SouthernBelle
#Feyonce
Yes, it is her business.
Meanwhile banks complying with federal law while making money on the money sitting with them is their business. She wants to spend that money she needs to help the bank by complying as well. Then she can do whatever the fukk she wants.
This story is her fukk up, not the bank's.
Considering that the bank told her after the initial hold that she could withdraw as she pleased after they verify it's origins, then I say it's the banks fukk up as well. Additionally, the only thing I have maintained was that race and class were among the variables that made her suspicious. Clearly, I wasn't wrong because many of you have called that woman everything but a child of God because of what? Her race and class. Y'all are probably doing the same thing that the bank teller did.
Additionally, that law regarding structured withdrawals (modified in 2014) states that withdrawing or depositing less than 10k isn't a crime in and of itself. And while intentionally structuring deposits/withdraws IS still a crime (there is ZERO indication that she was intentionally withdrawing small amounts to avoid reporting), the IRS will ONLY pursue the case if it's linked to illegal activity (that is why multiple business owners cited in a article posted in this very thread are getting their seized money back...even after signing paperwork saying that they would wouldn't try to seek the money in the future). Yes, it may still be reported, but the IJ specifically fought against people's money being seized SOLELY because of the amounts of the cash deposits and withdrawals. Finally, it wasn't the IRS that seized her money. It was the bank that froze her account. Based on everything I've read, the bank should have reported her and the IRS would have investigated as they deemed necessary.
She didn't do anything illegal that we know of at this point. Again, spending your money frivolously is stupid but it's not illegal (if you aren't actually spending it on illegal things).
Last edited: