Carrying cash thru airports

In the History channel documentary and the movie "21" they showed members of the MIT team carrying cash in their pants because they said it would show up on the carry-on x-ray scanners.

Well these days we have the Full body x-ray scanners being installed across the country and I believe that if you refuse the scan, you will get a pat-down. Anyone know if the new scanners would reveal cash? How would a high rolling individual or team get that kind of cash to the casinos in today's environment? Any ideas?

There is always the risk of an overzealous, ignorant TSA agent harassing you and/or "detaining" you for DEA or other agencies, just like an ignorant traffic officer might do. But after the embarrassment to TSA from the bad publicity over its idiotic treatment of an aide to Ron Paul over a small amount of cash, an internal policy memo was issued that TSA agents are not to harass people over cash.

That's not to say it doesn't still happen, but it is rare at major airports that serve gaming destinations. If traveling from a small airport, a boarding pass indicating a gaming destination should get you quickly sent on your way. If there is a hassle, immediately contact an attorney familiar with wrongful cash seizures and false imprisonment statutes.

As a result of the lawsuit, TSA screeners can now only conduct searches aimed at keeping firearms and explosives off of airplanes and cannot search for crimes unrelated to transportation security. The agency also told screeners that passengers carrying large sums of cash have not broken the law. The policy change came in two separate TSA policy directives, according to the ACLU. The first issued in September said that "screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security." The second directive, issued in October, said that carrying large amounts of cash is not illegal.

http://www.securitymanagement.com/news/tsa-revises-passenger-screening-policies-after-wrongfully-detaining-ron-paul-aide-006422

The legal part is only one of the dangers of carrying large amounts of cash. For most of us that are not playing extremely high stakes or involved in team concept, it seems like a very unnecessary risk to me. I say deal with one of the national or even regional banks such as Bank of America, US bank, wells fargo ect and just deposit your money where ever you are and withdrawl once in Vegas or AC or whatever destination you are going to. Let them carry the load for you. :-)

Good info Bear, glad to see the TSA is just focused on terror. I know its legal, and also wondered why the MIT team didn't open a bank account locally rather than the risk/hassle of carrying the cash. At the time, maybe interstate banking wasn't available? Don't remember when they opened that up. Regardless, it would probably be difficult to walk into a branch and ask for say, $50,000+ on demand. I think they were carrying 250k at times.

"wondered why the MIT team didn't open a bank account locally"

It's not easy to get $100 000 in cash from a bank when you get to Vegas at 9pm on Friday nights. Not much easier to put it back into the bank account at 9pm the next Sunday night upon leaving...

...to create a paper trail for the IRS to follow.

You can carry cash into the USA from a foreign country. When entering the USA there is a decelaration form to be filled out. If you are bringing in any amount over 10K then you are by law required declare it. If you take out of the USA any amount over 10k then you by law required to declare it. Whatever you take out you can bring back in. If you bring in more than you take out then you are required to declare it. In my travel experiences I have never had any problems with that. No inquiries No heat.

http://www.fincen.gov/forms/files/fin105_cmir.pdf

Gambler may get back most of winnings seized at border
George Hunter and Robert Snell / The Detroit News

Detroit � A man who lost his Windsor Casino winnings to federal agents after he tried to re-enter the United States on Monday without properly declaring his winnings may be in luck after all.

Federal officials said Thursday that the Birmingham high-roller could get most of his $19,901 winnings back since he obtained the cash legally.

Advertisement

The man, who was not identified, will have to pay a fine, said Ronald G. Smith, chief Customs and Border Protection Officer at the agency's Detroit Field Office.

Officers seized the cash at about 11 p.m. Monday, when two unidentified Birmingham men attempted to enter the United States via the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel. When the men were stopped at the border, they tried to circumvent a rule requiring travelers to declare if they are carrying more than $10,000 in cash. The rule is in place so that officials can verify the money's source and to block the flow of illegal cash.

The car's driver had $9,400 while the passenger had $9,500, federal officials said. The men told customs officers they each had taken $4,000 in cash to the casino and were returning with their winnings.

ghunter@detnews.com

...if neither had $10K?

Seems to me neither violated the law nor were required to report.

They admitted to structuring to avoid filing a report.

Last Updated: November 04. 2010 1:02PM
Casino winner's cash seized at border
Birmingham man's gamble to conceal $19,901 from Windsor casino puts an end to his luck
Robert Snell / The Detroit News

A big winner at a Windsor casino turned out to be a big loser after lying to border officers about the cash.

Officers seized $19,901 in cash Monday from two unidentified Birmingham men who attempted to enter the United States via the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel after a night of gambling at the Caesars Windsor casino.

Advertisement

When the men were stopped at the border at 11 p.m. Monday, they tried to dodge a rule requiring people to declare if they are carrying more than $10,000 in cash, which is used to verify the money's source and to block the flow of illegal cash. The car's driver had $9,400 while the passenger had $9,500, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The men told officers they had taken $4,000 in cash to the casino and were returning with their winnings. But the passenger became nervous as officers started counting his money.

The man admitted he had lost money at the casino and that the $9,500 belonged to the driver.

The driver admitted winning $40,000 at the casino and said he had deposited $20,000 at the casino and split the balance with his buddy to avoid the $10,000 reporting requirement, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

"It is not illegal to carry money into or out of the country," Port Director Roderick Blanchard said in a prepared statement. "It is required that you give an accurate declaration of the amount of money you are carrying. Anyone carrying or causing to be carried in excess of $10,000 dollars must fill out the appropriate paperwork when entering or leaving the country."

Officers seized the cash, which is the penalty for trying to dodge the $10,000 reporting requirement.

...deny, deny, deny rule.

"I deny it,
You can't prove it,
That's my story,
and I'm sticking to it."

--Bart Simpson

Almost every AP I know pays their taxes. The big issues for keeping and using cash have to do with identity protection, inconvenient bank hours, and the sheer scale of the amount of cash often required for high stakes play. Several teams do have safe deposit boxes scattered around the country to hold funds as players go in and out of a market while a certain play is active.

I seem to remember a paper bag with >$200,000 cash being misplaced as part of that story.

Also, my impression is that the real money was being made by the "investors" and the professor -- and the players were simply, in effect, wage-earners. Yet, on the surface, the assumption would be that the tax liability would be theirs -- IOW, guilty unless they could prove themselves innocent.

In the absence of any documents proving to the IRS that the players were merely employees, those actually getting the money could claim what they got was simply a gift, leaving the players liable for gift taxes on top of income taxes.

And who would have been deemed to have received the "income" in the form of comps?

Importantly, would the IRS have considered the players self-employed contractors or statuatory employees? After all, they were working at their employers' direction, using the employers' money, with their room & board paid with employers' money. Should the investors have been withholding taxes, SS & Medicare?

I would be very interested to see the contract between the players and the investor group.

the players were probably considered independent contractors to the investors. Self-Employed people pay SE tax on their own. Whether the MIT team should have sent 1099-Misc forms to each player and investor(maybe they did) is an issue between them and the IRS. Most teams are informal arrangements between friends for periods of as short as a weekend and sometimes long term. The beauty of table games is that there is no other paper trail to account for when doing taxes therefore each player just reports as though they were a single individual player. While some players are still active, the very large teams with 20 or 30 players of the 1990's and 2000's (MIT, Greeks, Hyland) just don't exist anymore. The teams out there now play as individual players to a joint bank.

but the guy who was holding cash for his friend was being put in a position of committing a felony by lying to a federal officer. (a crime itself). His friend should not have put him in that position. He should have just brought all the money back and reported it.

In the case of the MIT team, they did have a written agreement (which I would LOVE to see), but the players had all the tax exposure. Who won the money? Who got the comps? Who got the benefit of room and board paid for by the investors' money?

I still say a STRONG case can be made they were statutory employees because: 1) they were using their employer's money; (2) they were working at their employer's direction; (3) they were in accomodations (room & board) provided by the employer; and (4) they were not offering their services to the general market place but solely to the employer. As far as the IRS is concerned, this last point is proof they are not in business for themselves (i.e., NOT independent contractors).

Therefore, I believe the IRS could have ignored any written agreement there may have been and simply ruled they were statutory employees. This would have had very adverse implications to the whole business relationship between players and investors, and resulted in major tax problems, not the least of which would be timely deposits of withheld taxes and the severe penalties for not doing so.