If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Post)   Some Guy: "I calculate that my cash-on-hand falls well below the $10,000 threshold." Border Gestapo: :: Clikka-clikka :: "Nope. Sorry, Citizen. We are, however, grateful for the much-needed boost to Stephen Harper's Sweater Vest Fund"   ( news.nationalpost.com) divider line
    More: Stupid, Bank of Canada, detector dog, exchange rates, borders, Pearson International Airport, Federal Court of Appeal  
•       •       •

14913 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2013 at 6:31 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

152 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

2013-04-05 06:09:33 PM  
Also the monetary declaration at the 10K mark is because 10K is a large enough cash figure to be economically relevant for statistical purposes without affecting the general populace, just rare cases.

It would be uneconomical to have a paper trail for the 40c in someone's pocket, as well as considerably slow processing times in already congested airports. 10K+ on the other hand would be a reasonable line to draw for both tracking the flow of cash (FDI, Foreign Reserves, Money Flowing in and out) as it would barely inconvenience the populace as it's a very select few affected as well as being a reasonable value to be economically relevant.

Money flowing electronically are automatically recorded for this purpose, it's not taxed but small fees are charged by the banks themselves for the service thus declarations are not necessary.
2013-04-06 01:54:12 AM  

dready zim: mightybaldking: He smuggled in over 10k in cash, and did not declare it. The money was seized for that crime.

How about no.

The money was seized because it was assumed to be the proceeds of crime and not the crime of taking it across the border.

The crime that the money was assumed to be the proceeds of was not stated and the only proof of that crime was the existence of the money.

Either you should have to declare ALL money when passing a border or if there is a limit there should be no punishment for trying to be under it.

All of you saying he deserved this deserve the KGB to break down your door and `disappear` you because they assumed you were guilty of an unspecified crime because it is the same logical standpoint, being that the government can just do what it wants because `terrorists or something and just shut up`.

Why don`t you just give the government your front door key while you are at it? If you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear from officials just walking into your home and rifling through your stuff...

land of the free my arse.

He should have just declared it. That was the crime, he didn't declare it.,

By the way, this happened in Canada.
Displayed 2 of 152 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.