←back to thread

693 points hienyimba | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.266s | source
Show context
avvt4avaw ◴[] No.28523479[source]
Buddy, your business is selling "privacy cards" and "virtual cards" which hide the identity of the person making the transaction.

It's a massive money laundering red flag, it's not at all surprising that Stripe doesn't want to deal with you.

replies(2): >>28523661 #>>28523831 #
1. cascom ◴[] No.28523831[source]
I “hide my identity” daily when I make transactions, it’s called cash, guess that’s a red flag.
replies(2): >>28523896 #>>28525728 #
2. adventured ◴[] No.28523896[source]
That's an interesting point, because Stripe also doesn't handle cash.

Something can be perfectly fine for people to do, and it can be just as fine for Stripe to not want to handle it. They can choose what types of businesses they want to allow on their network. It potentially creates opportunities for other service providers.

3. ncallaway ◴[] No.28525728[source]
Aren’t cash businesses well known as money laundering opportunities?

Cash transactions above a specific dollar value literally generate reports to the government for investigation.

So, I think, yes, cash transactions tend to generate suspicion among anti-money laundering efforts.

replies(1): >>28540707 #
4. cascom ◴[] No.28540707[source]
So any business that accepts cash generates suspicion? I think not.

The reporting you are referring to only relates to bank transactions. In the US, When a business deposits their cash receipts, the bank generates a report. There is no obligation on the business (e.g.a car dealership that sells a car for $100k in cash has no incremental reporting burden)

More importantly - because x can be used in the commission of y crime, but the vast majority of the use of x is in perfectly normal/legal use, one should not cast suspicion on the use of x or reverse the burden of proof on for using x.