Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: "Paul M. Cook" <pmcook@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:09:53 GMT
And you'd be completely wrong. Nothing new there. It was put in place to
combat money laundering that was very common during the height of
organized crime. Bush I and II have both attempted to have toe amount
reduced to 5K. I suppose the 10K limit is bad for the family business.
Make that increased by 5K.
And to clarify Joe's usual mistake, he was referring to FRB Regulation CC,
the availability of funds and collection of checks (12CFR 229) over
$10,000.00 This was a modification that put an automatic hold on any
deposit $10,000.00 or more. It had nothing to do with withdrawals of
existing funds. It was enacted in 1988.
The 10K reporting law predated this by more than 15 years.
Paul
.
- References:
- OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Paul M. Cook
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: arielv2
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Ken Dixon
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Paul M. Cook
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Joe
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Paul M. Cook
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Joe
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Tom S.
- Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- From: Paul M. Cook
- OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- Next by thread: Re: OT: Spitzer - the true tragedy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|