Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;omahaorange, post: 1730298, member: 28199&quot;]I&#039;m kinda looking at this from a different perspective.&nbsp; I thinking this law is designed more to protect the business.&nbsp; The line ...We have lost 100% of the money paid for the purchase of the confiscated goods.. says it all. While you may have a slim chance of recovering your money when the hypothetical thief is caught, you have absolutely no chance if this &quot;seller&quot; is never identified.&nbsp; As read the ordinance, the shop is not required to <b>report</b> the sales, but simply keep a record of the identity of the seller.&nbsp; Personally, I don&#039;t have a problem showing ID before selling like this (although I think the thumbprint is a bit over the top).&nbsp; And the cash limit is probably more of a tax thing, but it doesn&#039;t say you can&#039;t buy, it says you can&#039;t pay cash over the limit. This is probably more of an IRS thing.&nbsp; So the check leaves a paper trail.&nbsp; So you get hit with a capital gains tax.&nbsp; Part of playing the game, whether you agree with the taxes or not.&nbsp; My question to this store owner is... How does the cost of compliance compare to the cost of the confiscated goods?</p><p><br /></p><p>I agree, the law isn&#039;t ruining the business, the refusal to comply is.</p><p><br /></p><p>Unless you have something to hide (or wish to skip out on the taxes), there is no reason, as a seller, you can&#039;t comply with the law.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in