Law Lets I.R.S. Seize Accounts on Suspicion, No Crime Required

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
this is an agency that is out of control. so if you make fequent cash deposits to your bank the fucking IRS can come in and take your money right out of your account when you have not been accused of any crime, all under the suspicion of you may be cheating on your taxes, you deal drugs or in some sort of racketeering scheme.

WTF :mad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/u...unts-on-suspicion-no-crime-required.html?_r=0

The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes — in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report.

On Thursday, in response to questions from The New York Times, the I.R.S. announced that it would curtail the practice, focusing instead on cases where the money is believed to have been acquired illegally or seizure is deemed justified by “exceptional circumstances.”


Army Sgt. Jeff Cortazzo of Arlington, Va., began saving for his daughters’ college costs during the financial crisis, when many banks were failing. He stored cash first in his basement and then in a safe-deposit box. All of the money came from paychecks, he said, but he worried that when he deposited it in a bank, he would be forced to pay taxes on the money again. So he asked the bank teller what to do.

“She said: ‘Oh, that’s easy. You just have to deposit less than $10,000.’”

The government seized $66,000; settling cost Sergeant Cortazzo $21,000.

so the guy did NOTHING WRONG and had to pay 21K. seriously fucked up.

Law enforcement agencies get to keep a share of whatever is forfeited.
 
Last edited:

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
this is an agency that is out of control. so if you make fequent cash deposits to your bank the fucking IRS can come in and take your money right out of your account when you have not been accused of any crime, all under the suspicion of you may be cheating on your taxes, you deal drugs or in some sort of racketeering scheme.

WTF :mad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/u...unts-on-suspicion-no-crime-required.html?_r=0

I'll just buy a safe and store cash there. Assholes.
 

master_shake_

Diamond Member
May 22, 2012
6,425
292
121
lol civil forfeiture again....

thank you patriot act.

we're gonna stop those terrists...
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Between this kind of stuff and targeting political opponents, who in their right mind is OK with granting these idiots even more power?
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,275
31,310
136
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws in general are in desperate need of being revised and restricted and this shouldn't be a liberal or conservative political football.
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
43,973
6,340
136
Surprised they didn't seize the operation choke point targeted accounts instead of just having the banks close the accounts.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
You guys are looking at it all wrong. What is this seized money being used for? I mean if it's going to a good cause then the end justifies the means. [/s] Redistribution will be accomplished. If not willingly, then forcibly. It's what the nation voted for. Elections have consequences.
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,328
709
126
All seizures needs to be based on reasonable suspicion and warrants. Conservative judges have been making dubious exceptions to this Constitutional command for long time.

Elections do have consequences, indeed. One way to stop this abusive agent actions is to make sure we elect a president who will appoint judges who will honor civil liberties.
 

master_shake_

Diamond Member
May 22, 2012
6,425
292
121
You guys are looking at it all wrong. What is this seized money being used for? I mean if it's going to a good cause then the end justifies the means. [/s] Redistribution will be accomplished. If not willingly, then forcibly. It's what the nation voted for. Elections have consequences.

not one american who isn't part of the senate or congress voted on the patriot act.

it was passed out of fear mongering by a president that was retarded.

hey i heard they finally found wmd's in iraq... too bad they were the ones the americans sold them during the iraq-iran war...
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
not one american who isn't part of the senate or congress voted on the patriot act.

But you can say that about any law. It's funny how when it's something you personally agree with, the people voted for it. When it's something you personally don't agree with, the people didn't vote for it.

Anyways, the Patriot Act has been extended several times, so do we at least say it's our fault for re-electing people who support the Patriot Act?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
They are only quarantining the money in case it has been infected with money laundering.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
They are only quarantining the money in case it has been infected with money laundering.

Think about the money's rights, please.....

On a more serious note, this isn't going to end well.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws in general are in desperate need of being revised and restricted and this shouldn't be a liberal or conservative political football.
Agreed. It's not just the IRS either - cops commonly confiscate large amounts of cash "just cause". Same with guns and vehicles - we
ll just take it, and you can get a lawyer to try and prove your innocence. It's the new serfdom.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws in general are in desperate need of being revised and restricted and this shouldn't be a liberal or conservative political football.

Don't hold your breath waiting for legislation. Asset forfeiture is becoming easier for law enforcement agencies. In many places, the revenue from cash seizures and auction profits is a noticeable item in police budgets. Politicians will stay far, far away.
 

The Merg

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2009
1,210
34
91
Yeah, civil asset forfeiture is definitely going too far. While I understand the concept behind it and believe it does have its place in certain situations, it does seem like things are out of hand now.

No maybe someone can explain something to me. As I understand it, conservatives say that Obama is a socialist and we are becoming a socialist state where he wants to redistribute wealth among everybody here. However, conservatives are viewed as creating a larger police state and giving more and more power to law enforcement and Federal agencies.

Am I missing something here or do I have things messed up? If I don't, aren't these both points of view leading to the same thing since aren't most socialist states also police states?

- Merg
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Yeah, civil asset forfeiture is definitely going too far. While I understand the concept behind it and believe it does have its place in certain situations, it does seem like things are out of hand now.

No maybe someone can explain something to me. As I understand it, conservatives say that Obama is a socialist and we are becoming a socialist state where he wants to redistribute wealth among everybody here. However, conservatives are viewed as creating a larger police state and giving more and more power to law enforcement and Federal agencies.

Am I missing something here or do I have things messed up? If I don't, aren't these both points of view leading to the same thing since aren't most socialist states also police states?

- Merg
Yup. As someone else analogized in another thread, two wings of the same bird.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
not one american who isn't part of the senate or congress voted on the patriot act.

it was passed out of fear mongering by a president that was retarded.

hey i heard they finally found wmd's in iraq... too bad they were the ones the americans sold them during the iraq-iran war...
I see that you haven't got a dog in the fight but regardless I will tell you that nothing has changed with a Democrat in the highest office in the land and nothing changed when Democrats controlled Congress in Obama's first term.

This continual blaming of previous Presidents accomplishes nothing, zip, nada, zilch. We cannot change the past but at any given moment the future is always before us and that is where changes will be made if they are made at all.

But by all means rail on about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Reagan and everyone else you wish to blame for whatever it is you feel needs to have blame distributed. It's all meaningless.
 

MrPickins

Diamond Member
May 24, 2003
9,125
792
126
I see that you haven't got a dog in the fight but regardless I will tell you that nothing has changed with a Democrat in the highest office in the land and nothing changed when Democrats controlled Congress in Obama's first term.

This continual blaming of previous Presidents accomplishes nothing, zip, nada, zilch. We cannot change the past but at any given moment the future is always before us and that is where changes will be made if they are made at all.

But by all means rail on about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Reagan and everyone else you wish to blame for whatever it is you feel needs to have blame distributed. It's all meaningless.

How about you stop derailing the thread?

This issue is more important than your partisan grudges.