

Whoever, having the custody or control of any such counterfeits, material, apparatus, articles, devices, or other things, fails or refuses to surrender possession thereof upon request by any authorized agent of the Treasury Department, or other proper officer, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Whenever, except as hereinafter in this section provided, any person interested in any article, device, or other thing, or material or apparatus seized under this section files with the Secretary of the Treasury, before the disposition thereof, a petition for the remission or mitigation of such forfeiture, the Secretary of the Treasury, if he finds that such forfeiture was incurred without willful negligence or without any intention on the part of the petitioner to violate the law, or finds the existence of such mitigating circumstances as to justify the remission or the mitigation of such forfeiture, may remit or mitigate the same upon such terms and conditions as he deems reasonable and just.

If the seizure involves offenses other than offenses against the coinage, currency, obligations or securities of the United States or any foreign government, the petition for the remission or mitigation of forfeiture shall be referred to the Attorney General, who may remit or mitigate the forfeiture upon such terms as he deems reasonable and just.



The interesting part of this section is that it gives you a chance to appeal the seizure and recover the property if there was no intent to violate the law. (I would assume study purposes would fall under that category.)

 

Thanks Conder. It is clear, now. Kind'a depressing in some ways, but needed laws.

 

The stuff you posted applies to mere possession. I think that issue is well settled and pretty much black letter law. 18 U.S.C. 485 requires fraudulent intent for mere possession, 18 U.S.C. 489 prohibits possession basically with the intent to distribute, and 18 U.S.C. 492 makes it a criminal offense to not fork over the piece if asked to do so by the government. So simple possession appears to be fine. With this said, the OP's question is distinguishable; he addresses distribution.

With regards to distribution, the HPA would abrogate the criminal statutes insofar as HPA compliant pieces are concerned. For pieces which do not strictly comply with the HPA, but where good faith attempts to comply with the statutory regime are attempted, I do not think that the statutes could be legally applied. First, there is a rule of criminal statutory construction that says insofar as an ambiguity were to arise, the Rule of Lenity requires the court to adopt the interpretation most favorable to the defendant. Second, while it is often repeated in case law that ignorance of the law is no excuse, there are in fact exceptions. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment (as applied to the federal government) and the Fourteenth Amendment (as applied to the states) requires a criminal statute to be sufficiently explicit to put the defendant on notice that the conduct was prohibited. Sometimes courts will call this void for vagueness, but it really is a due process decision invalidating the statute unconstitutional as applied to that particular defendant. It has its roots in Connally v. General Construction Company, 269 U.S. 385 (1926). This case requires that the statute reasonably apprise a criminal defendant of the prohibited acts and must not be "so vague the men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at is meaning and differ as to its applications." Id. at 391.

Edited: An OP, nothing in my post should be construed as legal advice. It is not. My comments are meant for an academic discussion of the underlying legal questions.

 

Thinking some more about Sec 489, it might also be the reason the government never interferes with the manufactures of replicas who make them and then stamp COPY into them. They would just have to return the dies and equipment because there was no INTENT to violate the law.

 

I

I think "lawful authority" is directly related to intent although its a very thin line.

Were the dies created with the intention of making counterfeits or were they made with the intention of creating replica coins of say, a different metal stock? (i.e. copper)
Would the coins be of a smaller diameter or have some other "difference" which would differentiate it from the real deal.

That point or law would be enforceable if the owner of the dies were in fact making counterfeit coins with the intention of defrauding merchants in daily commerce in which case, counterfeiting would be the primary charge and possessing the dies would be a secondary charge.

But that's a rough guess.

 

Not to mention their are coin clubs dedicated to the study of counterfeits. You can trade sale, buy and collect counterfeits as long as you disclose them as so. The secret service will rarely ever check into counterfeit accusations without it being a major player. There was story a story yesterday in the news about a woman living California who sales counterfeit goods. She has been order to pay millions of dollars to companies she was selling counterfeits copy after their goods. But for whatever reason the court can't force her to pay or throw her in jail. Her is the story> https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/counterfeiter-evades-us-lawsuits-gets-150924702.html

 

Y'all may want to read what the U.S. Department of Justice states about section 489:
http://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1460-counterfeiting-18-usc-489

Quoting:

Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 475 and 489 relate to reproductions which are made in the general design of coins or currency but which vary sufficiently in detail that they have no serious potential for use in place of genuine money.​

So at least according to this administration, that section of the U.S. Code does not apply to a Morgan Silver Dollar "replica" whether it's stamped COPY or not.

 

Actually there was more that provides more context for this thread and others in the last few months. So according to that site, 18 USC 489 is reserved for knock-offs while 18 USC 485 (the counterfeiting statute) is reserved for those items with "serious potential" to be confused with an actual government product.

I find it hard to believe that counterfeiting dies wouldn't be construed to be a separate offense from striking the actual pieces, but it is interesting (but non binding in courts just like official opinions of the Attorney General). I would be interested in seeing the case law, if any, relied upon by whoever wrote that.