When should unethical or illegal activity with coins and bullion be reported?

Certainly most of us have witnessed either unethical activity or illegal activity with coin, currency and bullion transactions:

Cash transactions over $10K without an 8300 form being filled out (actually the bar is a lot less than $10K due to the Patriot Act and other related laws).

Swap trades that may be considered "barter" or trade, but also have reporting transactions for various government purposes. ICTA has lots of guidelines on anti-money laundering laws, etc. http://www.ictaonline.org/whats-new

What would fall into the "none of my business" category and what should be reported to relevant authorities? Some organizations require reporting of such activity:

1. "I agree neither to buy or sell numismatic, philatelic, horologic or other collectible items of which the ownership is questionable, and to report promptly to the proper law enforcement agencies information on suspected stolen material.
2. "I agree to correct promptly any error I may make in any transaction.
3. "I agree to assist in the prosecution of violations, of which I have knowledge, of laws pertaining to numismatic, philatelic, horologic or collectible matters, and to report promptly to the proper law enforcement agencies any such violations.
4. "I agree not knowingly to sell, trade, produce, or advertise repaired, altered, or otherwise modified numismatic, philatelic, horologic or collectible items unless that condition is clearly stated. I further agree not to sell, produce, or advertise counterfeit material in any form, in violation of any law."
5. "I agree to bring known examples of irresponsible or unethical tactics to the attention of the organizations in which I hold membership and which embrace this code."http://www.nacacollectors.com/memberApplication.asp

No one likes someone who reports unethical or illegal conduct, but such is often necessary. Any others have thoughts on this topic?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There are different laws in different states and some separate bullion from numismatic transactions, so it really depends. I've never participated in a transaction that was illegal, or even operated through the loopholes, so I'm not sure what I would do. Then again, how many here can honestly say they file the correct forms at tax time to reflect their online purchases, be it coins or anything else? Probably less than 1%.
Guy

 

This question is asked by my accountant every year he prepares my tax return. My guess is many professionals who prepare tax returns do this, especially on the more complicated returns which could be audited. It's probably reported more than you think. It's those individuals that do their own returns who over look it.

 

I run all my available bank account and other records by the accountant and let 'em crunch the numbers. I have nothing to hide.

On audits the stat. on under $200K net income is less than a few percent.

 

Only for those whose incomes are easily verifiable. For those whose professions have access to lots of potentially unreported income its higher. I would put coin dealer right near the top of that pile.

 

I agree. Though I'm sure every dealer will deny it, I'm sure the majority of their business is done under the table, as most transactions over a few thousand dollars are conducted in cash between other dealers. It's not done to be shady, it's just how business is conducted and always has been.
Guy

 

The patriot act? What does domestic terrorism have to do with this?

 

Sam Sloat Coins has a sign on their front desk that due to the Patriot Act all transactions are fully recorded for the authorities. At least one major provision of the Patriot Act references precious metals and similar trades. Read the material on ICTA's site!

 

Since you asked for thoughts, I'll say this reminds me of the Brownshirts, but there have been a whole host of others in the last 100 years too.

 

I understand where you are coming from Fatima. I used to be a laissez faire libertarian; but that approach to reality doesn't work. You try to run a neighborly business in an old-fashioned way, wear a full beard, and get reported to the authorities as "looking" like a terrorist, ya know the guys with the beards!

Probably in most cases of fraud, the authorities don't pay much heed until they got dozens and dozens of complaints about illegal behavior or people being ripped off in the case of substantial commercial activity. The authorities have many tools at their disposal. They start out doing fact-finding, and then can do email intercepts as well as warrantless wiretaps. Finally, government agents get involved in calls and visits to the suspects business and other contacts; Martha Stewart's biggest mistake wasn't the insider trading, but lying to a federal agent. Be afraid, be very afraid!

On a lighter note, this is one person's theory of the Brownshirts who would agree with you:

"Have you any idea of how much there is to do? Do you ever think of that? Of course not, you're all too busy sticking your noses into every corner, poking around for things to complain about, aren't you? Well let me tell you something: this is exactly how Nazi Germany started! A lot of layabouts with nothing better to do than to cause trouble. Well I've had fifteen years of pandering to the likes of you, and I've had enough. I've had it. Come on, pack your bags and get out."

 

My Mom, who worked in the Woolworth Bldg to help destroy them back then, had a saying. "The Gestapo only knows about what someone has told them. If no one tells them anything, then they know very little."

 

Nothing of course, but the patriot acts real intent was to reduce Americans freedoms, which makes the naming of it rather ironic. The powers that be must have a sense of humor. (not really, the name of course has a purpose, to keep the sheeple from looking into the bill in detail, oh its called the patriot act, must be about protecting us, :desk: )

 

They have better tools nowadays unfortunately, they can listen to cell phone conversations and read emails without a warrant. Of course that is illegal (or should be) but who is going to stop them?

 

There is a simple answer -- Morality says, if you know you're about to commit a wrong then don't. If you don't know right from wrong you may be a sociopath. Still, I'd turn my neighbor in for beating his kids but not for beating the system. It's his choice and his consequence.

 

And they are also peeping on Twitter and fooling around on Facebook. DARPA and DHS know more about you than you do. At least in Soviet Russia you knew they were spying on you, but in Soviet America they are more clever and most fools are clueless.

 

Depends what it is. I'd say turn in a forfeiter (unethical - its both lying and stealing). Turn in someone for stolen goods of course. Turn in someone for trying to pull one over on Uncle Sam? No way. Giving less to Uncle Sam is like trying to keep someone from stealing from you, which everyone should do.

 

Based on testimony I heard on CSPAN this week...

IRS...

 

Only a fool would have been putting incriminating information in emails, blogs, or cellular phones. Even the lowest street life knows about disposable cellphones. If you think what you are saying is such, use one for your calls. Use one for your "secrets" and from the conspiracy club who wants to know where you buy your pizza. The wireless companies are assigned the wavelengths they use by Federal commissions and pay for that. The internet was developed by DARPA. So why would anyone use it in a traceable way for anything they might worry about. Learn about anonymous IPs, disposable phones, encryption, disposable email addresses. Why is it an American Freedom?

 

The only "authorized" government activities are those explicitly enumerated in the US Constitution and its Amendments...which is why we're a Republic. Your post (if I understand what you're saying) is the very reason I make posts...from time to time...to which you object.

It sounds like you're saying that "fools" don't deserve Constitutional protection.

 

So you are saying that the constitution and the amendments give a person the right to talk across the spectrum of wireless without being under the power of the US government to listen and control the use thereof? That would be interesting as Amateur and commercial radio, tv, satellite,etc. frequencies and operations have been under such since in the early 1900s. Pirate radio is a freedom OK,

Just as the government is chastised for using the terms such as "Patriot" to justify , certain people seem to use the word freedom rather freely also.

Ok, I'll make it easy to refute me, just tell me the section of the constitution or amendments where it says the government doesn't own control of wireless communication. IMO.