Only way to purchase an money order (WU*, Moneygram etc) is with cash, AFAIK.
That is certainly a RIPOFF. If they can do it, we should be able to do it, like in small claims court.





Only way to purchase an money order (WU*, Moneygram etc) is with cash, AFAIK.
That is certainly a RIPOFF. If they can do it, we should be able to do it, like in small claims court.
I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.
Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.
NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.





THIS
also 1) I had an illegal levy executed on my bank account- these days money is not safe just in your checking and savings. 2) Banks often have many annoying nosy questions when you open accounts- have good answers.
I HATE to say this but often your money is better off buried in the back yard than with Wells Fargo or Chase. My experiences have taught me to NOT have confidence in banks. I currently bank with a small local bank only because I NEED an on-paper existence. If I could magically go without that, I would....
“Cook for him like a housewife, fuck him good like a nympho….pay the rent and the car note, he invests in me like crypto”
So it looks like cash scrutiny from IRS is not just in how much you deposit but also how much you are buying/spending. What if the cash you are spending came from gifts/donations? Is there a limit on how much cash someone can give you? Gift money counts as income?
Like since this lady was running a cash only restaurant. Could she not have her customers give donations for meals? Where the suggested donation is $10 or whatever an average plate costs.
“Cook for him like a housewife, fuck him good like a nympho….pay the rent and the car note, he invests in me like crypto”
With gifts the DONOR is supposed to pay gift tax on amounts greater than $10,000.
Generally gifts are not income but just calling it a "gift" won't be very helpful if the IRS says it is "income".
The IRS does have sophisticated computer programs and algorithms that supposedly enable them to gauge income from spending.





IRS policy is already on record that when the 'gift' originates from a non-relative male, and where the 'recipient' is a female sex industry worker, the money so transferred is considered to be 'payment for services rendered' ... thus fully reportable and fully taxable as ordinary income.Gift money counts as income?
(snip)In some cases, taxpayers have defended their failure to file a return or to pay taxes by arguing that the money received was a gift rather than taxable income. While income is taxable, gifts are not taxable to the recipient. Whether a payment is a gift depends on the donor’s intent in making the payment. A payment is considered a gift where it is motivated by feelings of “detached and disinterested generosity . . . out of affection, respect, admiration, charity or like impulses.” This test has been applied in the context of payments made by men to women with whom they had sexual relationships on a number of instances.”(snip)
... the lady running the cash only restaurant would similarly fail this IRS test, because any 'gifts / donations' would be considered by the IRS to be 'payment for goods received / services rendered' i.e restaurant meals.
According to some business acquaintances, those IRS algorithms start with an IRS database of 'normal costs of living' for each separate zip code area ... which include average rent costs, average utility costs, average grocery costs, etc. The algorithms start with this 'minimal' level of spending on normal cost of living items, and add on additional spending which is reported to them by 3rd parties ... cash transaction reports, tuition payment reports, motor vehicle agency reports, property title agency reports, money order purchase reports, bank / investment / retirement account balance increases ( via 1099 interest payment reports ), etc. The algorithm then compares the probable total spending level it calculated against past year tax return information. If the probable total spending level is significantly 'out of whack' with the level of income reported on that tax return, red flags are waved and an audit is likely to soon follow.The IRS does have sophisticated computer programs and algorithms that supposedly enable them to gauge income from spending
Last edited by Melonie; 11-03-2014 at 02:11 PM.





I really don't understand the practice... if you make a deposit over 10 grand you're suspicious, but if you make one under 10 grand you're suspicious as well? What if she didn't have 10gs to deposit in her bank and only had 3 but wanted to get the money in the bank instead of having it sit around her restaurant or home and be stolen? I feel like I'm missing something.





Making a cash deposit over 10k isn't 'suspicious' in and of itself ... it's simply reported to the IRS by the bank as a 'cash transaction' along with the person's name, address and SS#, and fed into the IRS income vs spending algorithm. As long as there is sufficient reported income to explain where the cash came from, no problem.if you make a deposit over 10 grand you're suspicious, but if you make one under 10 grand you're suspicious as well?
A single cash transaction under 10k is not 'suspicious' either ... and will typically not result in the bank generating a 'suspicious activity' report. The criteria given to banks for generating 'suspicious activity' reports involves a pattern of ( multiple ) cash transactions by the same person which individually do not exceed the $10k threshold for the bank to generate a 'cash transaction' report, but which cumulatively add up to a whole lot of money. The rationale behind 'suspicious activity' reports stems from gov't concerns about 'money laundering' by potential terrorists, drug dealers, criminals etc. who could previously evade gov't 'radar' by simply limiting the size of individual cash transactions to $9,900 !!!





^but this woman is a running a small restaurant, so it's unlikely that every week she has 10gs to put into her account. I mean, even when I was a bit less tax-evading (fuck British tax laws) and depositing money into my account from stripping on a regular basis, I would frequently deposit 3g, 5g, $800, just because I didn't want it sitting around my apartment, and I would rather stop at the ATM after work every couple shifts than wait until the end of the week. If you don't regularly have over 10 grand to deposit because you are not wealthy, I don't see why you should be penalized by having your money seized. 33 grand over a lifetime is also a bit ridiculous to think she would be running some kind of illegal business, like over a 100gs ok... but what illegal business creates that low a profit?





You and thouands of other dancers, no doubt. However, compared to the mandatory $10k = 'cash transaction' report regulation, the criteria set for the bank to generate 'suspicious activity' reports is somewhat flexible. If the bank tellers know that this money is coming from legitimate business activities, they aren't going to generate a 'suspicious activity' report. So a lot of this has to do with the person's 'relationship' with their bank, and whether or not their 'business' transactions are being conducted in a 'professional' manner ( i.e. a separate business versus personal bank account ).I would frequently deposit 3g, 5g, $800, just because I didn't want it sitting around my apartment, and I would rather stop at the ATM after work every couple shifts than wait until the end of the week
I would speculate that if the lady running the cash only restaurant ( which is highly unusual ... restaurants typically accept credit cards after all ) had a decent relationship with her bank, or had tax returns on file which reported as business income a reasonably similar amount of money versus her recurring cash deposits, or had business 'books' documenting weekly restaurant cash receipts versus restaurant 'expenditures' ( ingredients, utility bills, rent etc. ) the IRS would not have elected to 'seize' her bank account in the first place ... or would have quickly lifted the 'freeze' once they were provided with the restaurant's 'books' !!! That's a side of the story which news media did not report ... which is understandable since 'little old lady evades tens of thousands of dollars worth of income taxes every year' wouldn't fit the media 'narrative' !!!
Last edited by Melonie; 11-03-2014 at 02:43 PM.





When your dealing with cash only any thing can be deemed suspicious. That's why I make it a habit to try to deposit the same large amounts often and they know me well at the bank ( that has the bulk of my money) as I also invest with them. But any cash transactions can be reported as suspicious , especially if you are unknown to the bank and start coming in with like 1000 in cash a few times a week and have like nothing in your account. Safes people.










And I will delete that later...





The Attorney General just ended this law that allows the federal government to seize your assets, even if you're innocent.
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-...-police-2015-1



But the individual states' laws remain in full effect - they just are no longer going to be backed automatically by the Feds.
What took him so long ? These abuses were going on under Reagan and Bush ( The Smarter ) ; under Clinton when Holder was a Deputy Attorney General ; Bush (The You Know What ) and six plus years under Obama.
Inter alia, these outrages turned many police departments and federal law enforcement agencies into money making enterprises with all the attendant abuse that naturally flows therefrom.
Btw, I've done a search but can't find numbers on how many recovery actions result in settlements ; partial settlements etc. Nor how many such suits are successful. I do know that many such cases against NYC and the NYPD have been successful i.e. the N.Y. Courts have taken a fairly dim view of unjustified seizures if the victim can show lack of probable cause. In other words LE has seized based on "reasonable suspicion " but when forced to show "probable cause " ( actually a little higher than preponderance of the evidence ) they often lose. Unfortunately , the N.Y. Courts do NOT permit punitive damages even in the most egregious cases. In N.Y after a victim shows that they were never indicted and often never even arrested , the burden shifts to LE to justify the seizure. In many cases they can't.










Just like the seizure laws - where you can be targeted for seizure because you are "aggressively driving under the speed limit, and therefore trying to avoid suspicion, which is suspicious" - if they want your money, they'll seize it under any pretext, regardless of how ridiculous.










Here's another question - Nobody has fought one of these all the way to the SCOTUS ? The ACLU AND the Tea Party AND the Libertarians are ALL opposed to this outrageous abuse. It violates the 4th ; 5th ; 6th and 14th Amendments i.e. violates search and seizure ; vitiates the presumption of innocence and is certainly an unlawful taking ; violates right to counsel and deprives victims of due process.
He's right. Banks are required to report cash transactions of at least $4,000 ( NOT $10,000 - it got lowered thanks to the Patriot Act ) and/or multiple small deposits aka structuring. The IRS in turn can and does share that info with other Federal L.E. agencies.
I will avoid further comment to steer clear of any "political " entanglement except I can't resist reminding everyone what Ben Franklin said : "Those that would sacrifice essential liberty for security deserve neither."
Bookmarks