The authorities detained 4 people who were carrying a million pesos in cash.
A lawyer clarifies that this is not a crime, but Justice usually takes it as an irregularity.
A news toured the social networks in Argentina and aroused all kinds of conflicting opinions. The fact is as follows: on Monday, January 31, the Santa Fe Police arrested four people for driving in a car with more than one million pesos in cash in the city of Rosario.
Although the passers-by expressed that they were engaged in the sale of automobiles, everything seems to indicate that they could not justify the amount of money they had in the vehicle, un Suzuki Swift. A la quote At the closing of this note, the sum is equivalent to USD 4,694.
As reported by the portal rosary 3, two of the delayed are men, while the rest of the group was made up of two women, one of them a minor. The inspection by the authorities took place during a routine operation in the northwest area of the city, the third largest in population in the country.
What can you buy in Argentina with USD 4,694?
So far, the facts. But nevertheless, what happened in Rosario woke up in many users from Twitter all kinds of criticism, especially considering that, due to the devaluation of the national currency, a million pesos in Argentina is not what it used to be.
For example, you can buy a mid-range car with this amount. In addition, other products are close to that value, such as a state-of-the-art refrigerator or a 15-night reservation in a 5-star hotel in a tourist city.
Is it illegal to carry “a lot of money” in cash?
Although the definition of “a lot of money” offered the media of communication was questioned by network users, the question inevitably arose as to whether it is a crime to carry a large sum of cash when traveling on public roads.
On this matter, CriptoNoticias consulted with the criminal lawyer Manuel Tessio, who assured that there is no limit of money that one can transport on public roads. This is not a crime, “any more than wearing a million-dollar diamond is.” There is no law that indicates that one must carry his affidavit of assets under his arm, detailed the specialist.
However, he also made it clear that Justice usually takes these cases as an indication of irregular activity, and can thus proceed to investigate a possible money laundering or tax evasion. A judge can also confiscate the money if there is a risk of flight or if the investigation may be hindered. This is a suggestion that the Attorney General’s Office itself made to Argentine prosecutors in a 2015 resolution, as shown below.
And what about privacy?
In addition to the issues raised above, the issue of privacy comes up in cases like this. To what extent does a real citizen have power over his assets? doWhy can the State confiscate money without being certain that it comes from illegal sources?
Other types of controls exercised by the State can also be added to what happened, such as the petition to banks of informing the consumption and operations of its clients from ARS 30,000. Again, it equates to a low amount of just $140.
These are precisely two issues that the Bitcoin ecosystem intends to resolve, and they represent two irreplaceable standards for the community. On the one hand, Bitcoin is a private and pseudo-anonymous monetary system, provided that the user knows how to take the appropriate precautions. This means that there is no regulatory entity that says who can operate and what amounts are accepted for a transaction.
For this same reason, Bitcoin is also unconfiscatable money. The cryptocurrencies of a user cannot be “retained” by the State, except when there is a judicial investigation that corroborates that the funds come from illicit activities. In such a case, the funds could be confiscated if they were in a custody service, such as an exchange, or by the defendant’s own will if they are in a self-custody wallet.
By either of the two procedures, this does happen. Some countries like the United States are millionaires in terms of holding cryptocurrencies if confiscated bitcoins are taken into account, as CriptoNoticias has reported.
Without apologizing for tax evasion or money laundering, it can almost be ensured that the aforementioned event in Rosario would not have happened if the pesos had been bitcoins. For now, the citizens in question must justify the origin of their income, while society is debating whether or not it is okay to kidnap money without a valid justification to support it.