Or better yet, outsourced to the experts (whom are appointed by the state) who may decide whether us ordinary yokel should get those pesky privileges in the first place!
This is common in banking all over the world. Governments usually force the banks to ask, supposedly to help combat terrorism and money laundering. Almost all large western linked banks follow the same protocols, though more local/regional only with limited national/global footprint banks may not.
The banks aren't asking why in order to deny you access to your money, the banks are asking you why to see if they need to file a report to the government on a suspicious transaction. The bank will not inform you if they are filing a report to the government and in fact informing you is against the law, typically.
This is so the government can check up on you to see if you're doing anything you aren't supposed to be.
If you refuse to give a reason, they may just report you to the government also.
Just say you're heading to the casino with some friends and you're going to play some high stakes poker. It's not something that's deemed culturally "good" but it's a legitimate reason for needing a large sum of cash.
If you're withdrawing over $10,000 in cash, it doesn't matter what your reason is, it's automatically reported to the government and has been for years.
Governments usually force the banks to ask, supposedly to help combat terrorism and money laundering.
If governments gave a fuck about money laundering and terrorism, they wouldn't spend so much money supporting both. Fundamentally, it's about denying the ability to move outside of the financial or currency system. They want your money tracked to control you: simple as.
It's like the ATF saying they are enforcing some gun policy to make sure dogs don't get shot.
If governments gave a fuck about money laundering and terrorism, they wouldn't spend so much money supporting both.
That's because you're missing the quiet part. They care about combating terrorism and money laundering that you might engage in. It's about fighting against competition, not about a principled stance.
In the US they only ask if it's a large amount. As u/RaceCreatesCulture pointed out, they have to report transactions over $10K and anything suspicious to the government. $6K AUD in the video is like $3K USD, my bank wouldn't bat an eye at that amount.
On the flipside, banks have gotten a lot better at intercepting old people that are being scammed. When granny goes in asking for a $30K cashiers check they're going to make sure it's not a scammer. If granny says it's to pay the IRS or any of the shit the scammers use, the bank will stop it right there. That's preferable to letting her just get ripped off for her life's savings IMO.
At the same time, it should not be the bank's job to ensure granny doesn't get scammed. I'd rather bankers and the government be out of people's privacy and then granny gets scammed rather than the other way around.
And although, bankers likely wouldn't bat an eye at a $3000 USD withdrawal, they are encouraged to still report anything suspicious so if you come into the bank with a dude and a camera shouting about ex girlfriend's boyfriends you need to give money to, they might inquire and write a report even if all you were withdrawing was $300.
Yes it is. Banks leverage granny's 30k to get loans and investments to make the bank money. It is literally their business to make sure granny isn't losing 30k to scammers because the bank loses lending and investing power.
By that logic though, almost anything could be argued. Why is your medical information private? Insurance companies would benefit from having full access to medical data of everyone so they can insure based on your medical history. Guess that information should be made public to everyone.
I agree that banks have a motive to keep your funds at their bank but the government shouldn't have regulations forcing banks to ask about your money. It shouldn't be the government's business to force banks in my opinion.
The government mandate wouldn't stop a bank asking Granny why she's withdrawing 30k when she hasn't withdrawn any significant sum of cash, ever. The government mandate just makes the bank tell them about it.
Wrong because without the government mandate, there would be banks, credit unions or the like who differentiated themselves from others by giving you complete privacy by not asking.
My brother in christ. The bank is going to ask about suspicious activity. It is private when one party speaks to another party, it ceases to be private when one of those parties is forced to tell the public entity that is the government about it.
You're an absolute fool if you don't want your bank to at least double check with you that you're not getting scammed.
No, actually I don't want my bank double checking into anything. Clearly you work for a bank or the government regulator. I can tell you from experience (I work at a bank) that no one appreciates the bank being inquisitive into their business not even the people getting scammed.
You know what granny can do? Live with her family who can tell when she's being scammed. If she sent them off to school and work while she hoarded wealth, let her get scammed.
Don't forget the IRS has been trying to alter policies so you are required to record all transfers over $600, including from your savings to your checking.
This isn't really a new thing. It's been like this for a while (I wanna say I can remember this for around 10 years maybe? I dunno specifically) and for full transparency, this is only in regards to "large" withdrawals that are done specifically at a teller window (rather than anything that can be done at a standard ATM). That doesn't make it right, or any better, but full transparency is better than part of the picture.
Australia is the most fascist country on the fsce of the earth the moment they jumped ontonthose lockdown they had the moment they needed to seize unconditional power.
In Australia, you can buy a house with cash and no-one gives a shit. Why because lawyers and realestate agent's are exempt from money laundering legislation.
Repressive tolerance in action, the real criminals are enabled by the government, while ordinary citizens are fucked over.
Slowly?
Joke's on you, I'm European. My rights aren't being stolen at all, because I have none to begin with.
Or better yet, outsourced to the experts (whom are appointed by the state) who may decide whether us ordinary yokel should get those pesky privileges in the first place!
Was going to say, the misconception here is that Australians have rights.
This is common in banking all over the world. Governments usually force the banks to ask, supposedly to help combat terrorism and money laundering. Almost all large western linked banks follow the same protocols, though more local/regional only with limited national/global footprint banks may not.
The banks aren't asking why in order to deny you access to your money, the banks are asking you why to see if they need to file a report to the government on a suspicious transaction. The bank will not inform you if they are filing a report to the government and in fact informing you is against the law, typically.
This is so the government can check up on you to see if you're doing anything you aren't supposed to be.
If you refuse to give a reason, they may just report you to the government also.
Just say you're heading to the casino with some friends and you're going to play some high stakes poker. It's not something that's deemed culturally "good" but it's a legitimate reason for needing a large sum of cash.
If you're withdrawing over $10,000 in cash, it doesn't matter what your reason is, it's automatically reported to the government and has been for years.
It's also a felony to make smaller transactions totaling > $10k with the intent to avoid reporting regulations.
Last year I withdrew my entire account (over $50,000) in $3,000 increments. The reason I gave was "fuck banks".
This. It's the same as airports. More than $10K and you get reported.
If governments gave a fuck about money laundering and terrorism, they wouldn't spend so much money supporting both. Fundamentally, it's about denying the ability to move outside of the financial or currency system. They want your money tracked to control you: simple as.
It's like the ATF saying they are enforcing some gun policy to make sure dogs don't get shot.
That's because you're missing the quiet part. They care about combating terrorism and money laundering that you might engage in. It's about fighting against competition, not about a principled stance.
I tell them i am buying crack everytime they ask.
Some laugh some don't.
They didn't do anything like this in COMECON countries, btw.
In the US they only ask if it's a large amount. As u/RaceCreatesCulture pointed out, they have to report transactions over $10K and anything suspicious to the government. $6K AUD in the video is like $3K USD, my bank wouldn't bat an eye at that amount.
On the flipside, banks have gotten a lot better at intercepting old people that are being scammed. When granny goes in asking for a $30K cashiers check they're going to make sure it's not a scammer. If granny says it's to pay the IRS or any of the shit the scammers use, the bank will stop it right there. That's preferable to letting her just get ripped off for her life's savings IMO.
At the same time, it should not be the bank's job to ensure granny doesn't get scammed. I'd rather bankers and the government be out of people's privacy and then granny gets scammed rather than the other way around.
And although, bankers likely wouldn't bat an eye at a $3000 USD withdrawal, they are encouraged to still report anything suspicious so if you come into the bank with a dude and a camera shouting about ex girlfriend's boyfriends you need to give money to, they might inquire and write a report even if all you were withdrawing was $300.
Yes it is. Banks leverage granny's 30k to get loans and investments to make the bank money. It is literally their business to make sure granny isn't losing 30k to scammers because the bank loses lending and investing power.
By that logic though, almost anything could be argued. Why is your medical information private? Insurance companies would benefit from having full access to medical data of everyone so they can insure based on your medical history. Guess that information should be made public to everyone.
I agree that banks have a motive to keep your funds at their bank but the government shouldn't have regulations forcing banks to ask about your money. It shouldn't be the government's business to force banks in my opinion.
The government mandate wouldn't stop a bank asking Granny why she's withdrawing 30k when she hasn't withdrawn any significant sum of cash, ever. The government mandate just makes the bank tell them about it.
Wrong because without the government mandate, there would be banks, credit unions or the like who differentiated themselves from others by giving you complete privacy by not asking.
My brother in christ. The bank is going to ask about suspicious activity. It is private when one party speaks to another party, it ceases to be private when one of those parties is forced to tell the public entity that is the government about it.
You're an absolute fool if you don't want your bank to at least double check with you that you're not getting scammed.
No, actually I don't want my bank double checking into anything. Clearly you work for a bank or the government regulator. I can tell you from experience (I work at a bank) that no one appreciates the bank being inquisitive into their business not even the people getting scammed.
I love my grandparents. A scammer told me they had picked me up in Mexico and were holding me for ransom. Grandpa told 'em to fuck right off.
Fuck granny.
You know what granny can do? Live with her family who can tell when she's being scammed. If she sent them off to school and work while she hoarded wealth, let her get scammed.
For now.
Don't forget the IRS has been trying to alter policies so you are required to record all transfers over $600, including from your savings to your checking.
Banker: "Sir, why are you taking out cash?"
Me: "Well, uh, now it's because you fucking asked me that."
oh because I'm antisemitic
This isn't really a new thing. It's been like this for a while (I wanna say I can remember this for around 10 years maybe? I dunno specifically) and for full transparency, this is only in regards to "large" withdrawals that are done specifically at a teller window (rather than anything that can be done at a standard ATM). That doesn't make it right, or any better, but full transparency is better than part of the picture.
Australia is the most fascist country on the fsce of the earth the moment they jumped ontonthose lockdown they had the moment they needed to seize unconditional power.
Always remember that not all Australians are descendants of prisoners. Some are descendants of prison guards.
It may even be outdoing their point of origin, England, which has become totalitarian.
In Australia, you can buy a house with cash and no-one gives a shit. Why because lawyers and realestate agent's are exempt from money laundering legislation.
Repressive tolerance in action, the real criminals are enabled by the government, while ordinary citizens are fucked over.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-03/afp-money-laundering-bust-highlights-real-estate-vulnerability/101923160
Banks will do this to you all the time with larger sums. Particularly if you start hitting that $10,000 line in the US. They'll interrogate you.
They did it to me without my hitting the 10,000 mark
I thought it was for 10 grand and over, didn't realise it was for such small amounts these days.
Love the bullshit answers too.