What does it saying in the Constitution that the government can Escheating your money.

[TheVictortheviking]

What is the name of your state? Florida

Where does it say in the constitution that the government can Escheat(cheat) your money?

I got a letter saying the bank saying the government has escheated my money because I did not contact my bank enough or friend them on facebook or tweet them on twitter enough or some such nonsense.

I have a bunch of account with them, pay tax on it, receive mail on it, call them up for issues here and there. I was assign a personal banker who ignores my phone calls so I just end up calling the general number. So I don't know what gives the ability to seizure my money without a warrant, court order, judgement, or any due process.
This is not a tax or fee,etc....

Where in the constitution does it give the state the authority to take my money without any justification whatsoever?

I heard of dirty cops doing this in Nevada when people were on their way to Vegas with cash in their carry using " asset forfeiture" in which someone takes money if they suggest it was used in a crime without even charging or convicting the person of a crime. Just the fact that someone has cash with them is all the proof some of these corrupt cops need to just take it.

It seem like I'm running into the same problem with corrupt government officials reaching into my bank account to take what does not belong to them. I am sure the founding father are rolling in their grave right about now.

Can a citizen fight back against this unconstitutional legalized thief done by the state of Florida?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? Florida

Where does it say in the constitution that the government can Escheat(cheat) your money?

I got a letter saying the bank saying the government has escheated my money because I did not contact my bank enough or friend them on facebook or tweet them on twitter enough or some such nonsense.

I have a bunch of account with them, pay tax on it, receive mail on it, call them up for issues here and there. I was assign a personal banker who ignores my phone calls so I just end up calling the general number. So I don't know what gives the ability to seizure my money without a warrant, court order, judgement, or any due process.
This is not a tax or fee,etc....

Where in the constitution does it give the state the authority to take my money without any justification whatsoever?

I heard of dirty cops doing this in Nevada when people were on their way to Vegas with cash in their carry using " asset forfeiture" in which someone takes money if they suggest it was used in a crime without even charging or convicting the person of a crime. Just the fact that someone has cash with them is all the proof some of these corrupt cops need to just take it.

It seem like I'm running into the same problem with corrupt government officials reaching into my bank account to take what does not belong to them. I am sure the founding father are rolling in their grave right about now.

Can a citizen fight back against this unconstitutional legalized thief done by the state of Florida?

I think perhaps you don't understand what escheating means. When an account is dormant for a number of years (I believe the amount of time varies by state) the bank turns the money over to the state for safe keeping. Its still your money, and you can still get it back from the state. You have to jump through a hoop or two to claim it, but its mostly just proving your identity.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Since it isn't the federal government doing this it is covered by the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

 

[Taxing Matters]

Where in the constitution does it give the state the authority to take my money without any justification whatsoever?

The state cannot take your money "without any justification whatsoever." The Constitution does require that before assets are taken there must be due process. You have the right for a certain period of time after the property is transferred to the state to get it back by following the procedures the state has for that. The escheatment laws provide the due process the Constitution requires. Note that the Constitution does not have to give the states a specific right or power. Under the Constitution a state may do anything unless the Constitution prohibits the state from doing it.

I heard of dirty cops doing this in Nevada when people were on their way to Vegas with cash in their carry using " asset forfeiture" in which someone takes money if they suggest it was used in a crime without even charging or convicting the person of a crime. Just the fact that someone has cash with them is all the proof some of these corrupt cops need to just take it.

Asset forfeiture laws are a distinctly different issue than escheatment laws. The U.S. Supreme Court just recently held that states are restricted by the federal Constitution in asset forfeitures in the same way the federal government is restricted. This will help curb the abuses by some states of civil forfeitures.

It seem like I'm running into the same problem with corrupt government officials reaching into my bank account to take what does not belong to them. I am sure the founding father are rolling in their grave right about now.

Contact the state about the procedure to reclaim the money.

 

[adjusterjack]

It seem like I'm running into the same problem with corrupt government officials reaching into my bank account to take what does not belong to them.

This has nothing to do with "corrupt government officials." The bank is doing this voluntarily because of lack of activity on your account. When you first opened the account you were given an "accountholders agreement." That's your contract with the bank. Did you read it?

This sample from one bank addresses Unclaimed Property on Page 56 and explains the circumstances under which funds can be turned over to the state.

https://www.bankofamerica.com/deposits/resources/deposit-agreements.go
Find or get your account holders agreement. You'll find similar wording. It's what you agreed to allow the bank to do when you opened the account. If you didn't follow the bank's instructions about keeping your account active then you really have nothing to complain about.

 

[Taxing Matters]

The bank is doing this voluntarily because of lack of activity on your account.

There is nothing voluntary about it. State law requires the bank to do it when there has been no activity on the account.

 

[xylene]

I know a great deal about this, and escheatment is frankly some real shady business.

The claim is to protect the citizen/consumer - but the reality is it is a cash grab, and that's why most states have inceasingly shortened the period before the funds are escheated and ratcheted up MASSIVE penalties on financial institutions for reporting, compliance and due deligence filings that are DESIGNED to be impossible to comply with as a secret quasi tax on banking and financial services. And it's perfect - poorly understood, most people have never heard of it, it is positioned a consumer service with friendly sounding websites 'findyourNYSmoneyowed.gov' that kind of thing.

And it's not just about forgotten bank accounts, it can involve thousands even millions in stock. For the owner this can involve thousands in missed dividends, losses, liquidation costs and massive tax gains and repurchase step-up issues. It is not fun, ant it is major cash grab. Because you don't get your stock back. Finacially trashes mostly old people who purchased stock in an ESPP, which is a financial snoozer and is normal to have trivial activity from the participant. Easily have zero activity in 36 months.

 

[xylene]

If you own stock by certificate or directly held book entry (from a DSPP, DRIP, or ESPP) check in on the account with the transfer agent at least once a year, better yet quarterly. Don't assume because you are getting statements that you have no escheatment risk. Depending on state rules you account can get flagged 'inactive' for a single unresolved point of contact issue. The TA has to flag it, or else be massively fined.

 

[xylene]

And the poster is in Nevada. States that have 'EZ incorportation laws' htink Nevada, Delaware and South Dakota - they are the worst offenders.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I know a great deal about this, and escheatment is frankly some real shady business.

The laws do vary significantly among jurisdictions on this. In the two places I've lived most recently the law requires that the institution send notice to the account owner of the upcoming escheatment so that the account owner can take steps to prevent it. And indeed while living in both places I received those notices and all I had to do was contact the institution and verify with them that I am still around and aware of the account. So if the notices are sent and you ignore them, that's on you.

 

[xylene]

The people who operate these programs and administer these programs have professional development programs and seminars for the very purpose of increasing the revenue for the State derived by escheated funds and enforcement actions against financial service firms. It's not a public service. They make it confusing on purpose to generate escheatments.

So if the notices are sent and you ignore them, that's on you.

That is arguably the most common stupid defense of an incredibly punitive and poorly understood anti-consumer policy, but when you really consider the US is a country that literally has publicly sponsored media campaigns encouraging 'set-and-forget' investing to bolster retirement income.

If you want to dupe people into losing thousands because of poor literacy and our crappy postal service, ok. but then concede spending money to promote passive investment is pretty stupid.

 

[Taxing Matters]

That is arguably the most common stupid defense of an incredibly punitive and poorly understood anti-consumer policy, but when you really consider the US is a country that literally has publicly sponsored media campaigns encouraging 'set-and-forget' investing to bolster retirement income.

If you want to dupe people into losing thousands because of poor literacy and our crappy postal service, ok. but then concede spending money to promote passive investment is pretty stupid.

That's your opinion. I respect it though I don't share it. If you get a notice you can't read, take it to someone who can. As for the postal service being "crappy" that too is opinion and one I see no good evidence for. In at least 30 years if not longer I can count on one hand the times mail sent to me did not arrive or was misdelivered. The same is true is for items I have mailed to others. That's a pretty good record, IMO.

 

[LdiJ]

The laws do vary significantly among jurisdictions on this. In the two places I've lived most recently the law requires that the institution send notice to the account owner of the upcoming escheatment so that the account owner can take steps to prevent it. And indeed while living in both places I received those notices and all I had to do was contact the institution and verify with them that I am still around and aware of the account. So if the notices are sent and you ignore them, that's on you.

Its the same in my state. Of course, if the address for the owner of the account is no longer valid, that's a problem.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Its the same in my state. Of course, if the address for the owner of the account is no longer valid, that's a problem.

True, but if you move and don't tell people your new address then you can hardly complain that you don't get your mail, can you?

I am not a fan the paternalistic state that regulates everything to eliminate the personal responsibility of individuals. I think people ought to have the responsibility to do some basic thing for themselves. It's not too much to ask people to keep their addresses current with the institutions and agencies they do business with. It's not too much to ask people to read their mail and take the steps indicated to protect themselves. God help us if people cannot do even these simple things without some kind of government regulation or program to protect us from our own stupidity or laziness.

 

[xylene]

God help us if people cannot do even these simple things without some kind of government regulation or program to

But why does the government then need a program to 'protect' those same personally responsivle consumers from financial firms they invested in voluntarily for years, often decades on an ever tightening timeline? Because it is a racket even if you're a conservative.