The TSA seized one contractor’s cash for a vehicle, but even though it was legal and documented, they won’t return it.
If you are considering booking travel or signing up for a new credit card please click here. Both support LiveAndLetsFly.com.
If you haven’t followed us on Facebook or Instagram, add us today.
Traveling with Cash
In the United States, there is no limit on how much cash you can carry on domestic flights. When travelling internationally to the US (and most other countries) $10,000 USD (or equivalent) is the cash limit without declaring the cash you are bringing in to limit money laundering efforts.
Even when carrying over $10,000, possession of money over the limit does not trigger cash seizure, however, a failure to declare it or without some documentation stating the origins of the cash may cause seizure or a penalty. It doesn’t matter how you choose to carry the cash either, though taping stacks of cash to your legs or leaving it loose in a duffel bag filled to the top may draw attention unnecessarily.
Contractor Cash Seized at Airport
Boris Nulman, an employee for a business in Tampa, departing for Cleveland to buy large trucks for his employer carried $191,500 in cash through to TSA en route to his flight. The TSA stopped Nulman for additional screening and then the TSA seized cash that Nulman was carrying but for $10,000 (the international limit for undeclared cash) giving him a receipt for the seizure short of the amount taken.
“The lawsuit says an agent gave Nulman a receipt to document the $181,500, but the federal agencies now say only $159,950 was confiscated. That’s $21,550 less than what the company says was seized.”
Without the cash to purchase the assets, Nulman did not continue to Cleveland to make the purchase.
While carrying that much cash is not illegal it’s not advisable either. Loose currency can become lost, burned, damaged or torn and as a payment method for this amount of money isn’t even easy for the recipient to cash.
There are plenty of transactions that require cash of this size. In this case, the seller was trying to avoid bank holds due to fraud suspicion from cashier’s checks originating in Florida. Following this incident, Global Entry for both the business owner and the travelling employee, Nulman, was revoked. Business owner Rozenberg suspects his revocation was not coincidental.
This Government Seizure Was Illegal, But Hard to Fight
From the evidence presented in this story, any seizure of the cash was illegal. I don’t blame the TSA for wanting to have a word with the employee and the employer shouldn’t have put them in that position but that doesn’t make it illegal just because it is unusual. The TSA also handed over the cash to the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) which should have had nothing to do with a domestic matter anyway.
The difference in the amount seized notwithstanding, the CBP listed their reason as “specified unlawful activity” though the owner of the business was able to provide documentation showing the legitimacy of the money. Despite presenting this evidence, or being charged with a crime, the business owner is now a plaintiff in a lawsuit to get the money returned.
If he is successful, he’s unlikely to receive the entire amount seized (due to the discrepancy in the amount listed on the receipt) and will still have to pay for his lawyer to fight for his legal money back. Further, stress on cashflow of the business as well as lost revenue/profit from not being able to purchase and utilize the trucks is just another way the plaintiff loses.
Cases like this have been hard to fight for a number of reasons. In this specific incident, the business owner can show that $191,500 was taken from the bank, but the employee returned with $10,000 and a receipt for $159,950.
While I don’t doubt the honesty of the TSA/CBP officials and assume that in the room where the money was counted there was a working surveillance camera that could verify which amount is accurate, where did the other $21,550 go? When the CBP deposited the money into the bank, how much did they deposit and how does that correlate with any other seizures? Did the employee “lose” $21,550 en route to the airport before it was confiscated?
Other government agencies have done the same with cash when they believe it could be used for nefarious purposes. Civil asset forfeiture has been a rising problem with some government entities as John Olliver discussed in late 2014 (video contains NSFW language):
Conclusion
The TSA acted reasonably in questioning a person carrying an excessive amount of cash though they did not have any authorization to do anything about it. If proof was supplied proving the veracity of the funds, the federal government should return the money back without haste.
It shouldn’t have held it in the first place and shouldn’t take a battle in federal court to return the seized money for which the agency had no right to retain without proof of criminal activity even if it was an unusually large amount of cash. If agents acted in what they felt was the best execution of their duty, that’s fair enough, but there should be no delay in correcting that mistake and remedying the cash amount discrepancy. There is no current law domestically against carrying any amount of cash during air travel but it’s still not advisable to take your life savings in twenties and hundreds if avoidable.
What do you think? Should the government give back the cash without going to trial? Does the government owe more than that due to financial damage to the business? What do you think happened to the extra $21,550?
You’ve got to love big government and all of their agencies!
A very good reason why big government isn’t necessarily best.
The government are the biggest crooks. By what right do they take someone’s money away for no reason except those they make up. Why should you have to go to court to get back what’s yours.
A friend of mine in big business transported cash around the country because the suppliers wanted it that way… what’s wrong with that.
Though he couldn’t be checked because he had his own plane.
He said he would never fly commercial because of such ridiculous things happening aven though no laws are broken.
IT’S THE VERY DEFINITION OF CONVERSION.
Just goes to show how crooked TSA and other government agencies are. Only as honest as the people they employ.
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Actually this does not violate the fourth amendment. The search conducted falls under administrative search which allows an inspection or search carried out under a regulatory or statutory scheme usually to enforce compliance with regulations or laws pertaining to health, safety, or security.
However, TSA or whomever has possession of the money should return it once the money legal use has been established.
Fascist police authoritarian state. And no they have no right to ask about the funds. Why many are voting with their feet
The government should have no right to ask what the funds are for, where it came from, or anything else for that matter simply because you’re flying from one state to another. Why not ask why I’ve packed so many pairs of socks, or question why I have three toothbrushes when I’m only one person? NONE of your business. Unless the person is suspected of committing a crime, stay out of it. This is definitely overreaching.
How about clarifying, because it looks like you rushed this to print. Initially you say the government provided a receipt for $181,xxx, but later you say the receipt was for the $159,xxx amount. Which is it?
The only problem is – voting with their feet to go where? As fast as freedom is evaporating here, it is disappearing even more rapidly elsewhere, especially in places like Canada and Europe.
Nonsense. The 4th Amendment has no such exclusions to allow an unreasonable “administrative” seizure.
The search is reasonable.
The seizure of property is not.
The search is NOT reasonable.
Martin – Your comment seems to me to imply that an administrative search is automatically exempt from the reasonableness requirement of the 4th Amendment. I understand that the government likes to consider the administrative state to be immune from those pesky constitutional protections that only get in the way of government doing whatever it damn well feels like doing. That doesn’t make it true. Or reasonable. Or legal. Or constitutional.
I know this is the legal test, but you have to admit that it comes close to circumvention of the 4th Amendment given the circularity of the argument relied on by the courts: it isn’t a violation because the government is conducting the search under regulatory or statutory powers afforded to it, so anything could be carved out of the 4th Amendment via regulation or statute. Of course, the SCOTUS would have a say as to whether the search & seizure powers so granted are (dis)proportionate (aka reasonable), but still, that’d take years and millions seized before a ruling.
That is pure BS !!!! As the 4th amendment has no specific situations !!! Pretty clear, ….but…the Government agencies choose to Ignore the Constitution as it pleases them !!! And they do it because they will and can get away with it !!!! Because it cost a lot of money to fight this tyranny…it is plain and simply organized crime at the government level !!! Sad that our once “FREE” nation has become a police state with corrupt government officials just as Nazi Germany was and N Korea is !!!!!
In the courts eyes the man did nothing wrong and the money was not “siezed”. The money was actually arrested. Hence the court records will show this as $159,950 v. Florida. Not the trucking company v. Florida. It’s a convoluted way of getting around the Constitution.
Convoluted is an egregious understatement!
The idea that any non-entity can be treated as an entity and be held subject to arrest is patently insane!
Don’t think so?
Just try and apply any of a dozen established legal rights to this “cash!”
From posse comitatus to freedom of speech every application is laughable….
If they arrested the cash then the cash has a right to speedy trial, and proper representation among other things. The “State” should be forced to appoint the cash a public defender!
Try telling that to corporations post Citizens United verdict.
I own a shipping and import business and I routinely carry large sums of money with me, certain industries , like raw materials, prefer cash and done deal in wire transfers …. I usually alert local law enforcement and get a certified letter which states the money , it’s origin and it’s end point … I got stopped with 178k in PHL but I had 2 letters from Florida State police and one letter from Bank of America and after about 10 minutes of questions I was on my way
The agent gave Nulman a receipt to document the $181,500, That’s how much he should get back. Simple!
They have yet to return the money regardless of the amount.
I agree 100%.
All too true…
TSA is to make air travel safe…they do so badly…not to mention money has zero effect on that safety….thieves…jail them
Why do you assume that the TSA exists to make air travel safe(r). Everything I’ve ever seen indicates to me that the TSA exists to keep voters from bothering politicians about the pathetic state of security in the air travel industry. That’s why they have them badges even though they were not law enforcement officers. If you call them on it, though, YOU become the threat and you won’t be getting on your flight. Now that’s safety, but not safety for you and me. Safety for another make-work bureaucracy and political patronage center.
Truth. Occasionally someone from the TSA will admit the whole TSA is a charade to reassure passengers that does little to nothing to mitigate threats to the safety of citizens. It’s a show to get people back in the air post 911 and to preserve the monopoly of concourse vendors. That’s it.
Scary that we have a govt that thinks and acts with such disregard for the constitution. But then we have idiots that put them in power.thats scarier
Sounds like a nice way for the government to make some extra money…
Yeah. Its like taxes but slightly more honest. You have money. We want it. We’re going to take it. We have guns so you can’t stop us. I think the discussion about gun control should examine how many guns the government possesses, paid for by taxpayers, to intimidate, coerce (and shoot if necessary) those same taxpayers.
But if WE as citizens engage in the same behavior it curiously changes to armed robbery and all other types of felonious bs…..
Just because a certain amount was taken from the bank doesn’t mean that’s what was there when the TSA got it. Try proving you paid your rent in cash by showing you withdrew the money the the ATM. And then you sign a receipt for the wrong amount. Come on.
It doesn’t sound like the money should have been taken, but maybe somebody other than government is trying to get a little extra out of this.
If deposit records or something else shows the receipt is wrong then fine. Otherwise you can’t have everybody questioning documents they signed and attested to, and assume they’re correct.
With all due respect some of the articles by Kyle appear to favor law enforcement and their respective organizations. I could not disagree more. No they were neither correct nor reasonable in iniating those types of searches.
In one area you have “but the employee returned with $10,000 and a receipt for $159,950” and in another is you have “The lawsuit says an agent gave Nulman a receipt to document the $181,500”. Which is it?
Carl – I am sure you read the linked article as well from where the quote was derived, but this is a major portion of the contention. They were given a receipt and then told only a portion of the money was there.
I did read the article, but I did not see the part about “but the employee returned with $10,000 and a receipt for $159,950” . Maybe I missed it.
If it’s agreed the receipt said $181,500 then it seems to be a clear cut case for return, unless we’re missing something about why the money was suspect.
You would think two agents would witness the count(s) so anything like a wrong receipt would be avoided..
Yeah the wrong receipt is BS. The government has to pay what is on the receipt. The agents should be arrested for larceny if the receipt and the amount don’t match.
Arrested if receipt is higher.
Fired if receipt is lower.
The government can’t renege on a contract because if oops!
I would like to have my money….
WTF, TSA?
I noticed this discrepancy as well.
Without a doubt the amount actually listed on the receipt (whichever it is) must be returned immediately – keeping that money is blatantly unconstitutional and illegal. Dealing with the discrepancy is another matter that might take further investigation and legal action.
@Donny
The amount of extra, precautionary work you have to do just to carry out a perfectly legal activity should give you, and everyone else, pause and rethink what sort of government we empower. Reminds me of the old saying, “perfectly legal, criminal anyway.”
Oh and Kyle, do you really think the purpose of the cash control at borders is truly for money laundering prevention? Curious how your money is guilty until proven innocent…
It’s not guilty if it’s declared at the border, this case was not at the border obviously.
My main point was to highlight the perversion that is civil forfeiture where, in general, seized property (I.e. money) is indeed presumed guilty from a legal standpoint—burden of proof on claimant to show lawful source of funds rather than on government to show illicit source.
For your example, I suppose I could argue that being forced to “declare” money is a form of presumption of guilt since, to be clear, these declaration forms also ask for a source/proof of funds. Therefore you are in effect already explaining yourself despite no suspicion of wrongdoing.
This case was not at the border, as you say, so it’s not clear what sort of legal justification they used—my hunch is the CBP 100 mile “border zone” interpretation—murky as it is.
I don’t really disagree with your broader outline, just a lot less willing to trust the good-faith judgment of the law enforcement officers when the financial and career incentives are so heavily skewed.
Thanks for the quick approval and response btw!
I lived before your time when repulsive laws such as FATCA and RICO did not exist. There were no “laundering” laws and bank privacy was just that. It is a pity that those in your generation have no perspective as to what freedom was. None of this is ok and there is no justification.
There was also a lot more “laundering” back then too, I imagine.
This is an insane story.
However, I think we can do without controversial extremists figures like John Oliver in this blog’s articles. He’s purporting hate speech against half of Americans on a weekly basis, and he could very much be classified as foreign election interference.
You think Oliver showing some Americans absurd and irrational love for traitors and secessionists who defended slavery would be something you would cheer. Or maybe you would like his expose on America’s crazy healthcare system. Just because he talks about things you disagree with doesn’t make him extreme. Btw, he is a U.S. Citizen, so how would it be foreign election interference?
Classifying John Oliver as “hate speech” is truly one of the dumbest, most asinine, most idiot posts I’ve ever seen on this site
(I’m guessing this poster of course watches Fox News, aka the “hate for profit” network)
Amen to everything you and Charles said.
John Oliver frequently engages in hate speech against European-Americans.
I can explain that to you, I can’t understand it for you. I bet you take offense to the statement ‘It’s Okay To Be White’, too?
He has more intelligence in his left pinky than I think you do in your whole body
Can we please keep the tone civil here? I don’t know who told you people you were entitled to denigrate people with differing opinions?
I guarantee you it won’t work out for you, though. Nobody wants to listen to children like you.
Grow up. Attack the argument, not the person.
Will, please show me an example of actual hate speech, find me one, link it here for all to see. If he has engaged in hate speech that we all somehow missed he should be taken to task on it. It would be truly disappointing but regardless of popularity, people should be held accountable.
I’ll wait.
P.S.
I’ll not accept excepts or snippets taken out of context or without caveats he’s known to give. I’ll also not accept commentary on an actual criminal who happens to be European-American.
I don’t owe you anything, but how cute that you think you matter.
Do you go and ask women to prove assault to you as well?
THANKS for your smart comment. I was inspired by all the cra cra about covid to pen this below…hope you enjoy it. pat w
You have the right to be free :
To hate Science
To be stupid
To die sooner
Don’t get the vaccine
Join more than 600,000 who
did the same
and died
More than the # who died in WWII
Be FREE & part of U.S. History (the part we should all be ashamed of) Pwin,baltimore
The only reason to transact anything in cash is to skirt laws and not declare income.
i don’t see anything wrong with this seizure and then TSA passing on the information to IRS to look into the businesses transacting in cash and whether they were trying to pay less sales and income tax by falsifying the sales price.
Most people that quote 2nd and 4th and whatever effing amedments usually are neck deep in illegal activities. Tie them upside down in times square and beat them like a pinata.
The only reason to transact anything in cash is to skirt laws and not declare income *in your opinion*.
Last I looked America was not the land of “Minority Report” – we don’t proactively punish people for a crime we *think* is going to happen without evidence. Some of us still believe in the presumption of innocence and the Constitution.
Actually the article clearly stated the reason the seller wanted cash: his bank was putting holds on cashier’s checks from Florida and he wanted immediate access to his money.
We can think that’s a silly reason or that it might not be his only reason but it is a valid justification on its own.
As for seizing property without any evidence that it was related to a crime or any attempt to charge anyone with a crime and then refusing to return it when its source was fully documented? Yes, that’s blatantly and obviously unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. We can disagree about where along that line the government went from reasonable to unreasonable seizure but by not returning the money they’re definitely across the line by the end.
In the US, the presumption of innocence exists until a person is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law by a jury of one’s peers.
Civil asset forfeiture violates the English Bill of Rights and the US Constitution by presuming guilt until a person proves innocence.
“debit” exalts unilateral government power and not the inalienable rights that America was founded upon.
No one is saying they are guilty. The money is still theirs. It’s with TSA for a little while, while the presumption of not guilty is checked out.
I don’t think the word “presumption” means what you think it does…
Except that the government is refusing to return it… Sorry, thats unquestionably a “seizure”.
If a government agency drains my checking account, and I can’t pay my bills, it’s okay because they’re only holding it for a while? What you’ve said is that they government can take whatever they want whenever they want – no charges made against me – so long as they’re going to give it back?
Did you recently convert or have you been a Nazi all of your life?
Presumption of “not guilty” need not be “checked out.” Unless there is evidence to convict in the first place, it stands. Period.
How did the TSA act reasonably? You say it like it is a fact. But it is not and I, for one, think they did not act rrasonably
I agree, alerting law enforcement to a traveler with an unusual but unquestionably legal cargo without any additional reason to suspect a crime is not a reasonable action.
Final thought. If the money was suspect why would they let him keep $10K? It seems like they would take it all.
This is why real conservatives should not blindly support law enforcement. If the laws cops enforce are an assault on freedom of body and property, cops are doing evil. Just doing their jobs and blindly following orders is not a valid excuse when they are bringing harm to the public. These civil asset forfeiture and seizure laws are designed to enforce the war on drugs which in itself violates the most basic principle that every person has a right to make decisions for his or her own body and not the government. If cops were held accountable by the public it would be impossible for them to enforce the liberal laws that say the government has a right to tell you what you can and can not do to your own body.
How does the TSA have jurisdiction to seize cash? Isn’t their interest solely related to matters of aviation security. I understand they can contact other agencies if they suspect obvious wrongdoing, but in this case no borders were being crossed. Something seems very off here.
The TSA is not the agency confiscating the money. There is an interagency group made up of local police, DEA and CBP who are notified when there is bulk cash found during an authorized administrative search. That group is responsible for either confiscating the money if the is a suspicion of money laundering or other illegal matter or let go. All a person has to do is produce the proper paperwork and the money can be released. The interagency group has been responsible for seizing thousands of dollars from smugglers.
The business owner produced the paperwork, according to the lawsuit and still hasn’t received the funds back.
The details on the reason why the HSI/DEA/CBP Agent thought the money was suspicious should come out in the lawsuit. TSA has an obligation when there is something suspicious to notify other agencies whether local or Federal and then that agency takes over the situation. Your opinion article is made to look like the TSA seized the money themselves when in fact they did not. TSA notifies local authorities at least a dozen times every day across the nation of a persons with loaded weapons in their carryon bag. Also the group of HSI/DEA/CBP agents don’t seize a large amount of cash which is being smuggled.
Your piece is just a TSA bashing article.
Meanwhile, he’s out a lot of money
Let’s take that from you and wait for a lawsuit to settle things.
The interagency group has also been responsible for seizing thousands of dollars from perfectly innocent people and causing them tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to recover their own money.
These agencies get to divvy up these seized funds so they have an incentive to aggressively seize cash.
About 10 years ago I was traveling over to Europe with $15,000 for my mom and dad who were building a house. Couldn’t for the life of me figure out how to declare this at LAX so I just flew with it. Didn’t realize I could have had that money confiscated.
“There are plenty of transactions that require cash of this size.”
Yes, there are. Most of them involve drugs, Russian gangsters, creative real estate transactions, “business associates” and friends of the current president.
Florida Man. The guy’s name is Boris. Nothing suspicious going on here at all. Riiiight. I’m sure it’s all perfectly legit.
Until the government has PROOF otherwise, then it should be treated as legit.
Without speculating on the probability that the owners were or weren’t doing everything above board (and I grant there is a good chance they weren’t), the main point is that we should be alarmed when mere warrant-less suspicion by a–let’s face it–not highly educated individual is enough to deprive someone of their property and there is no clear path on how to rightfully retrieve it.
There is a reason we require some sort of burden of proof (preponderance, clear & convincing, beyond reasonably doubt) before legal consequences set it on a person’s life, liberty, or property. For sure, some illicit actions slip through the cracks because of this despite the fact that we “know” something shady is going down. However I think you’ll find the alternative much worse.
Oh please, only an idiot or criminal carries around $200k in cash. No sympathy here.
There are plenty of people here from cultures where the banking system isn’t trusted, and with good reason. Business transactions involving large amounts of cash are the norm for them.
Regardless, assuming someone is a criminal *simply* because they carry large amounts of cash is an affront to American ideals of justice.
THANK YOU… And the same individuals defending this criminal nonsense would rail to the highest heavens if they traveled to another country and ANY of their human rights were trampled on…
ROFLMAO!
YOU think backs can be trusted???
Hilarious. They are in fact the most untrustworthy organizations in the human endeavor!
Think I’m wrong?
Go buy a cashier’s check at Chase Bank and try to cash it at Wells Fargo!
You get not one dime….
Deposit the check and they will cash it.
But only after holding it for seven to ten days. Until the other back pays them the cash for the check!
Banks spend most of their time trying to figure out legal ways to take your money…..
Based upon TSA criminal history, the discrepancy was probably the result of a TSA employee stealing it.
The conclusion is that “The TSA acted reasonably in questioning a person carrying an excessive amount of cash.”
I completely disagree. That is not within the scope of the TSA. It is actually quite the opposite.
The TSA is there to keep transportation safe. Their mission statement is:
“Protect the nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.”
In this case they are actively hindering commerce. They have no business mucking about with anything but security.
Tell me again why Bitcoin has no value?
This seizure theft goes on on our roads and highways and now airports. sooner or later one of these victims will snap and there will be carnage on an unprecedented level. Not everyone is content to simply let an entity rob them.
Trump should be brought up to speed on this widespread abuse and come down on all the agencies doing it. Police departments should never be allowed to share in the theft because it is incentive for them to rob people.
try to pay your $9.00 credit card bill with cash at most banks(my frame of reference is BoA and Chase) you get a hard time they take your picture and make you sign something in the guise of MONEY LAUNDERING.. crazy to launder $9.00 but that is their story and they are sticking to it….
Liked the article. Disagreed with the conclusion.
(1) I disagree with the statement that it was reasonable for the TSA to question the reason for carrying the cash. Since there is nothing illegal about carrying cash, it was unreasonable for the TSA to require the carrier of the cash to explain it.
(2) Theres no such thing as an “excessive” amount if cash. If it was legally possessed (and the government had no evidence that it was not) then it’s none of their damn business how much it is, whether its 181k or a million dollars.
Should police be permitted to stop you on the street and require that you provide receipts if you are wearing an “excessive” amount of jewelry.
Actually, even if it is OK with you, it’s not OK with the Constitutiona and it’s not OK with me.
Kyle, TSA employees working at airport checkpoints are TSO’s, Transportation Security Officers, not agents.
This makes zero sense. You have a case # for this? CBP are not even at the screening area for international nor do they have any jurisdiction and TSA would need to turn over to local police if anything. They also can’t hold a passenger, they have no legal authority once bag is clear of their scope which is air travel prohibited items.
so if someone travels and has $9000. cash, it will not/cannot be taken? Or you need written proof? This is really alarming to read that TSA can do this….And the people on here who think there’s no good reason for anyone to carry that amount of cash w/o being a crook, etc. THEY are equally as alarming…Holy cow…is this America?
There’s no limit on the amount of cash you can travel with domestically. The TSA doesn’t have the mandate to research financial crimes nor concealment. To the letter of the law, even if you chose to place your money in an incredibly suspicious style like taping $10,000 stacks to your body, this doesn’t constitute a crime of any kind.
It is not the TSA, they only check things and when they see large sums of money they refer it to law enforcement particularly the Customs and Border Patrol.
“In 2014, the federal government took more property from American citizens through asset forfeiture than burglars did. According to the Washington Post (link), the federal government deposited more than $5 billion into their asset forfeiture funds, whereas burglary losses were only $3.5 billion.”
That is why people love cryptocurrency. It gives them more financial freedom for their money and takes some of that power away from the government who also sometimes do unlawful things.