No, I bet she is a lifelong Democrat and after this fiasco.....she will still vote Democrat. It is astonishing but many small business people like this lady are very liberal in their outlook, thinking that laws against big evil corporations and taxes on the rich will not affect them as they are "Little Guys". Just like most middle class soccer moms also think this "hound the rich" attitude of the mob will not get them, when of course we all know that it is precisely the middle class and the small businessman that the politicians go after because "That is where the money is" and they are too small and lacking in power to defend themselves.
Same ole bureaucratic SIERRA, they do it because they can. In Middlesex, NJ prosecutor's seized a Corvette they really liked because they alleged that the 60 Y.O. Insurance broker had sold Insurance to a drug dealer for his girlfriend's car, and that made his corvette a drug profit confiscation. The Case is waiting to be heard by the NJ Supreme Court.
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.”
"Exceptional circumstances" means they can arbitrarily decide to do whatever they want to do.
I gave at the office. The check is in the mail. Trust me. Politicized enforcement? We'd never do THAT. I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.
I believe the report point is even lower on a non business account. $3000 in a single deposit if cash.
I remember reading that, I believe as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform mess. But it could have been changed since due to too much pushback from banks and consumers both.
"there are plenty of good reasons for a cash only business model." I use a lot of cash too. I've never had someone offer to pay in cash, but my wife sees it sometimes. Our reasons are the things you say, not to evade taxes. Another advantage of cash is it's an immediate way of showing value. You can put groups of C-notes on the table, and there's no question the funds are good and you're serious about the deal.
Could be, but there are plenty of good reasons for a cash only business model.
No credit card transaction fees No risk of bounced checks No extra fees from your bank for depositing or writing too many checks Less administrative paperwork and overhead on bookkeeping
The fact that they are so much off the "financial grid" is why they go after them. Hard to track you transactions with no readily seen records tied to you.
It is intrusive and should not be legal to seize assets with no evidence of a crime.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
The Case is waiting to be heard by the NJ Supreme Court.
"Exceptional circumstances" means they can arbitrarily decide to do whatever they want to do.
I gave at the office.
The check is in the mail.
Trust me.
Politicized enforcement? We'd never do THAT.
I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.
I remember reading that, I believe as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform mess. But it could have been changed since due to too much pushback from banks and consumers both.
I use a lot of cash too. I've never had someone offer to pay in cash, but my wife sees it sometimes. Our reasons are the things you say, not to evade taxes.
Another advantage of cash is it's an immediate way of showing value. You can put groups of C-notes on the table, and there's no question the funds are good and you're serious about the deal.
IRS likely would think drug money initially, once the bank reported her after the buyout accounts review.
But once they take the money they do not intend to give it back, even if you are guilty of no wrong doing.
No credit card transaction fees
No risk of bounced checks
No extra fees from your bank for depositing or writing too many checks
Less administrative paperwork and overhead on bookkeeping
The fact that they are so much off the "financial grid" is why they go after them. Hard to track you transactions with no readily seen records tied to you.
It is intrusive and should not be legal to seize assets with no evidence of a crime.