It's hard to believe that this can happen, but the IRS can sieze all of the money in your bank account, even if no crime has been committed. Here are two links regarding the same story.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/...ring-laws/
http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/11/the-ir...t-it-back/
Long story short, the IRS along with other agencies of government decided to seize the funds from a small business owner's bank account. The reason? A history of making several deposits of less than $10k. From one of the articles linked above.
Quote:
The IRS agents apparently were suspicious because of deposits McLellan had made of just under $10,000. Banks are required to report transactions over $10,000; making multiple deposits of less than $10,000 to evade that requirement is known as "structuring."
Hmm... the owner of a convenience store/gas station making several deposits of under $10,000. That sounds like criminal activity. :unsure:
Quote:
McLellan is one of many business owners who have been caught up in a controversial federal practice known as civil forfeiture. Under this policy, federal agents have been able to seize the property and bank accounts of anyone they suspect of having criminal ties. The burden of proof falls on the owner even if no charges are filed.
That sounds more like communism to me. Unfortunately, "innocent until proven guilty" only applies in criminal cases not civil cases. The only "evidence" that the feds have are deposits into a business account. I haven't seen anything where receipts from his business were looked at.
Here is the other shocking thing from the story.
Quote:
Civil asset forfeiture is a procedure that allows law enforcement to seize property if it’s suspected of being related to a crime. The practice began decades ago with good intentions.
However, law enforcement agencies have been using civil asset forfeiture to seize property and money for profit.
Quote:Johnson also noted that the IRS frequently teams up with local law enforcement to look through suspicious activity reports. By seizing property and money through the Department of Justice’s Equitable Sharing Program, law enforcement agencies share the proceeds of the forfeiture.
Oh I'm all about abolishing the IRS
Quote:Oh I'm all about abolishing the IRS
LOL. That's where I know that you and I share the same idea, that being The Fair Tax.
When I first caught the story from a link on Drudge, I kind of wondered about it. Then I went to FOX News, and saw the story there. That piqued my interest so I did some more research on it. The story of the federal government (IRS) seizing this man's money is actually true.
This isn't an IRS issue. This is a civil forfeiture issue.
Quote:This isn't an IRS issue. This is a civil forfeiture issue.
I beg to differ. Read the articles that I linked to.
Quote:
“The IRS deputizes these local law enforcement officers to go through suspicious activity reports and to identify cases where people are subject to forfeiture,” Johnson said. “So you have somebody who is not a federal official and yet is deputized to be enforcing federal law.”
In McLellan’s case, an affidavit was completed by a North Carolina law enforcement official, which indicated to Johnson that it was a state official likely combing through these suspicious activity reports who flagged the Fairmont convenience store, he said.
“The government has a financial incentive to broadly apply the forfeiture laws,” Johnson said. “When an agency like the IRS takes money under the forfeiture laws, that money goes back into the pockets of the agency and it’s available to the IRS to fund law enforcement activities without appropriation from Congress. It’s a powerful incentive for law enforcement to abuse civil forfeiture laws.”
It's about the power of the IRS to circumvent funding from Congress and grab money from innocent people. The forfeiture laws were intended to catch illegal activity (drug money, etc.). Instead it is being used to pretty much confiscate legally earned money from small businesses. When a protest or challenge is made, they will usually offer to give back 50% of the confiscated money. Many people will do this to avoid costly fees associated with taking it to court.
Quote:I beg to differ. Read the articles that I linked to.
It's about the power of the IRS to circumvent funding from Congress and grab money from innocent people. The forfeiture laws were intended to catch illegal activity (drug money, etc.). Instead it is being used to pretty much confiscate legally earned money from small businesses. When a protest or challenge is made, they will usually offer to give back 50% of the confiscated money. Many people will do this to avoid costly fees associated with taking it to court.
If this is a reason to, as you say, "abolish the IRS", you might as well abolish every single law enforcement agency in the country, be it local, state or federal. Because they are all using civil forfeiture laws to take money and property under the suspicion of criminal activity.
Civil asset forfeiture is a crime against the citizenry for which the government should've already been toppled. Those [BAD WORD REMOVED] deserve nothing short of the death penalty for their blatant disregard for the rights of the people. They have as at each other's throats for all kinds of foolishness while they quietly go about the business of confiscating our rights one by one.
Quote:Civil asset forfeiture is a crime against the citizenry for which the government should've already been toppled. Those [BAD WORD REMOVED] deserve nothing short of the death penalty for their blatant disregard for the rights of the people. They have as at each other's throats for all kinds of foolishness while they quietly go about the business of confiscating our rights one by one.
Your reactionary and over bearing punishment aside, this is one area we can agree on.
Oh lord bunker time boudreaumw and flsprt have agreed on something truly the end is near!
I don't understand what irregular rectal skewers have to do with anything..
To avoid being put on a list, I personally think the IRS are doing an upstanding job.
Quote:Oh lord bunker time boudreaumw and flsprt have agreed on something truly the end is near!
The end times are near for sure!
Quote:It's both. The idea was for the Drug Enforcement and Organized Crime agencies around the country to have a weapon against drug trafficking. It was never intended for the IRS or other federal agencies.
But I agree with you, the RICO act in the 1980s (Reagan with Dem congress) opened the door for this activity, and numerous police departments (ahem ...Volusia County ... ahem) abuse it in search of additional funding.
are you saying its OK for one angency to use it because drugs and alcohol but not others or that its wrong in general?
Quote:The end times are near for sure!
Tin foil hats and bazookas at the ready
Quote:are you saying its OK for one angency to use it because drugs and alcohol but not others or that its wrong in general?
He's more pointing out how government always goes a step further then they first announce their intentions to be. That said I'm pretty sure much like my self malabarjag opposes them doing it in the first place.