Suspicious Activity Reports to the IRS when buying or depositing money orders.
Sep 11, 2017, 5:43 pm
#1396
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NRT
Programs: UA gold
Posts: 135
Does that article cite any official source?
As an accountant who handles the filing of BSA paperwork in a retail store, I once ran into a situation where an auditor tried to nail me for not having a CTR on file (BSA forms are filed electronically, but company policy requires a paper copy on file as well for CYA purposes) for a transaction that was over $10K but did not involve any cash (money orders only). The company's legal dept backed me up and told them that because no actual cash changed hands, a CTR was not necessary.
As an accountant who handles the filing of BSA paperwork in a retail store, I once ran into a situation where an auditor tried to nail me for not having a CTR on file (BSA forms are filed electronically, but company policy requires a paper copy on file as well for CYA purposes) for a transaction that was over $10K but did not involve any cash (money orders only). The company's legal dept backed me up and told them that because no actual cash changed hands, a CTR was not necessary.
Sep 11, 2017, 6:02 pm
#1397
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: New England
Programs: American Gold, Marriott Gold, Hilton Silver
Posts: 5,640
Not at all. The transaction involved the customer receiving a money wire in the form of money orders. Legal dept determined that as the currency was never under the custody of the store (MSB), it does not constitute "cash" as defined in Part II lines 26 to 27a on the CTR, and therefore, would be 0, which is less than the $10,000 threshold.
For those who have never seen a CTR, this is how it is set up:
26. Total Cash In:
26a. Foreign Cash In:
27. Total Cash Out:
27a. Foreign Cash Out:
And the lines below that are checkboxes for indicating the breakdown of the types of cash equivalents, but they do specifically say "Negotiable instruments cashed" and similar. Since nothing was cashed, and no cash changed hands, the legal dept determined that a CTR was not necessary.
I'm not sure who was correct, but this would fall upon the legal dept if they were wrong. I was still within the 15 day window to file a CTR, so I had all of the information needed to file with their guidance on how to fill out lines 26-27a if needed.
For those who have never seen a CTR, this is how it is set up:
26. Total Cash In:
26a. Foreign Cash In:
27. Total Cash Out:
27a. Foreign Cash Out:
And the lines below that are checkboxes for indicating the breakdown of the types of cash equivalents, but they do specifically say "Negotiable instruments cashed" and similar. Since nothing was cashed, and no cash changed hands, the legal dept determined that a CTR was not necessary.
I'm not sure who was correct, but this would fall upon the legal dept if they were wrong. I was still within the 15 day window to file a CTR, so I had all of the information needed to file with their guidance on how to fill out lines 26-27a if needed.
Last edited by diburning; Sep 11, 2017 at 11:20 pm
Dec 15, 2017, 4:45 pm
#1399
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 826
It is one thing for filers such as Walmart or Banks to file SAR, nobody can stop them and they don't have to think too much beyond if it seems SA then they file the report. It is in their interest to error on the cautious side, they have nothing to lose, failure could have negative impact on them, so, so far so good.
Now comes the investigation/prosecution part. Typically if structuring is done to hide something there is invariably criminal intent involved. There is no criminal intent involved in MSing process, so doesn't there have to be criminality involved in order for them to prosecute you? As I said above filing there is no problem.
Now comes the investigation/prosecution part. Typically if structuring is done to hide something there is invariably criminal intent involved. There is no criminal intent involved in MSing process, so doesn't there have to be criminality involved in order for them to prosecute you? As I said above filing there is no problem.
Dec 15, 2017, 7:46 pm
#1401
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 826
I know
My question is, does structuring have to be coupled with criminality in order for prosecution? or can structuring on it's own is reason for prosecution? It is easy to prove structuring but no other violation of penal code.
My question is, does structuring have to be coupled with criminality in order for prosecution? or can structuring on it's own is reason for prosecution? It is easy to prove structuring but no other violation of penal code.
Dec 16, 2017, 8:06 am
#1403
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 1,139
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertw.../#2336ced45123
Here are a couple of articles for you to read that should answer your question. There was a policy change (not a law change) in 2014 or 2015 that makes it significantly less likely for the government to pursue structuring (and just as importantly less likely for them to seize bank accounts, since that was usually the damaging action, not the court case that never occurred), when no "other" criminal activity occurs.
That having been said, there is not usually true structuring in Manufactured Spending since Money Orders and Prepaid Debit Cards do not, in the opinion of most posters who have studied the issue, constitute the cash or cash equivalents necessary to cause Structuring.
If you read the posts back far enough, you will find reports of visits by the IRS CID to a couple of people who were doing this at a heavy volume with the debit cards that generated Delta miles. The IRS CID folks (who were focused on Structuring, not any civil tax collection) never pursued any action after gaining an understanding of what was occurring, and one of them laughed when the guy pulled out his debit card, apparently having heard the tale before.
We did not get as much information as what would have been desired, because one poster accused them of making it up, but one posted the IRS Special Agent business card, and I corresponded with one poster via PM, and I am certain they were being truthful. What you have to consider is that when Suspicious Activity Reports are filed with FINCEN, the government can't really tell that you are MSing with debit cards instead of cash, so that is why many of us try to avoid the generation of SARs by limiting our transactions. So sometimes information designed to discuss minimizing the possibility of SARs being generated will get belittled as a post about the risk of Structuring. And sometimes you deal with bad policies at the vendors. Many Walmarts program their systems to alert the teller to gather information for transactions involving $3,000 or more regardless of whether the person purchasing money orders is using cash or a debit card. Probably not correct, but many MSers simply made a decision not to exceed $3,000 on a single transaction, or do multiple transactions of the exact same type at WalMart that would exceed $3,000.
Dec 16, 2017, 9:07 am
#1404
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,322
@Andy2 -- Hate to break it to you, but new administration is effectively reversing the policy changes, and seems to fully embrace civil forfeiture. See: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...set-forfeiture
Dec 16, 2017, 4:41 pm
#1406
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 1,139
I read that article and did not see where they reversed the policy the articles I linked to discussed.
It said the federal government is being more aggressive with asset seizures and forfeitures, and are using "federal adoption" to combat states that are adopting reasonable safeguards against government abuse in the area.
Personally, I find it unfortunate that the federal government is being more aggressive in this area, and even if it has not fully reversed the reasonable policy, it can very broadly define any underlying crime associated with structuring.
It said the federal government is being more aggressive with asset seizures and forfeitures, and are using "federal adoption" to combat states that are adopting reasonable safeguards against government abuse in the area.
Personally, I find it unfortunate that the federal government is being more aggressive in this area, and even if it has not fully reversed the reasonable policy, it can very broadly define any underlying crime associated with structuring.
Dec 16, 2017, 8:25 pm
#1407
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 826
People say if a retailer was to file SAR, they have to do so without letting the suspect know. If you look at the SAR form it asks for driver's license, social security etc for identification purposes. So that means the retailer would ask for such information.correct? Do they need DL and SS both to file SAR? I would think they would need one or the other for sure.
Now this won't apply to banks because banks have both forms of IDs and they don't need anything from you as such but same can not be said for the retailer. All they have is encrypted CC numbers.
Now this won't apply to banks because banks have both forms of IDs and they don't need anything from you as such but same can not be said for the retailer. All they have is encrypted CC numbers.
Dec 17, 2017, 8:02 am
#1408
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 1,139
That same information is needed by a retailer (or a bank if it does not already have it) for entry into the Daily Monetary Log that is required for cash transactions of $3,000 or more. Also, the guidance the government has issued to money Service Businesses suggests that they gather this information for cash transactions of $2,000 or more to evaluate whether SARs are to be filed. So this information is asked for in a tremendous number of situations in which a SAR is not filed, and there is nothing wrong with them telling you they simply need to gather information to let the transaction proceed. As I said, a tremendous number of retailers (or certain locations of those retailers) have programmed their computers WalMart $3,000, Kroger $2,000, etc., to gather this information. People can argue to the cows come home that there is no reason for them to do so when debit cards, credit cards, and money orders are involved in certain parts of the transactions (because they are not cash), but if your goal is avoiding your name and identification numbers going on paperwork that may (or may not) be used in filing SARs, those company policies are just as important as the law.
Dec 18, 2017, 11:14 am
#1409
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 826
That same information is needed by a retailer (or a bank if it does not already have it) for entry into the Daily Monetary Log that is required for cash transactions of $3,000 or more. Also, the guidance the government has issued to money Service Businesses suggests that they gather this information for cash transactions of $2,000 or more to evaluate whether SARs are to be filed. So this information is asked for in a tremendous number of situations in which a SAR is not filed, and there is nothing wrong with them telling you they simply need to gather information to let the transaction proceed. As I said, a tremendous number of retailers (or certain locations of those retailers) have programmed their computers WalMart $3,000, Kroger $2,000, etc., to gather this information. People can argue to the cows come home that there is no reason for them to do so when debit cards, credit cards, and money orders are involved in certain parts of the transactions (because they are not cash), but if your goal is avoiding your name and identification numbers going on paperwork that may (or may not) be used in filing SARs, those company policies are just as important as the law.
Can someone confirm this? Retailer can gather the info but as long as they have not asked you for the social security number and or DL then they haven't filed the SAR on you? Not sure if they can file the report just based on whatever info they can get from the credit card transaction.
Dec 18, 2017, 11:48 am
#1410
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Midwest
Programs: Delta PM, Hhonors Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 114
People say if a retailer was to file SAR, they have to do so without letting the suspect know. If you look at the SAR form it asks for driver's license, social security etc for identification purposes. So that means the retailer would ask for such information.correct? Do they need DL and SS both to file SAR? I would think they would need one or the other for sure.
Now this won't apply to banks because banks have both forms of IDs and they don't need anything from you as such but same can not be said for the retailer. All they have is encrypted CC numbers.
Now this won't apply to banks because banks have both forms of IDs and they don't need anything from you as such but same can not be said for the retailer. All they have is encrypted CC numbers.