Pinned Tweet
Did I hold up the Constitution to Congress? Yes.
Did I reference the Grateful Dead? Also, Yes.
Did I reference the Grateful Dead? Also, Yes.
13
30
148
22,237
Sell your car for cash and deposit it, and your bank reports you to the federal government. Move $5,000 in a way a teller doesn’t like, and the bank can file a suspicious activity report on you. If anyone at the bank tells you it happened, they’ve committed a federal crime. You unt gets closed, if you ever find out at all.
Banks spend $59 billion complying with the Bank Secrecy Act. They filed 28.7 million reports on Americans. Those reports tipped off 275 investigations.
It started in 1968, when a Texas congressman named Wright Patman held a hearing about secret Swiss bank accounts. Patman claimed Americans were using them for tax evasion, stolen Treasury bills, corporate kickbacks and securities fraud. His star witness, U.S. attorney Robert Morgenthau, told Congress that the millions of Americans vacationing in Europe were finding foreign banks ready to help them commit crimes.
Members of Congress warned that the bill would gut the privacy of bank customers, choke honest commerce and hand the Treasury Secretary far too much power. They were right. It passed anyway. Richard Nixon signed the Bank Secrecy Act in October 1970, twenty months before his own men were caught breaking into the Watergate.
Treasury set the reporting line at $10,000 in 1972 and has never moved it. That is about $80,000 in today’s money after inflation, so the net drops lower every year Congress does nothing. In 1986 Congress made it a crime to keep your deposits under the line on purpose, which means the line catches you whether you cross it or not. By 1996 banks were filing suspicious activity reports on their own customers for anything over $5,000 that looked off to them. After September 11 the Patriot Act bolted eleven more sections onto the law, and last year the GENIUS Act extended the same surveillance to stablecoins.
In 2012 banks filed 1,720 suspicious activity reports for every IRS investigation that came out of them. Over the next decade the reports nearly doubled and the investigations fell by half.
Last year FinCEN ordered businesses in thirty zip codes along the southern border to report cash transactions as small as $200. One small business estimated it would go from filing nine reports a week to 50,000. A federal court in Texas found the order likely violated the Fourth Amendment and said it was like using a blunderbuss to target a fly. FinCEN answered by raising the line to $1,000 and stretching it over 126 zip codes and 3.2 million people.
In 1974 Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in dissent that forcing a bank to photocopy your checks gives the government as much of a hand in the seizure as if it had sent someone to break into your home and copy them there. Even the justices who upheld the law warned that your financial records reveal your activities, your associations and your beliefs. Two years later, in United States v. Miller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not protect your bank records at all.
Repeal the Bank Secrecy Act.
Banks spend $59 billion complying with the Bank Secrecy Act. They filed 28.7 million reports on Americans. Those reports tipped off 275 investigations.
It started in 1968, when a Texas congressman named Wright Patman held a hearing about secret Swiss bank accounts. Patman claimed Americans were using them for tax evasion, stolen Treasury bills, corporate kickbacks and securities fraud. His star witness, U.S. attorney Robert Morgenthau, told Congress that the millions of Americans vacationing in Europe were finding foreign banks ready to help them commit crimes.
Members of Congress warned that the bill would gut the privacy of bank customers, choke honest commerce and hand the Treasury Secretary far too much power. They were right. It passed anyway. Richard Nixon signed the Bank Secrecy Act in October 1970, twenty months before his own men were caught breaking into the Watergate.
Treasury set the reporting line at $10,000 in 1972 and has never moved it. That is about $80,000 in today’s money after inflation, so the net drops lower every year Congress does nothing. In 1986 Congress made it a crime to keep your deposits under the line on purpose, which means the line catches you whether you cross it or not. By 1996 banks were filing suspicious activity reports on their own customers for anything over $5,000 that looked off to them. After September 11 the Patriot Act bolted eleven more sections onto the law, and last year the GENIUS Act extended the same surveillance to stablecoins.
In 2012 banks filed 1,720 suspicious activity reports for every IRS investigation that came out of them. Over the next decade the reports nearly doubled and the investigations fell by half.
Last year FinCEN ordered businesses in thirty zip codes along the southern border to report cash transactions as small as $200. One small business estimated it would go from filing nine reports a week to 50,000. A federal court in Texas found the order likely violated the Fourth Amendment and said it was like using a blunderbuss to target a fly. FinCEN answered by raising the line to $1,000 and stretching it over 126 zip codes and 3.2 million people.
In 1974 Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in dissent that forcing a bank to photocopy your checks gives the government as much of a hand in the seizure as if it had sent someone to break into your home and copy them there. Even the justices who upheld the law warned that your financial records reveal your activities, your associations and your beliefs. Two years later, in United States v. Miller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not protect your bank records at all.
Repeal the Bank Secrecy Act.
20
144
438
24,768
@BenBRockN @dylanmallman This list is so long that the easiest way to show it is a Star Wars crawl. It even applies to boat dealerships
0
0
0
14
Nick Anthony retweeted
Sell your car for cash and deposit it, and your bank reports you to the federal government. Move $5,000 in a way a teller doesn’t like, and the bank can file a suspicious activity report on you. If anyone at the bank tells you it happened, they’ve committed a federal crime. You unt gets closed, if you ever find out at all.
Banks spend $59 billion complying with the Bank Secrecy Act. They filed 28.7 million reports on Americans. Those reports tipped off 275 investigations.
It started in 1968, when a Texas congressman named Wright Patman held a hearing about secret Swiss bank accounts. Patman claimed Americans were using them for tax evasion, stolen Treasury bills, corporate kickbacks and securities fraud. His star witness, U.S. attorney Robert Morgenthau, told Congress that the millions of Americans vacationing in Europe were finding foreign banks ready to help them commit crimes.
Members of Congress warned that the bill would gut the privacy of bank customers, choke honest commerce and hand the Treasury Secretary far too much power. They were right. It passed anyway. Richard Nixon signed the Bank Secrecy Act in October 1970, twenty months before his own men were caught breaking into the Watergate.
Treasury set the reporting line at $10,000 in 1972 and has never moved it. That is about $80,000 in today’s money after inflation, so the net drops lower every year Congress does nothing. In 1986 Congress made it a crime to keep your deposits under the line on purpose, which means the line catches you whether you cross it or not. By 1996 banks were filing suspicious activity reports on their own customers for anything over $5,000 that looked off to them. After September 11 the Patriot Act bolted eleven more sections onto the law, and last year the GENIUS Act extended the same surveillance to stablecoins.
In 2012 banks filed 1,720 suspicious activity reports for every IRS investigation that came out of them. Over the next decade the reports nearly doubled and the investigations fell by half.
Last year FinCEN ordered businesses in thirty zip codes along the southern border to report cash transactions as small as $200. One small business estimated it would go from filing nine reports a week to 50,000. A federal court in Texas found the order likely violated the Fourth Amendment and said it was like using a blunderbuss to target a fly. FinCEN answered by raising the line to $1,000 and stretching it over 126 zip codes and 3.2 million people.
In 1974 Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in dissent that forcing a bank to photocopy your checks gives the government as much of a hand in the seizure as if it had sent someone to break into your home and copy them there. Even the justices who upheld the law warned that your financial records reveal your activities, your associations and your beliefs. Two years later, in United States v. Miller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not protect your bank records at all.
Repeal the Bank Secrecy Act.
Banks spend $59 billion complying with the Bank Secrecy Act. They filed 28.7 million reports on Americans. Those reports tipped off 275 investigations.
It started in 1968, when a Texas congressman named Wright Patman held a hearing about secret Swiss bank accounts. Patman claimed Americans were using them for tax evasion, stolen Treasury bills, corporate kickbacks and securities fraud. His star witness, U.S. attorney Robert Morgenthau, told Congress that the millions of Americans vacationing in Europe were finding foreign banks ready to help them commit crimes.
Members of Congress warned that the bill would gut the privacy of bank customers, choke honest commerce and hand the Treasury Secretary far too much power. They were right. It passed anyway. Richard Nixon signed the Bank Secrecy Act in October 1970, twenty months before his own men were caught breaking into the Watergate.
Treasury set the reporting line at $10,000 in 1972 and has never moved it. That is about $80,000 in today’s money after inflation, so the net drops lower every year Congress does nothing. In 1986 Congress made it a crime to keep your deposits under the line on purpose, which means the line catches you whether you cross it or not. By 1996 banks were filing suspicious activity reports on their own customers for anything over $5,000 that looked off to them. After September 11 the Patriot Act bolted eleven more sections onto the law, and last year the GENIUS Act extended the same surveillance to stablecoins.
In 2012 banks filed 1,720 suspicious activity reports for every IRS investigation that came out of them. Over the next decade the reports nearly doubled and the investigations fell by half.
Last year FinCEN ordered businesses in thirty zip codes along the southern border to report cash transactions as small as $200. One small business estimated it would go from filing nine reports a week to 50,000. A federal court in Texas found the order likely violated the Fourth Amendment and said it was like using a blunderbuss to target a fly. FinCEN answered by raising the line to $1,000 and stretching it over 126 zip codes and 3.2 million people.
In 1974 Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote in dissent that forcing a bank to photocopy your checks gives the government as much of a hand in the seizure as if it had sent someone to break into your home and copy them there. Even the justices who upheld the law warned that your financial records reveal your activities, your associations and your beliefs. Two years later, in United States v. Miller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not protect your bank records at all.
Repeal the Bank Secrecy Act.
20
144
438
24,768
Nick Anthony retweeted
Rusia 🇷🇺 | El rublo digital le da al Kremlin un "interruptor de emergencia" para reprimir la disidencia.
@EconWithNick ✍️ elcato.org/el-rublo-digit…
@EconWithNick ✍️ elcato.org/el-rublo-digit…
1
4
8
717
Lagarde has been the lead champion of the digital euro.
Will the digital euro campaign survive in her absence?
Will the digital euro campaign survive in her absence?
I have just informed my colleagues that I will step down as @ecb President on 7 February 2027.
It has been a source of great pride to serve this institution.
I thank all of those who have supported me on this journey over the past seven years.
4
4
13
2,673
@EconWithNick I think it all really hinges on the live testing next year. As she told me in Bangkok the first tests will take place in 2027 using central bank staff from a range of countries, assuming approval happens end of year. So 2029 has to be based on what happens next year.
1
0
1
17
@joshualipsky Of course, but the article says only Nagel will target 2029. I would understand if there are bumps in the road that later cause delays, but I just found it curious that 2029 seems to be implied as a nonstarter for the others right out of the gate.
0
0
0
27
@joshualipsky I found this paragraph and the closing curious. Only Nagel is framed as respecting the 2029 target, but do you think the others would actually change the date? Or is 2029 an ambitious target that only Nagel is aggressive enough to accomplish?
1
0
0
19
Nick Anthony retweeted
"in a cruel twist of irony, the policy meant to catch criminals is likely pushing people into illegal markets." p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
2
3
23
2,905
I'm leaving the ECB because I want to have freedom is a WILD take for the head of the central bank to say.
I will be leaving the @ecb in February 2027 because I want to have the freedom of speech, the freedom of expression, and the freedom to engage on matters that are not monetary policy matters.
0
1
10
346
The HRF CBDC Tracker now covers 150 jurisdictions, from Albania to Zimbabwe. Each one gets a status, a timeline, and a look at what a CBDC could mean for civil liberties there. Check it out. cbdctracker.hrf.org
1
1
6
347
I'm with you on both counts. First, I think most of us in this CBDC tracking space assumed a smooth trajectory from research to launch, with a few dropouts along the way. But instead, like you say, we get mid-trajectory pauses or complete cancellations, then sometimes restarts. When I describe the numbers in text, I always frame them as "xx [] have reached the [research/ POC/ pilot/ launch] phase" to reflect the dropouts and cancellations.
On the widening to include other "government-run" retail payment systems (e.g., Brazil's PIX, Cambodia's Bakong, and India's UPI) the amount of work is scary for me alone and I don't have an option of calling in more resources (my efforts are completely on my own time and resources). That's why I was trying to pass it on to you 😀! But I understand that you have to answer to beancounters instead, a concept I don't miss, although I do miss the deep pockets they protect!
On the widening to include other "government-run" retail payment systems (e.g., Brazil's PIX, Cambodia's Bakong, and India's UPI) the amount of work is scary for me alone and I don't have an option of calling in more resources (my efforts are completely on my own time and resources). That's why I was trying to pass it on to you 😀! But I understand that you have to answer to beancounters instead, a concept I don't miss, although I do miss the deep pockets they protect!
1
0
1
17
Nick Anthony retweeted
Are banks systematically discriminating against conservatives and Christians?
That’s what the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s new report on debanking has led many to believe.
Yet, a careful read of the report shows something else.
@EconWithNick buff.ly/EvZsoRE
That’s what the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s new report on debanking has led many to believe.
Yet, a careful read of the report shows something else.
@EconWithNick buff.ly/EvZsoRE
0
1
1
150
Nick Anthony retweeted
Nick Anthony @EconWithNick warns Russia's CBDC will silence dissent. Every regime might do that, and the EU is the next significant player to do so. Link below.
2
6
19
1,881
There is a lot of momentum behind new privacy tools for crypto these days. There is also a lot of momentum towards greater financial surveillance. Seems clear that the fight for greater privacy will be both a technical and political one.
Appreciate @EconWithNick for calling out this bit of bad policy.
Appreciate @EconWithNick for calling out this bit of bad policy.
Financial Surveillance at the Southern Border is Expanding
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
1
0
3
236
@jasonsomensatto Thank you, @jasonsomensatto! I agree. It's going to take everyone to win this one.
0
0
1
52
A big thanks goes to @NeerajKA and the @coincenter crew (tm) for inviting me to talk about financial surveillance in P2P this week.
Check out the article below and subscribe to their newsletter.
Check out the article below and subscribe to their newsletter.
Financial Surveillance at the Southern Border is Expanding
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
1
6
12
1,464
Financial Surveillance at the Southern Border is Expanding
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
8
4
21
3,523
@NeerajKA @EconWithNick What exactly is expanding at the border, and how does it affect people crossing?
1
0
1
19
Businesses that cash checks and send remittances used to have to report cash payments over $10,000. Now it's $1,000. For people who live there, that means it's more expensive to send money to family and friends abroad, they may be targeted by the government, and services are harder to get.
0
0
0
7
@NeerajKA @EconWithNick Will this increased tracking of money crossing the border violate our fundamental privacy rights
1
0
0
21
Nick Anthony retweeted
Financial Surveillance at the Southern Border is Expanding
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
A guest post by @EconWithNick
p2p.coincenter.org/p/financial-su…
8
4
21
3,523