WHY would Your FUNDS be FROZEN Anyway? MAYBE...

WHY would Your FUNDS be FROZEN Anyway? MAYBE... this site could shed MORE LIGHT on regulations about BANKING? http://www.homelandsecurity-us.com/banking.html In search of the TRUTH...
MiddleClassMaiden :flower:

I can tell you this much- I have been scouring the web for the last hour looking for links regarding the supposed new $500k limit on transfers and freeze/hold policy that the DHS has allegedly JUST foisted upon us. I cannot find one solitary thing. Nothing.

Now I'm not implying anybody is lying, just that I can't find anything on that. Maybe I'm not looking in the right spots, but you would think this would make news in the US Financial sector. Reuters, Forbes, FinancialTimes, etc- NOTHING on this whatsoever. One of the comments made was that they weren't allowed to post the link to the article they said they got the info from, on the particular site they were posting this info at.

Why not post the article here? I want to see it. If anybody has that article, or one that verifies this, how 'bout posting it here so we can have a look? Can anybody help us out with that?

On another issue- given the current administration's track record, just who might be considered a terrorist anymore?
Why, we have the TSA groping kids, grannies, and demanding to see how breast pumps work...

After all the discussion back and forth about potential freezes on accounts transferring $500K or larger, I called my guy at Wells Fargo for a little clarification. He's not a total idiot, usually, so I trust him to be at least mostly accurate on his information.

Essentially, the freeze regulations are there to combat terrorism and fraud and they are not completely new. If the transaction, according again to my banker at WF, is unusual for you it may be held at any time. The mandatory freeze comes in with an unannounced transfer of $500K or more in to your account or a >$500K transfer thru your account within a ten day period. The way he explained it to me was that if you TELL YOUR BANK IN ADVANCE to expect a large transfer you may avoid the freeze but then a good chunk of it needs to stay parked.

The thing he did reiterate was that any 'unusual' movement on your account can be subject to a hold unless it is a pure cash transaction. For example if you carry less than $1,000 in balance at any time then try to deposit a check for $50,000 you can expect it to be held at least ten days.

He also cautioned that these freezes can be as short as ten days or as long as ninety. It is totally up to the government as to when your funds get released, not the bank. He therefore cautioned against large wires if you can help it.

Again, this is information straight from my Wells Fargo banker who to this point has proven himself to not be a total idiot. I'm trying to get a little further confirmation from my banker at BoA just to make sure it lines up but this is what I've been told so far. Hope it helps.

@dbrianpittman- thanks for that. This explanation sounds like what policy has already been in-place for more than a few years (post 9/11). I have experienced the same thing when depositing a retirement check around 5 years ago. There was a hold and incremental released of those, funds because it was a check from my former domestic employer that I deposited. So it didn't originate from a questionable, or foreign source. The credit union incrementally released $$ out of that deposit, the bulk of which was a 10-day hold.

Did you get any specificity on the $500k figure ceiling being recent, or is this part of the mandate/DHS policy in place already? Thank you.

My WF banker did give me a little more in response to that blinkster. I didn't add it because I didn't want it to be misread as talking down on anyone else's information. I for one appreciate what the intel providers try to do (aside from the obvious pumping nonsense) and edited my comments a bit so as not to sound like I was detracting.

Essentially, yes you're correct the policy has been around since approx 2006 in its current form. Note he wasn't 100% on the date, may be off a year or two. However, this isn't something that ever plays a part in MOST people's financial lives outside of that upper 1% of incomes. My banker likened it to whether or not I knew the requirements for a black card, which I don't because up until now the possibility of it applying to my life was little to none at best.

He did go further though to say that whoever brought that up obviously did have some good contacts because it is not something that an everyday personal banker would have experience with. So, simple answer is that yes it was already in place but is still probably a very worthwhile discussion because it could be a stumbling block for a large amount of people in this investment.

and the current admin's track record shows them to be dishonest,underhanded,..and, criminal. It's probably one of those things we will experience when it is enacted upon us if it is indeed true.

Agreed, dbrianpittman! I believe those posting info are really trying to help everyone concerned. The trouble is in the classic, passing of info scenario we learned in school decades ago. (Share a bit of info and by the time it gets to the other side of the room the story isn't the same.) LOL Just trying to eliminate confusion. (as we've had in the TAG account issue)

So it's really crucial we have the real skinny on these matters- clarity... especially in this new world of finance for so many here. I've had to learn a LOT in a very short window just in being a recent "Dinarian"- and I'm thankful for the effort of those here who are trying to help us. Amazing stuff. What I felt here was, somebody has their wires crossed a bit on this issue- nothing is in the press today that I can find on this ceiling being something new. I wasn't sure what the limits were in 2012, but I knew they were there.

I edited out a few specifics of my past scenario/experience that weren't really necessary, but they fell within the timeframe of which you mention. as has been stated by a few others, cultivating a relationship with your bank manager is crucial here. I learned that well. Show your face. Let them know who you are. And don't blindside them with sudden, huge movements of your assets unannounced if at all possible, so as to not send off warning bells. Keep them in the loop for YOUR sake. Thanks!

I don't know about any money limits or triggers, but I know that a direct deposit, which is a form of wire transfer, can be reversed,

It happened this past October in Alaska due to some overpayments or mistaken payments on the annual Perm. Fund Dividend.

I will throw my 2 dinar worth. If you wish to make large transactions, (and I personally have) you let the bank know in advance.
If you do not...The first of several questions will be, Are you doing this transaction of your own voiltion??
One will be to what purpose do you wish to make this transaction? IF YOU himhaw then you WILL raise a flag. (clear and honest answer needed here)
Once your funds are in place your "background" "will" have already been chased/checked.
If you are not a "bad guy" then you have little to worry about.
If you do not associate with "badguys" you have little to worry about.
If you DO NOT decide to move said monies "back and forth" for no appearant good reason you will have little to worry about.

The basics here are DO play by the rules and you should have no problems.

All that said...I am not an attorney or banker CHECK WITH A PROFESSIONAL

Now, please, love each other and yourself. ...rick152

Rick makes sense,

We have wired more than a few times large sums to companies in China, and never had one problem. Even twice from branches not in our home state.

Play by the rules they have in place, even if you do not agree and you should have no problems.

I will add a little bit...
almost ANY transaction over 10 thousand in cash, in or out will trigger a "letter" from said institution as a normal inquiry. Unless you notify in advance. FILL OUT THE ANSWERS AND RETURN THE LETTER TOOT SWEET.
Advance notice of large (we will say 5 K or up) will take about 2 days dependant upon the actual time request is made ie; make the request afternoon and the fulfillment may take an extra day (Monday after 12 noon and you WILL most likely wait until Wednesday to recieve said cash.)
Dependant upon location (size of the bank branch) even a withdrawl say 3 k (in cash) WILL take an extra day to accomidate. Banks do not always have hugh amounts of cash lyeing around. It needs to be "ordered" as to why you see an armored car arrive near daily.
Just play it smart everything will be OK. ...rick152

seems like everyone is acting semi nuts. let the rv happen and go from there

Banks, like dealers are required to file the Fed form for any transaction over $10K, aren't they? Reading the Instructions, it is required for any "suspicious transaction," including those over $10,000.

I just bought a cashiers check for a bit over 5k, from my bank, who has more informtion about us than they need, but had to fill out a internal (within the bank) form for any transaction from 3k to 10k, Over 10k it then it becomes a form to the IRS.

I asked about any limits in any transaction, cashiers check, wire transfer any one, and the Manager said if there are any limits they were new to her. New as in the last few minutes were her words.

If you try to move 500K by wire is that going to get someone's attention? Probably, will it cause a freeze? Possibly, and if no one is expecting it, I would expect the chances get somewhat higher. Is this something new, not from what I have read. I found nothing solid in what I have read, but there are solid reasons in todays environment why that might happen. At any rate, I would not get wound up over it one way or the other.

SpiritualWarrior wrote:Banks, like dealers are required to file the Fed form for any transaction over $10K, aren't they? Reading the Instructions, it is required for any "suspicious transaction," including those over $10,000.

It is pretty much the same for any purchase anywhere. I used to sell cars for a well-off dealership and if anyone came in with more than 10k in cash we had to report that as well.

707RV wrote:seems like everyone is acting semi nuts. let the rv happen and go from there

LoL it's like 3's, where there are squirrels. There are NUTS!

This is some old information about CTRs and SARs but it is still the same today. Perhaps it will be of help. As pointed out above, the key word could be summed up as "unusual". A business account is not as scrutinized as a personal account. For example, if a person who regularly deposits his pay check for $1000.00 a week and then sells his car and deposits $4,000.00 he will most likely get an SAR filed on him and his account could be frozen. But most likely if he tells his banker about selling his car before he makes the deposit and if it were me I would just ask if the deposit will raise any red flags or cause account to be frozen. Then it would be doubtful. The bottom line is 'they' want to know everything you are doing and where your money is coming from, etc.

Currency Transaction Report (CTR)

A currency transaction report that banks are required to complete if the deposit was $10,000 or more. To try to say under this limit the government can say that the practice amounted to "structuring" transactions to avoid complying with the law. And that is illegal.

======================
SAR
LINK:http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?dist=newsfinder&siteid=google&guid=%7B7E48E8B9-8C76-4323-8A6A-1D9741F1E30A%7D&keyword=

7-6-06: Spying banks. Secret financial reports. Scared customers who are afraid to
pay off their bills in their entirety. Welcome to the reality of the current
U.S. banking system. According to Market Watch, the same government
program, called "Suspicious Activity Report," which was originally
designed to catch terrorists and other criminals is scaring the average bank
customer. And they should be scared. Your bank, out of obligation to both
the government and their nervous lawyers, can file a "Suspicious Activity
Report" (or "SAR") on you if you do something as drastic as make a
transaction that's $5,000 or more. The catch is this over $5,000 transaction
has to be something the bank feels is "not the sort in which the particular
customer would normally be expected to engage." That means if your
payments or withdrawals are out of the ordinary (for example you inherit a
sizable amount so you decide to pay off a long indebted credit card bill),
they'll fill out a SAR with your name on it. And it happens often. It's
estimated there will be a million SAR's filed in 2006. Critics of the SAR
are saying this paper trail is more than just to track terrorists. They say the
government has found a wholesale way to get as much information about
you as possible. You can avoid this "SAR" mess by keeping your
payments and withdrawals as "routine" as possible. And keep every
transaction as visible as possible, so you will be invisible to the banking
spies.
=================
Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)

An SAR must be filed if the institution detects or suspects any actual or attempted criminal violation totaling $5,000 or greater but can be filled out for a lessor amount.

Number of SAR ( Suspicious activity reports) on file for the accounts over a defined period of time. If an account has had 3 or more SAR's filed by the bankers over a 6 mos period it will automatically bypass the scoring used by other factors and force an auto score that is high enough to force a compliance review. This will go for all individual accounts and previously flagged non-individual accounts.

Chase Bank Internal back in 2005: Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR). Under Regulation 12 CFR 21, national banks are required to report known or suspected criminal offenses, at specified thresholds, or transactions over $5,000 that they suspect involve money laundering or violate the Bank Secrecy Act. Similar regulations by other regulators apply to other financial institutions.(Chase has tightened it to $3,000 and I'm sure most all others have also)

MY NOTE: SRA’s can be filed on any amount, even $1000.00.
=====================

CTR & SAR

2-15-06 COMMENT wrote: QUOTE: “I don't think you will get a "Red Flag" for large deposits, the bank does send a report to the IRS on deposits of 10k and larger, just as long as you pay Taxes there will be no problems.” UNQUOTE


RESPONSE 2-15-06: that is correct. i worked in banking at washington mutual for a number of years. A Cash Transaction Reciept is filled out by the bank for any deposits 10k or greater and filed for tax purposes. just make sure if u r regularly depositing amounts of 10k or greater not to structure your deposits in an attempt to avoiod filling out a CTR. If the bank suspects you are structuring yout deposits, we will out a Suspicous Activity Report and this does get forwarded to the IRS or appropriate gov agency without your knowledge. refusing to complete the CTR will also result in a SAR being filled out. hope this helps
==================
SAR
(Financial Surveillance)

Owning large amounts of cash, together with a whole range of other "suspicious actions" like banking offshore, can now result in asset confiscation and prosecution. If you cannot account for your wealth or your actions with it you are guilty of "money laundering", without proof or actual existence of criminal origin. Has someone reported on you? Maybe. Have you wired money to an offshore bank account? Received money from an officially blacklisted jurisdiction, or an unofficially blacklisted bank? Did you have too much cash, or attempted to buy a high-value item? Did you upset your local bank teller?

Bank staff, real estate salesmen, lawyers, and just about anybody who handles money is now being told: "Always suspect your client might be a money launderer. Investigate and report, even if in doubt, but don't tell the client you've done so. Nothing will happen to you, even if you get it wrong and report an innocent person." In some countries, the failure to identify a "money launderer" brings with it the possibility of jail time by virtue of the crime of aiding and abetting, so the rule is "when in doubt--report". Sounds far-fetched? Here it is, in the FATF's own words, taken straight from the Recommendations that have been--or are being-- incorporated into law around the globe:

"14. (Increased Diligence of Financial Institutions) Financial institutions should pay special attention to all complex, unusual large transactions, and all unusual patterns of transactions ... The background ... of such transactions should ... be examined, the findings established in writing, and be available to help supervisors, auditors and law enforcement agencies.

"15. If financial institutions suspect that funds stem from a criminal activity, they should be required to report promptly their suspicions to the competent authorities.

"16. Financial institutions ... should be protected ... from criminal or civil liability for breach of any restriction on disclosure of information ... if they report their suspicions ... even if they did not know precisely what the underlying criminal activity was, and regardless of whether illegal activity actually occurred.

"17. Financial institutions ... should not be allowed to warn their customers when information relating to them is being reported ... "

In reality, offshore tax havens and bank secrecy are the real target, not money laundering. Thus, the fight against money laundering is but a useful cloak used to obscure the true intentions of the FATF—targeting offshore financial centers and the overtaxed corporations and individuals who are attracted to them. (from No-Hits OS Series #7 Financial Surveillance)

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)

As of December 2003, over 1.5 million suspicious activity reports (SARs) have been filed at the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

Start with the fact that US bankers now are US police 'eyes and ears' when it comes to spotting 'suspicious' banking activity. It's a crime for a banker not to report suspicious activity of all kinds, and another crime if the banker tells a person who is under investigation.

This same deputized police status now extends to virtually every financial institution official or employee, every stock or bond broker, real estate agent, precious metals seller, every antique or art dealer and even accountants and attorneys.

This drastic, radical, unprecedented transformation of American financial professionals from trusted fiduciaries to police spies comes from the expansion of the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, and since 9-11, 2001, the PATRIOT Act. These highly coercive laws are a serious threat to honest persons, a major source of make-work for bureaucrats and the FBI, but not much of a likely deterrent to terrorism.

But don't you think for a second that anti-terrorism is the real reason for all this Nazification of the US financial system. And it's not the threat of drug lords or the mafia. It is spawned by government's insatiable appetite for control of our lives. All the rest are just convenient excuses. Sad as it is, to find true financial independence these days, the USA is not the
place to look.

US bankers, lawyers, accountants, investment and financial advisors now have legal duties to subject every one of their clients to:

1) extensive know your customer and due diligence investigations
2) a continuous secret reporting of a host of 'suspicious activities'
3) restrictions on the creation of IRS-suspected trusts and the creation and sale of tax shelters with which the IRS disagrees
4) a special new IRS rule, Revised Circular 230, that directs how to give advice on any 'tax avoidance' issue mouthing the IRS line.


WASHINGTON: Having issued reams of rules forcing banks to report client 'suspicious
activities' and fining banks millions of dollars for failure to report, and driving
one major bank out of business, now the stupid Feds are upset when every banks
reports almost anything as suspicious, to cover their rumps. Apparently US bankers
deputized as police spies are overzealous. Rather shows the whole system for what it
is - a mess.

* US says banks over report data for Patriot Act.
LINK: http://www1.youreletters.com/t/159361/9533460/777320/0/

Sovereign Society: All U.S. banks are also required to submit a form to the federal government reporting cash transactions over $10,000. If you must make a large cash deposit or withdrawal, casually mention to the teller that it's OK to file whatever 'paperwork' might be necessary. The bank will still have to file the form to the government, but if you are viewed as being 'cooperative,' the transaction is much less likely to lead to a report of a 'suspicious transaction,' the freezing of your account or your arrest for money laundering.

OLD SAR STATS from the Sovereign Society. I can only imagine what the STATS would be today.

2006 SAR FILINGS

For those who follow the sporadic posts concerning the United States' Suspicious Activity Reports, here is a partial quote from an article written by Robert Bauman, Legal Counsel for The Sovereign Society and editor of The Sovereign Society Offshore A-Letter (Thursday, March 13, 2008 - Vol. 10, No. 62). Also, if you are not familiar with The Sovereign Society, I highly recommend you take a look at

http://www.sovereignsociety.com/

Unfortunately, the anti-money laundering laws that ensnared Mr. Spitzer apply to you and me and every bank customer. But undoubtedly, public officials’ questionable banking activities – particularly prominent figures like the New York’s governor – likely receive quicker and more thorough review.

Since the 1980’s, financial institutions have been forced to file "suspicious activity reports" (SARs) on questionable transactions. But since the September 11th terrorist attacks, federal regulators have put even more pressure on banks to report any kind of questionable activity. .....

In fact, once American bankers owed complete privacy to their clients. Now, under current law they are little more than financial spies for the government, subject to fines and prison if they fail to rat on their customers.

As bankers have been covering their own behinds, the number of suspicious activity reports from banks has quadrupled. In 2001, banks filed 205,000 reports. That number jumped to one million in 2006, according to the federal government.

SAR EXPANSION to MORE BUSINESSES

The oldest requirements for customer spying are in U.S. banks, which for nearly 20 years have been required to submit suspicious transactions by their customers. What's suspicious? Just about anything even remotely out of the ordinary. In previous A-Letters I've written about how even paying off a loan can be considered suspicious, leading to an investigation and a prolonged account freeze.

In the U.S., these requirements have now been extended to pawnshops,
travel agents, jewelry and precious metal dealers, mutual funds, dealers of
cars, boats and airplanes and real estate agents.

It's not stretching the truth to conclude, "If you're a citizen, you're a suspect."

These requirements are now being exported to other countries, in the form of "best practices" recommendations from organizations such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). More and more countries now have "financial intelligence units" whose responsibility it is to sift through "suspicious transaction reports" filed by local financial institutions and merchants. In the European Union, even lawyers must inform on their
Clients.

The latest trend is to extend these requirements to utility companies. In British Columbia, for instance, using too much electricity may result in a mandatory "safety inspection." Abnormal consumption is defined as any residence that uses more than three times the average electrical consumption. More than 18,000 homes fit this definition in British Columbia. A few of the "safety inspections" conducted to date have
unveiled marijuana gardens, but most have revealed households with items such as hot tubs, swimming pools, or teenagers—all sources of high electricity use.

ANOTHER POST I HAD IN MY FILE FROM A FEW YEARS BACK. MY NOTE: I THINK THE DINAR CASH IN WILL BE DIFFERENT AND PERHAPS EVEN PERSONAL ACCOUNTS WON'T BE SO SCRUTINIZED. I THINK THE KEY TO ANYTHING IS HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR BANK.
===============================

Reported Amounts

Over $10,000 a report is sent to the IRS and the Treasury Department and compared To Know Watch List (326+)

The IRS dos a check about 4 week latter to see if you pay any tax on it
Here is the Check They do at $2000 most banks wait till $3000.00

$10,000 and Above is just a form informing the IRS that you just deposited $10,000 or more and then the IRS just check in 3 to 6 week weather Tax has been paid if not the Contact you for more info. The Treasury is also informed and a Check is preformed on you to see you are in 326 different watch Lists.

The $3,000 ($2000) Required by the Patriot Act $2,000 ie guidance most bank don't bother as a lot of people who receive that often. So they use the $3,000 so they don't have so many to report.

It Is Called the SAR Report and it is really sent to "HomeLand Security" and checked against our enemy watch List. and determined If its income funding (Legally) to you or fund that you collect and sent do them. In all Likelihood you will never be called or contacted unless your Name Is on there Watch Lists.

If you are a business that will regularly or even from time to time deposit large amounts or transfer large amounts, you will be ok as long as you have a good relationship with your banker and do not try to hide anything. Personal accounts are not advised to do large transactions even if you have a good relationship with your banker, it is likely you will still have an SAR filed.