Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Gold - Silver - Coins - Numismatics (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=51)
- - Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=25625)

AgAuGal | 11-05-2005 02:28 PM
Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM I had found an article this summer from one of the coin dealers associations that outlined the new Patriot Act rules dealers have to abide by starting Jan06. Anyone have a link to that article? It listed all the changes by Patriot # and the impact on dealers - what they would have to do to comply. My dealer has finally heard about these new rules, he is still waiting for the offical doc. He warned me there will be changes. I would like to review those changes before Jan06 if possible. thought I had kept a copy on my PC but can't find. Help to locate this coin dealers association doc would be appreicated. TIA

AgAuGal | 11-05-2005 02:36 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Found this while looking for more information on the JAN06 rules http://www.ccbma.com/ Saturday, November 5. IMPORTANT BULLETIN Oct, 1st - AB 1178 (Yee) became a two-year bill on June 2 when, thanks to intense opposition from a coalition that included CCBMA, the author discovered he didn't have enough votes in the state Assembly to pass it. Thereafter, Assemblyman Yee and the pawnbrokers worked in earnest to craft a compromise package for insertion into some other legislation. That effort failed and the Legislature has now recessed until January. The proponents of AB 1178 have not given up. They intend to aggressively move forward next year with their agenda to require all second hand dealers, and coin dealers who buy or sell any non-exempt merchandise, to become licensed by the state and to be subject to strict reporting requirements for all non-exempt transactions. Customers would have to be fingerprinted and submit proof of identity. There would be a mandatory licensing and a holding period of up to 30 days. License fees and other costs could run hundreds of dollars a year. While picking on legitimate businesses such as those operated by coin and precious metal dealers, the bill would exempt swap meets from any licensing and reporting requirements. CCBMA needs to prepare for a major legislative fight over AB1178 immediately, because the pawnbrokers are aggressive trying to influence legislators right now and will have all there ducks in a row by January. Remember AB1178 has already passed two important committees in the State Assembly and will be hear on the floor of the Assembly as its first course of business. As part of the opposition, CCBMA needs to have its grassroots machine organized and ready to swing into action within hours of any new legislative developments. Mass emailing, faxing and calling legislators will be key as well as possible visits to key legislators district offices. I�d recommend that during October, November and December you work with Barry Stuppler to make as many state Senators and Assemblymembers as possible aware of the problems AB1178 would cause your business if passed. Carl Brakensiek Lobbyist for CCBMA For all members of the California Coin & Bullion Merchants Association Sept, 15th - With the recent passage of the US Patriot Act many dealers in precious metals and rare coins are now subject to the regulations in Section 352 within the Patriot Act. Non-compliance would result in federal penalties (fines and imprisonment). ICTA, with the endorsement and sponsorship of the PNG, CCBMA, NSDR and Collectors Universe, has taken on the responsibility of conducting a brief coin dealer educational seminar during the upcoming Long Beach Coin Expo. With the help of former IRS Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Special Agent (ret.) Ray Gregson this seminar will focus on Coin Dealer compliance within Section 352 of the USA PATRIOT Act. He is an expert on money laundering and compliance plans. Section 352 Applies SPECIFICALLY to Dealers in Precious Metals, Stones or Jewels ("Precious Metals" Includes Bullion AND Certain US $20's, $10's, etc.). All dealers must comply by January 1, 2006 (whether or not you do cash transactions). On-site registration will begin at 11:15 AM on Wednesday, September 21st in room 102-A of the Long Beach Convention Center. The seminar will begin promptly at 12:00 noon, so we recommend pre-registration to avoid delayed admission. For ICTA members, the pre-registration donation is $50; at the door $75 (fee covers up to 2 individuals from the same company). Proposed California Legislation AB 1178 Penalizes Collectors while Subsidizing California Pawnbrokers May 15 - If passed into law, this legislation would require any dealer who purchases ALMOST ANY TYPE OF CONSUMER PRODUCT THAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY OWNED to pay for a special license that is the same one required of pawnbrokers. Dealers must fingerprint their customers and electronically report to the California State Dept. of Justice and then hold the material for thirty days before being able to resell it. Coin and precious metals have never been considered "second hand merchandise." In fact, when they are manufactured by the U.S. Mint, the very PURPOSE of a coin REQUIRES that it be spent in order to fulfill its function. Although coins and precious metals are currently exempt from reporting in AB1178, the California Coin & Bullion Merchants Association (CCBMA) is concerned about the thousands of other collectibles, such as stamp collections, coin jewelry, medals, sports cards, and exonumia, which now will require special statewide licensing and must be reported electronically to a state-wide database. This bill would treat all businesses that purchase or sell previously-owned merchandise as though they were pawnbrokers, but without the special exemptions and provisions that pawnbrokers enjoy. The fingerprinting requirement presumes that every customer is a criminal, regardless of any longstanding relationship or how small the transaction. The main sponsor of AB 1178 is the Collateral Lenders & Secondhand Dealers Association (CLSDA), which is the California Pawnbrokers Association. They are seeking to expand the current licensing & reporting requirements in an effort to force thousands of other businesses to shoulder the burden of the estimated $2 million cost to launch the Department of Justice's (DoJ) electronic reporting program. For decades it has been mandatory in California for pawnbrokers to report when they issue a loan or purchase secondhand merchandise as part of their licensing requirement. Pawnbrokers enjoy a special exemption from the state�s usury laws to issue loans that are secured by the customer�s collateral at annualized rates greater than 60%, which is perfectly legal. The loaned amount is a fraction of the value of the product, not a fair market value, which enables a pawnbroker to enjoy a windfall profit if a customer does not �redeem� his pawned collateral. Very often pawnbrokers� clients are more transient, while others businesses who purchase secondhand items outright (such as antiques) often have worked hard over years to develop a relationship with their customers who do repeat business and also refer others. AB 1178 would require that these good clients be treated as criminals by being fingerprinted and reported to the state, irrespective of the fact that the client may have purchased the same item from the dealer. This bill is intended to change the pawnbrokers� reporting from a cumbersome, inefficient paper system to a more useful and convenient electronic system. When implemented, this system will make the pawnbrokers� reporting easier and more efficient. Pawnbrokers already have the necessary computers and software programs; for all other businesses, they will have the additional cost to purchase these. Most significantly, pawnbrokers will be the greatest beneficiary of AB1178. By the very nature of their business, they will use the new electronic system on 100% of their transactions, just as they have had to do via the current paper reporting system. Other businesses to which the state licensing requirement has been extended under AB 1178 will only use the system part time, many for as little as 1% or 2% of their transactions. Also, only pawnbrokers purchase or pawn such a wide range of merchandise from cars to electronics to guns, etc. Other businesses that might purchase previously-owned items usually specialize in their field. A car dealer buys cars, not digital cameras. A jeweler takes used items in trade for other jewelry items�they do not take in a television set. The initial fees total $552, plus $175 every two years for licensing are specifically designated to fund this system. Additional costs for specialized software and hardware would be required for most non-pawnbroker locations. These costs and other aspects of this licensing are identical whether the business is a full time pawnbroker or an occasional buyer of scrap gold or silver. This bill is not only extraordinarily onerous for small businesses, it is unfair to both the coin dealer and their customers. Additionally, since there is no minimum transaction amount, a dealer will be required to report everything from a $5 sterling spoon to a $50 stamp collection. There is no dealer to dealer exemption in AB1178, so if it is resold to another dealer that DEALER has to be fingerprinted and the process starts all over again. Neither of these types of reports contributes anything positive to a reporting system; indeed, they serve only to bog down the system with worthless data. As proposed AB1178 states that a license dealer is restricted to a single business location. Therefore, any licensed California dealer cannot purchase or sale material at any trade show or convention within California without having a second license for that location. UNBELIEVABLE, considering that any unlicensed individual selling or buying 2nd hand property or collectibles can set up at a swap meet and is exempt from licensing, fingerprinting or holding. Out-of-state dealers attending coin conventions within our state will require the same licensing, fingerprinting and holding periods. Both the American Numismatic Association and Expos Unlimited LLC have stated passage of AB1178 would result in moving 6-7 major coin shows annually to other states costing California millions of dollars in convention revenues including hotels, dining, entertainment, transportation, etc. A more efficient and equitable way to pay for the new electronic reporting system has already been implemented in Phoenix, Arizona. The Phoenix, Arizona police department charges $3 per ticket to all 2nd hand dealers and pawnbrokers. This way the companies who use the electronic reporting system pay as they go. Law enforcement not only approved this method but, when challenged in the courts by the pawnbrokers in that state, the courts upheld this �pay to play� method of reporting. Unlike the proven system in Arizona, AB 1178 would force the entire collectible community, over 10,000 businesses to subsidize 700 California pawnbrokers. Click Here to find out how you can help defeat AB1178. AB1178 is opposed by: California Coin and Bullion Merchants Association American Numismatic Association Collectors Universe iSold It eBay Auctions by the Bay, Inc. Antiques by the Bay, Inc American Electronics Association Claude Parrish, Member, Calif. Board of Equalization California Chamber of Commerce City of Alameda American Civil Liberties Union The California State Auctioneer's Association Quikdrop International

Curtman | 11-05-2005 02:42 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM What a drag. All kinds of this garbage is getting passed while attention is being drawn to other matters. THe stupid patriot act was passed without anybody even reading it. I know it took nearly a ream of paper to print it off the computer. Better make some phone calls and emails for all the good it will do. Thanks

AgAuGal | 11-05-2005 02:53 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM A couple of more links I hope are helpful: http://www.libertycoinservice.com/currentnews.pdf This is what the Partriot Act Terrorism looked like in 2001: http://www.epic.org/privacy/terroris...ot/RL31200.pdf Still looking for the changes to the Act affecting how our coin dealers will have to deal with us. They (and you know who the faceless, spineless scumbags are) are changing the rules again. Anti money laundering - they think the criminals care. Of course not, more micro management of the general population :banghead: :banghead: http://www.fincen.gov/antimoneylaundering060905.pdf

AgAuGal | 11-05-2005 03:04 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Got a kick out of this one, read the first mission of the Treasury and try not to :puke: :puke: http://ciir.cs.umass.edu/ua/Fall2004...Y_(TREAS).html Too bad we can't make money off exporting American arrogance. Wouldn't need to worry about retirement. :rant:

AgAuGal | 11-05-2005 03:07 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM I give up for now, can't find the article from a coin dealers or pawn brokers association describing the changes. I believe it incuded transaction limits and paper work required.

hoarder | 11-05-2005 03:29 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM What about individuals selling coins at coin shows and swap meets? If they are not dealers they are exempt from all the BS, right? It seems that all this legislation is doing is putting dealers out of business and the slack will just be taken up by individuals. Anyone here ever sold bullion/coins at a coin show?

Curtman | 11-05-2005 03:41 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM IT works the same way at gun shows. but there is a bigger demand and it is harder to get a deal than it used to be before the assualt weapon ban.

me_ummagumma | 11-05-2005 03:53 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarder What about individuals selling coins at coin shows and swap meets? If they are not dealers they are exempt from all the BS, right?
the article stated that coins and precious metals are exempt from reporting in AB1178

Ponce Cuba | 11-05-2005 04:15 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM All I can see is the government wanting to get rid of the paper fiat in order to make everyone use a debit card and that way control you and the economy 100%. :love: Like with hard liquor in the 30's and drugs now days the underground business of PM will be out of this world and only those with PM will be able to control their life. :clap2: By the way now days the metal detectors at the airports can detect large ammount of the new paper cash, that's why I hold a good deal of the old $100.00 bills in case I have to make a fast getaway from this country. :Zzzz: " Only he who is ready can sleep well at night ".......Ponce

AgAuGal | 11-06-2005 01:49 AM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM More Patriot fun http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9939709/ FBI mines records of ordinary Americans Under Patriot Act, feds probe lives of residents not alleged to be terrorists By Barton Gellman Updated: 1:04 a.m. ET Nov. 6, 2005 The FBI came calling in Windsor, Conn., this summer with a document marked for delivery by hand. On Matianuk Avenue, across from the tennis courts, two special agents found their man. They gave George Christian the letter, which warned him to tell no one, ever, what it said. Under the shield and stars of the FBI crest, the letter directed Christian to surrender "all subscriber information, billing information and access logs of any person" who used a specific computer at a library branch some distance away. Christian, who manages digital records for three dozen Connecticut libraries, said in an affidavit that he configures his system for privacy. But the vendors of the software he operates said their databases can reveal the Web sites that visitors browse, the e-mail accounts they open and the books they borrow. Christian refused to hand over those records, and his employer, Library Connection Inc., filed suit for the right to protest the FBI demand in public. The Washington Post established their identities -- still under seal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit -- by comparing unsealed portions of the file with public records and information gleaned from people who had no knowledge of the FBI demand. Steep rise in �national security letters� The Connecticut case affords a rare glimpse of an exponentially growing practice of domestic surveillance under the USA Patriot Act, which marked its fourth anniversary on Oct. 26. "National security letters," created in the 1970s for espionage and terrorism investigations, originated as narrow exceptions in consumer privacy law, enabling the FBI to review in secret the customer records of suspected foreign agents. The Patriot Act, and Bush administration guidelines for its use, transformed those letters by permitting clandestine scrutiny of U.S. residents and visitors who are not alleged to be terrorists or spies. The FBI now issues more than 30,000 national security letters a year, according to government sources, a hundredfold increase over historic norms. The letters -- one of which can be used to sweep up the records of many people -- are extending the bureau's reach as never before into the telephone calls, correspondence and financial lives of ordinary Americans. Issued by FBI field supervisors, national security letters do not need the imprimatur of a prosecutor, grand jury or judge. They receive no review after the fact by the Justice Department or Congress. The executive branch maintains only statistics, which are incomplete and confined to classified reports. The Bush administration defeated legislation and a lawsuit to require a public accounting, and has offered no example in which the use of a national security letter helped disrupt a terrorist plot. Records archived, shared The burgeoning use of national security letters coincides with an unannounced decision to deposit all the information they yield into government data banks -- and to share those private records widely, in the federal government and beyond. In late 2003, the Bush administration reversed a long-standing policy requiring agents to destroy their files on innocent American citizens, companies and residents when investigations closed. Late last month, President Bush signed Executive Order 13388, expanding access to those files for "state, local and tribal" governments and for "appropriate private sector entities," which are not defined. National security letters offer a case study of the impact of the Patriot Act outside the spotlight of political debate. Drafted in haste after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the law's 132 pages wrought scores of changes in the landscape of intelligence and law enforcement. Many received far more attention than the amendments to a seemingly pedestrian power to review "transactional records." But few if any other provisions touch as many ordinary Americans without their knowledge. Senior FBI officials acknowledged in interviews that the proliferation of national security letters results primarily from the bureau's new authority to collect intimate facts about people who are not suspected of any wrongdoing. Criticized for failure to detect the Sept. 11 plot, the bureau now casts a much wider net, using national security letters to generate leads as well as to pursue them. Casual or unwitting contact with a suspect -- a single telephone call, for example -- may attract the attention of investigators and subject a person to scrutiny about which he never learns. Following digital bread crumbs A national security letter cannot be used to authorize eavesdropping or to read the contents of e-mail. But it does permit investigators to trace revealing paths through the private affairs of a modern digital citizen. The records it yields describe where a person makes and spends money, with whom he lives and lived before, how much he gambles, what he buys online, what he pawns and borrows, where he travels, how he invests, what he searches for and reads on the Web, and who telephones or e-mails him at home and at work. As it wrote the Patriot Act four years ago, Congress bought time and leverage for oversight by placing an expiration date on 16 provisions. The changes involving national security letters were not among them. In fact, as the Dec. 31 deadline approaches and Congress prepares to renew or make permanent the expiring provisions, House and Senate conferees are poised again to amplify the FBI's power to compel the secret surrender of private records. The House and Senate have voted to make noncompliance with a national security letter a criminal offense. The House would also impose a prison term for breach of secrecy. Like many Patriot Act provisions, the ones involving national security letters have been debated in largely abstract terms. The Justice Department has offered Congress no concrete information, even in classified form, save for a partial count of the number of letters delivered. The statistics do not cover all forms of national security letters or all U.S. agencies making use of them. "The beef with the NSLs is that they don't have even a pretense of judicial or impartial scrutiny," said former representative Robert L. Barr Jr. (Ga.), who finds himself allied with the American Civil Liberties Union after a career as prosecutor, CIA analyst and conservative GOP stalwart. "There's no checks and balances whatever on them. It is simply some bureaucrat's decision that they want information, and they can basically just go and get it." �A routine tool� Career investigators and Bush administration officials emphasized, in congressional testimony and interviews for this story, that national security letters are for hunting terrorists, not fishing through the private lives of the innocent. The distinction is not as clear in practice. Under the old legal test, the FBI had to have "specific and articulable" reasons to believe the records it gathered in secret belonged to a terrorist or a spy. Now the bureau needs only to certify that the records are "sought for" or "relevant to" an investigation "to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." That standard enables investigators to look for conspirators by sifting the records of nearly anyone who crosses a suspect's path. "If you have a list of, say, 20 telephone numbers that have come up . . . on a bad guy's telephone," said Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI's general counsel, "you want to find out who he's in contact with." Investigators will say, " 'Okay, phone company, give us subscriber information and toll records on these 20 telephone numbers,' and that can easily be 100." Bush administration officials compare national security letters to grand jury subpoenas, which are also based on "relevance" to an inquiry. There are differences. Grand juries tend to have a narrower focus because they investigate past conduct, not the speculative threat of unknown future attacks. Recipients of grand jury subpoenas are generally free to discuss the subpoenas publicly. And there are strict limits on sharing grand jury information with government agencies. Since the Patriot Act, the FBI has dispersed the authority to sign national security letters to more than five dozen supervisors -- the special agents in charge of field offices, the deputies in New York, Los Angeles and Washington, and a few senior headquarters officials. FBI rules established after the Patriot Act allow the letters to be issued long before a case is judged substantial enough for a "full field investigation." Agents commonly use the letters now in "preliminary investigations" and in the "threat assessments" that precede a decision whether to launch an investigation. "Congress has given us this tool to obtain basic telephone data, basic banking data, basic credit reports," said Caproni, who is among the officials with signature authority. "The fact that a national security letter is a routine tool used, that doesn't bother me." �It's all chicken and egg� If agents had to wait for grounds to suspect a person of ill intent, said Joseph Billy Jr., the FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, they would already know what they want to find out with a national security letter. "It's all chicken and egg," he said. "We're trying to determine if someone warrants scrutiny or doesn't." Billy said he understands that "merely being in a government or FBI database . . . gives everybody, you know, neck hair standing up." Innocent Americans, he said, "should take comfort at least knowing that it is done under a great deal of investigative care, oversight, within the parameters of the law." He added: "That's not going to satisfy a majority of people, but . . . I've had people say, you know, 'Hey, I don't care, I've done nothing to be concerned about. You can have me in your files and that's that.' Some people take that approach." �Don't go overboard� In Room 7975 of the J. Edgar Hoover Building, around two corners from the director's suite, the chief of the FBI's national security law unit sat down at his keyboard about a month after the Patriot Act became law. Michael J. Woods had helped devise the FBI wish list for surveillance powers. Now he offered a caution. "NSLs are powerful investigative tools, in that they can compel the production of substantial amounts of relevant information," he wrote in a Nov. 28, 2001, "electronic communication" to the FBI's 56 field offices. "However, they must be used judiciously." Standing guidelines, he wrote, "require that the FBI accomplish its investigations through the 'least intrusive' means. . . . The greater availability of NSLs does not mean that they should be used in every case." Woods, who left government service in 2002, added a practical consideration. Legislators granted the new authority and could as easily take it back. When making that decision, he wrote, "Congress certainly will examine the manner in which the FBI exercised it." Looking back last month, Woods was struck by how starkly he misjudged the climate. The FBI disregarded his warning, and no one noticed. "This is not something that should be automatically done because it's easy," he said. "We need to be sure . . . we don't go overboard." CONTINUED

AgAuGal | 11-07-2005 12:07 AM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM still looking for the new rules that go into effect Jan06.

Crockett | 11-07-2005 11:14 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM What a web they weave. Can�t believe anybody would ratify such a hodgepodge of a law in the short time they did. This was the best I could do AgAuGal. Here is the Department of Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network interpretation of Section 352 http://www.fincen.gov/faq060305.pdf http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/po3034.htm The Department will publish regulations called for by the PATRIOT Act within the next six months. This includes not only regulations called for by section 352 of the Act, but also other provisions, such as section 326, which requires financial institutions to develop procedures for identifying and verifying the identity of accountholders. http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/po3580.htm `Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001'. See Sec. 352. Anti-money laundering programs, and other sections referred to in the above links. http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/patriot.pdf

lhslancers | 11-07-2005 11:33 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM 1 Attachment(s) Go ahead you honky MF axe me a question. :D

AgAuGal | 12-03-2005 01:49 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Pragmatisit under Khan's post gave me the key words I needed to find the article I was looking for. Gave it to my dealer today. He expects no more cash deals starting next year. So even if we paid in cash these past years the dealers starting next year due to these new rules will not likely pay cash just so they cover their butts from the jack boot thugs. Sad but understand. Uncle is going to force people to another market if ya know what I mean. I am not advocating being dishonest but our uncle and his minions have been ggrossly dishonest with the people.

AgAuGal | 12-03-2005 01:52 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Thanks Crockett for the links. BTW, interesting flag, don't recognise it.

Curtman | 12-03-2005 03:38 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Wonder how probable it is that the price is spiking because of the new reporting rules are about to come into effect? I't would surly slow down the new buying wouldn't it?

AgAuGal | 12-03-2005 06:54 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM The dealer I spoke with today said people were coming in buying gold and selling silver. Although a customer came in a wanted to sell Krugs. Didn't seem to be aware of silver's situation (growth).

naccarato | 12-03-2005 07:56 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarder What about individuals selling coins at coin shows and swap meets? If they are not dealers they are exempt from all the BS, right? It seems that all this legislation is doing is putting dealers out of business and the slack will just be taken up by individuals. Anyone here ever sold bullion/coins at a coin show?
I sold my proof sets and mint sets at a coin show earlier this year and was paid cash.

Deck Chair Boy | 12-04-2005 12:02 AM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM What about Canada? Does anyone know if some of the same is coming there?:afraid:

Sir O of K | 12-13-2005 10:12 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM AgAuGal, I spoke with one of the guys at CNI. They were to be briefed this week on the new rules. By next week, they should have all the information about what FedGov will require. I will call them next week just to find out what they've learned. If you wish to do the same to ask your questions, you can reach them at 1-800-225-7531 (toll free).

AgAuGal | 12-13-2005 11:15 PM
Re: Question for current/ex-dealers at GIM thanks for the update Sir O of K.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:26 PM. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM