War on Cash = War on Privacy, Individual Sovereignty

When Carole Hinders found out the Internal Revenue Service seized roughly $33,000 from her checking account in August of 2013, it took her completely by surprise.

“Who takes your money before they prove that you’ve done anything wrong with it?” she asked.

Hinders ran a Mexican restaurant for over 35 years in Northwest Iowa and regularly put the cash-only eatery’s earnings into a local bank account. Until she learned the IRS had seized nearly $33,000 without charging her with a crime, obtaining a court order or even claiming it was to reconcile a tax bill.

take our poll - story continues below

What is your top alternative to Facebook? - FIXED

  • What is your top alternative to Facebook?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Liberal Students Throw Tantrum when Biologist says Men and Women are Different          

Instead, the event that triggered the seizure was based on the individual amounts of cash she deposited. The government declared that any cash deposit over $10,000 should be reported by the bank to the IRS. Hinders had not gone over the threshold, but even that drew suspicion.

Hinders’ ‘mistake’ was — whether intentional or not — making deposits just under the reporting threshold (like $9,785).

“Government overreach has been a growing problem in the United States,” said Adele Weiss, principal of Weiss+Associates, a European-based financial freedom consultancy which has helped thousands of American Nationals with tax and other issues regarding individual sovereignty. “As the National Government nears bankruptcy, it will turn to unlawful methods of stealing money from the very people they are paid to protect.”

The process of civil asset forfeiture is another battle in the war on cash, as governments worldwide are losing control of the financial systems they’ve corrupted and are using desperate measures to keep the upper hand on its citizens.

Yes, cash is an inherently flawed form of money. It’s not really even money at all — it’s currency, as it lacks the all-important aspect of value storage. But one positive of cash lies in its anonymity. Weiss added,

“Remember what George Washington said about government being like fire: it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. You can bet, if the government had its way, citizens would not be able to buy a loaf of bread without governmental approval.”

As the U.S. federal government nears insolvency, it is assured that its intended “servant role” will vanish and the master role will flex its muscle. Weiss remarked,

“Currency controls are coming to the United States. They have already begun the process, as many banks are limiting international wire transfers to less than $50,000. This is just the first chapter of many attempts to make sure citizens are stuck using a devalued currency without the option of protecting themselves internationally.”

As we approach increasingly perilous times, citizens can expect wild government antics to increase, as well as deception and wickedness. The more these governments make assessments (which will benefit their power and influence while at the same time weakening those of the citizenry), the more ‘We The People’ have to consider doing the opposite of what the government promotes. Those in power say it’s legal (a term referring to statutory law), but it’s clearly unlawful (a term different from ‘legal’, referring instead to constitutional law), as it denies due process. Weiss added,

“The government is doing a lot of saber-rattling about foreign bank accounts and passports. This emphasizes the increased need to consider international business corporations (IBCs), foreign bank accounts and trusts as a way to protect that which you’ve worked years to accumulate.”

The federal government has been successful working the press into painting these activities as illicit. The fact remains: obtaining a foreign bank account is completely lawful. It’s not about hiding assets, but more about a sovereign individual maintaining control and flexibility of their private property in a changing world.

Weiss stated, “We have recently made a new discovery about the limited application of FATCA that foreign financial institutions are not aware of and are utilizing this to assist Americans who desire to bank internationally without FATCA restrictions.”

Make no mistake, as capital controls expand, it will likely become reality that these activities will be banned in the future. So the time is now to think internationally, while doing so has the least amount of restrictions.

In the meantime, we can expect more government overreach, as your cash — a symbol of privacy and sovereignty — is directly in their crosshairs.

In Sweden, it is projected that within the next 15 years, there will be only digital currency and no form of paper currency. Every purchase will be tracked and monitored for a variety of “beneficial purposes,” to be proclaimed by governments.

Once everything is digital, governments will find it much easier to take money out of one’s bank account by simply reducing the digital number in one’s account and transferring it to the government. Some may welcome digital-only cash as a convenience, but also fail to take into account that it is a convenient form of government control. It becomes very easy to harass pro-liberty citizens. The government can can just freeze a citizen’s account or turn off a citizen’s technological blueprint, essentially causing the citizen to cease to exist, in a digital sense.

It’s paramount for sovereign citizens to be aware of the difference between “legal” (statutory) and “lawful” (constitutional), which are terms relating to jurisdiction. All laws are applicable only within its own defined boundaries; relative to the federal government, statutory refers to those in the District of Columbia and insular territories. Constitutional laws extend into the 50 states of the Union.

Those in D.C./territories are subjects to the exclusive jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress, with no unalienable rights. To this group of people, due process and unreasonable search and seizure are mere fantasies. The U.S. Congress can do pretty much what it wants to their subjects, including theft.

This epidemic is spreading, and now law enforcement is getting involved in the heist. State police are seizing cash from motorists who are not charged with a crime nor even given a traffic citation. It was recently reported that a Nevada sheriff’s deputy stopped a motorist, and after claiming he smelled marijuana, asked to search the car. He found no drugs but rather a briefcase containing $50,000 in cash. The driver said he had won it at a casino.

The driver was not charged with any wrongdoing, but the deputy took all of his cash. When the driver protested, the deputy reportedly instructed the driver that his car would be towed unless he “got in his car and drove off and forgot this ever happened.”

We can expect more of these sorts of incidents as the United States turns more into a totalitarian state with each passing day. Protect yourself accordingly.

To learn more about the benefits of asset protection and investment diversity, click here and schedule a consultation.


Patrick Vermeister

Patrick Vermeister is a communications professional, privacy advocate, and partner at Weiss+Associates, located in Paris, France. His published work covers topics ranging from economics, banking, taxation, individual sovereignty, and sports. Weiss+Associates, founded by Adele Weiss, over 25 years ago, are Financial Freedom Consultants who specialize in the U.S. Federal Income Tax, constitutional tax law, and Americans' voluntary election into the U.S. Tax Club.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.