Structuring $10,000 to Evade Reporting

If your money was seized because you failed to properly declare the amount on the FinCEN Form 105 to a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent, a civil asset forfeiture attorney can help you file a claim for court action to get the money back. Our civil asset forfeiture attorneys can help you assert a claim that the seizure violates the excessive fines provision of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or other defenses.

An attorney can help you file a verified claim for court action demanding the immediate return of the currency. Filing the verified claim starts the clock on a 90-day deadline. During those 90 days, the federal agency that seized the money must turn the case over to the United States Attorney’s Office. After the referral, an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) in the civil asset forfeiture unit will be assigned to the case.

The AUSA must decide whether to return the money or file a complaint for forfeiture in the district court. If the complaint for forfeiture is not filed within the 90-day period, then CBP must return 100% of the seized funds.

You need an attorney to help you during this process by either:

• negotiating the best possible settlement agreement with a CBP attorney at the Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel where the seizure occurred; or
• convince the Assistant United States Attorney not to file a complaint for forfeiture in the district court so that CBP is required to return all of the funds; and
• protect you against any criminal prosecution for intentionally structuring to evade the reporting requirement.

Others might suggest you waive all your rights to court action by filing a petition for remission or mitigation, but we can explain why those options might cause a longer delay or result in the loss of all funds.

Attorney for Structuring to Evade Reporting $10,000 at the Airport

If a federal agent with HSI or CBP alleged that you and another person carried more than $10,000 on an international flight after structuring the money to evade the reporting requirement under Title 31, United States Code, Section 5324 or the FinCEN 105 form, then contact us today.

We can help you show that the currency was not involved in a violation of so-called “structuring” laws and is, therefore, not subject to forfeiture. To establish a violation of the structuring laws, the government must prove that the currency being moved into or out of the United States or otherwise transported in a way intended to evade bank reporting requirements. See 31 U.S.C. § 5324. 

We understand the rules when the government alleges that two travelers knowingly divided the U.S. currency between themselves so that each was transporting less than $10,000 from inside the United States to outside the United States (or vice versa).

Our lawyers can help you fight allegations of intentionally attempting to evade the currency reporting requirement of Title 31, United States Code, Section 5316. Our civil asset forfeiture lawyers can help you file a claim showing the seizure violated the excessive fines provision of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

We also collaborate with other attorneys fighting similar battles throughout the busiest airports in the United States. Attorneys contact us to co-counsel with them on their case. No matter where the U.S. Currency was seized, contact attorney Leslie Sammis to discuss the best way to fight the forfeiture action.

Call 813-250-0500 today.

Complaint for Forfeiture in Structuring to Evade Cases

If the AUSA decides to file a VERIFIED COMPLAINT OF FORFEITURE IN REM, the complaint is a civil action initiated in the appropriate district court. The Court has jurisdiction over the matter under Title 28, United States Code, Sections 1345 and 1355.

Most cash seizures before an international flight involve an allegation that the currency seized is forfeitable because it is involved in a currency reporting violation under Title 31 United States Code, Section 5316 since the traveler failed to file a currency and monetary instrument report as required by Title 31, United States Code, Section 5317(c)(2).

In addition to failing to file the currency report, FinCEN Form 105, the AUSA might allege structuring to evade the reporting requirement.

Structuring to Evade Reporting Requirement – Section 5316

The government might also allege that the currency seized is also forfeitable because of structuring to evade the reporting requirement under Title 31, United States Code, Section 5324, since the travelers did, with the intent to avoid the currency reporting requirement of Title 31, United States Code, Section 5316, knowingly divided the defendant currency between themselves so that each was transporting less than $10,000 from a place inside the United States to a place outside of the United States (or vice versa).

Most allegations involve two or more persons traveling together at an airport in the United States preparing to take an international flight. Before boarding the flight, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is trained to present the travelers with a copy of the following documents:

• the FinCEN Form 105;
• a CBP Form 503;
• outbound currency reporting questionnaires;
• a Supplemental Form 503 that explains the Federal requirement to declare all outbound United States currency in excess of $10,000.00.

The questionnaire asks whether the traveler is carrying currency or monetary instruments over $10,000 in United States currency, whether the traveler is traveling alone, and whether the traveler checked any baggage.

The questionnaire asks these questions:

• “Are you transporting more than $10,000 in monetary instruments for yourself and/or someone else?”
• “Are you transporting any packages or money given to you or for someone else?”

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Officers will consult with the airline to determine whether any bags were checked or the traveler had any traveling companion.

The CBP officers will then search the travelers and seize any currency they find if the total amount being carried is in excess of $10,000. The form requires the traveler to acknowledge understanding of the reporting requirements as stated on the CP 503. CBP usually questions the travelers to determine the following:

• who the money belonged to;
• how it was earned;
• why it was being transported and its intended purpose;
• whether the travelers knew each other; and
• whether they lied or made false statements to evade the reporting requirements.

If one traveler files a REQUEST FOR REMISSION OR MITIGATION OF FORFEITURE that claims ownership of more than $10,000, that statement can be used against him when the complaint is filed.

In these cases, the AUSA might file a complaint claiming that the defendant U.S. currency is forfeitable under Title 31, United States Code, Section 5317( c )(2), as it represents currency or property involved in a currency reporting violation under Title 31 United States Code, Section 5316 (often called “the Seizure of Unreported Currency – FinCEN 105“).

The complaint might also allege that the currency is forfeitable under Title 31, United States Code, Section 5324, since the travelers structured the U.S. Currency with the intent to evade the currency reporting requirement of Title 31, United States Code, Section 5316, by knowingly dividing it before the international flight.

The complaint will request relief in accordance with provisions of Rule C (3), Supplemental Rules of Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims. In the civil lawsuit, the AUSA will request that any person or persons having any interest in the U.S. Currency be cited and directed to answer this complaint as required by Title 18, United States Code, Section 983(a)(4)(A).

The AUSA also requests in the lawsuit that the Court decree the condemnation and forfeiture of the defendant’s currency to the United States.

“Smurfing” to Avoid the Reporting Requirements

The term “smurfing” refers to the process of structuring large pools of illicit money into amounts below $10,000 and either depositing the money into bank accounts or purchasing bank checks or money orders to evade the currency reporting requirements. See Israel Reyes Florida’s Anti-Money Laundering Statutes, The Florida Bar Journal, July/August 1999. Under federal law, 31 U.S.C. 5324 prohibits “smurfing” by structuring transactions with a financial institution to avoid a reporting requirement.

Don’t let the U.S. Government take your money. Fight to protect your rights. Hire an attorney to help you immediately file a verified claim and represent you in court if the money is not returned quickly.

This article was last updated on Wednesday, November 27, 2024.