If you deposit MOs over $10k, there is no report filed. A CTR is filed for cash transactions greater than $10k. A MO is not cash but rather a monetary instrument. And you are correct that you shouldn't be purposely making transactions just under reporting thresholds to where it appears to be structuring. I guess I'm not following you as I never said to intentionally structure transactions. So what exactly do I have wrong?

In order to structure, cash must be involved. That is why I said in MSing, you shouldn't be dealing in enough cash to appear to be structuring. Granted, I don't know every angle of MS as I do what works for me to get enough points I need. That involves very well known techniques and almost always involves MOs and ACH/BillPay. However, I still can't see a reason to deposit enough cash that it would give the appearance that you are trying to structure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGtFWC-12-w

interesting situation regarding deposits by a legit business owner.

Sheesh. I can't help but think that the noise to data ratio is pretty high when you're getting 75,000+ reports per month.

Andyandy

Thanks for providing the link!

Exhibits 4 & 5 are interesting - the #1 suspicious activity type leading to a SAR is "Multiple transactions below CTR threshold."

SARs usually go to the relevant law enforcement agency. I know from PE it goes to attorneys at the US Attorney's Office (DOJ) at your division. They look through it and basically make the subjective call of whether its worth taking a second look at.

It doesn't make a difference if an outside company processes a Chase ATM deposit because the activity is transmitted to Chase and is monitored.

from POLITICO:
 

Former Speaker Dennis Hastert indicted in payment scheme
By John Bresnahan and Hillary Flynn and Josh Gerstein

The Justice Department on Thursday announced an indictment against former House Speaker Dennis Hastert for allegedly lying to the FBI and illegally structuring tax payments designed to “conceal his prior misconduct” against an unnamed individual.

Hastert was charged with transferring funds to avoid detection by the IRS, a practice called “structuring.”

Rumors that Hastert had legal problems were bouncing around the Capitol in recent weeks. In an interview with POLITICO last week, Hastert denied that he had problems with the IRS and denied that he was about to be indicted.

“I read what you heard but that’s not correct,” Hastert told POLITICO when asked about problems with the IRS. “I’m not going to talk to you.”

When a POLITICO reporter told him in a phone interview that he was about to be indicted, he said, “Well, it’s not true.”

“I’m not speaking to you right now, thanks,” Hastert said, before hanging up the phone.

The indictment, which was handed down by a grand jury in Illinois and is based on an investigation that began in 2013, does not specify the nature of the prior misconduct but said it involved activities from “years earlier.”

The individual who received the payments had known Hastert for most of that person’s life, the indictment says.

According to the indictment, from 2010 to 2014, Hastert withdrew $1.7 million in cash from various bank accounts and provided it to someone the federal indictment lists as “Individual A.”

From 2010 to 2012, he made 15 withdrawals of $50,000 in cash from accounts at several banks that he paid the individual every six weeks, the charges say.

In 2012, bank representatives “questioned” Hastert about the withdrawals, according to the indictment. Shortly thereafter, the former speaker began withdrawing cash in increments of less than $10,000.

“He had been withdrawing cash in increments of less than $10,000 to evade currency transaction reporting requirements because he wanted his agreement to compensate Individual A to remain secret so as to cover up his past misconduct,” the indictment says.

And in December of last year, the indictment says, Hastert lied about the payments to the FBI.

“Specifically, in response to the agents’ question confirming whether the purpose of the withdrawals was to store cash because he did not feel safe with the banking system, as he previously indicated, [Hastert] stated: “Yeah … I kept the cash. That’s what I’m doing,” the indictment alleges.

Each of the two felony counts in the indictment carries a potential 5 year prison term and a $250,000 fine. If convicted,defendants usually get lighter sentences, particularly when they have no prior criminal record.

Structuring is when taxpayers try to avoid the Bank Secrecy Act’s reporting requirements. The law says that when taxpayers withdraw or deposit cash in amounts of $10,000 or more, they must file a Currency Transaction Report with the IRS. Those trying to skirt the reporting rules often withdraw or deposit sums under $10,000.

But deliberately evading reporting on cash transactions can trigger probes by the Justice Department of Justice, which can freeze and seize the taxpayer’s assets.

Structuring, or concerns about the practice have been the downfall of powerful political figures before, including former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. Some of Spitzer’s withdrawals caught the attention of bankers monitoring his accounts. They tipped of the feds, who eventually proved Spitzer was using the cash he withdrew to pay for prostitutes.

Anyone thought about putting together a Wiki for this thread? Seems like there's a TON of valuable information here and elsewhere on FT that could reasonably be condensed and bundled together here.

Now with Denny Hastert in the news, this is again a thread that I checked out. For the life of me, its so damn crazy to me. Someone tell me: if I only do $1000 of MS a month because I am afraid of a SAR if I did more, is that considered structuring and an offense that can put me in jail? Crazy!

What does MS have to do with Dennis Hastert's actions ?

He was busted for structuring (his payoffs to the alleged victim). Structuring has been discussed many times in this thread as something to avoid. :D

At work, everyone has to get their yearly AML (Anti-Money Laundering) training, which supposedly is audited by the IRS (I doubt it, but that's what they tell us). Now that the Patriot Act has expired (the Patriot Act is one of three laws that the training uses to justify the AML reporting thresholds) I wonder what will happen to these thresholds, if anything will change at all.

He was busted for intentionally structuring cash withdrawals from his bank account to avoid a CTR form. What does that have to do with the title of this thread ?

Seems pretty relevant to me. Guy withdraws cash in patterns that are unusual, changes his patterns after being asked about it by his bank, lies to federal investigators about what he's doing, and (likely) hands it off to a former student as hush money.

The relevance is that the feds arrested not because of any underlying criminal activity, except that he tried to evade reporting requirements, which was really an attempt to conceal his personal affairs. There were no drugs, no terrorists, not even prostitutes, only an act that I would guess the statute of limitations has expired on (since no one is prosecuting him for that) and that he'd prefer was not publicly disclosed. If it could happen to Dennis Hastert, what's to say you couldn't be approached about your "money recycling" (laundering implies that the money is dirty) activities? And, if all the persons following this thread were approached, how many would answer the questions directly and fully honestly? I'm certain that lots of people would (myself included), but human nature shows that at least some will not. As soon as that happens, they're in exactly the same legal position as Hastert. As has been noted in this thread many times, you don't have to take out $50,000 cash withdrawals to generate SAR's, so it's all very relevant, in my mind.

People define "avoid" differently. I particularly find it interesting that I know multiple people who do $10's of 1,000's per month in MO who also use multiple banks to avoid SAR's. Personally, I find that to be a HORRIBLE idea, as it is a clear violation of the Bank Secrecy Act. You cannot specifically try to avoid reporting requirements; that's federal law. If I just happen to stay under limits for other reasons (like my credit limits, or not wanting to handle more than a day's worth of MO's at a time) then I haven't violated the BSA. Prosecutors might come after me, but at least I'd have a reasonable defense with a judge or jury.