The US Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is implementing new rules that limit the amount of cash transactions allowed before Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) must be filed – and that amount is capped at $200.
The Geographic Targeting Order (GTO) affects banks, and financial sector businesses like check cashing and currency exchange in 30 ZIP codes that border with Mexico in California and Texas – a total of seven counties (San Diego, Imperial – and Cameron, El Paso, Hidalgo, Maverick, and Webb, respectively).
The US has 44 counties along the bobrder with the neighbor to the south, and it isn’t immediately clear if this is the definitive extent of the area the order covers.
Critics of the new measure see it as a way to expand financial surveillance. Personal data that is contained in CTRs includes social security or tax ID numbers.
CTRs apply to both withdrawals and deposits, and are a general measure against money laundering, that is not to be confused with Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) – which are only activated when there is actual suspicion of transactions tied to illegal activities.
The decision was made as part of a broader push of the Trump administration to suppress the activities of drug cartels operating in those areas, with a FinCEN announcement specifying that the goal is to suppress money laundering and other illegal activities perpetrated by Mexico-based drug gangs and other criminals.
The order applies to all money services businesses (MSBs) in the designated geographical area, which must submit CTRs should a cash transaction exceed $200. If this amount of cash can be withdrawn from an ATM in a single day – which is reported to rarely be the case in the US – then that applies to ATM withdrawals as well.
Outside the seven counties, previous federal rules that require the filing of CTRs remain, according to which the cash threshold is set at $10,000 per day.
There are observers also critical of that rule, which has been in force for over 50 years. They argue that this limit should be raised from $10,000, rather than be dramatically lowered to $200 – even if this is now only happening in a limited border area.
