You Win Big: Cash-in the Chips Now or Later?

[tthree]

Tribute read this quote. It lists the federal requirement at the end.

Shadroch, casinos do not issue cashier's checks. Only banks issue cashier's check. A casino check is a personal check, just like a check written by any other business or by an individual. Neither a cashier's check nor a personal check triggers a CTR filing requirement, unless it is "either in bearer form, endorsed without restriction, made out to a fictitious payee..., or otherwise in such form that title thereto passes upon delivery." (31 CFR § 103.11(u).)
.

 

[WRX]

Aslan the ctr laws exist to catch criminals and money launderers for what they can get them on. Al Capone and many others they couldnt get any other way were caught this way. By refusing to show ID you put yourself into that profile and the wheels will be put in motion that exist to get these criminals. The only problem is the one the government will be looking at very very closely will be you. And their assumption will be this is who you are and that is how you will be viewed. If and when they decide otherwise will be when the intense scrutiny will end.

Exactly how would the government know who to look at if you never identified yourself to the casino?

Sorry, I'm not falling for the thinking that seems to be in vogue, holding that privacy is a quaint, outdated concept, and that we should happily give all desired information to self-styled "authority figures," like casinos.

 

[tthree]

Would the casino let you walk? I dont know. If they did would they follow you to determine your identity as the exgriffin man said they have done? I dont know the answer to that either.

As you can see from Aslan's experience they wanted to make sure he won the money and not purchased chips for the purpose of cashing them out and not gambling with them. That should at least infer a partial answer to those questions.

 

[aslan]

Aslan the ctr laws exist to catch criminals and money launderers for what they can get them on. Al Capone and many others they couldnt get any other way were caught this way. By refusing to show ID you put yourself into that profile and the wheels will be put in motion that exist to get these criminals. The only problem is the one the government will be looking at very very closely will be you. And their assumption will be this is who you are and that is how you will be viewed. If and when they decide otherwise will be when the intense scrutiny will end.

The ctr law does not require you to show your ID for transactions $10,000 or less. However, some casinos keep a list of transactions of $3,000 or $5,000 which is used to catch "structuring" attempts to circumvent the ctr rules. Some of these same casinos take advantage of these less than $10,000 transaction points to force an ID check; this check is not required by law, and does not result in a "refusal" filing with the IRS. It does result in a refusal notation with the casino for other than CTR purposes, which is kept along with your picture. The only way a refusal is filed with the IRS is when you have a transaction of more than $10,000 and refuse to show your ID to the casino.

 

[aslan]

Exactly how would the government know who to look at if you never identified yourself to the casino?

Sorry, I'm not falling for the thinking that seems to be in vogue, holding that privacy is a quaint, outdated concept, and that we should happily give all desired information to self-styled "authority figures," like casinos.

The law requires the casino to attach a description of the person refusing to show ID for any cash amount in excess of $10,000. As a practical matter, they attach a picture of the person, likely taken at the cashier window.

 

[WRX]

The law requires the casino to attach a description of the person refusing to show ID for any cash amount in excess of $10,000. As a practical matter, they attach a picture of the person, likely taken at the cashier window.

First point: I would NEVER recommend that anyone refuse to identify himself upon initiating a cash transaction of $10,000 or more, or give false identification in such circumstances. That would be foolish and asking for trouble. I hope that anyone who reads this site is well-informed enough to know that a cash transaction of $10,000 or more will require a CTR, and will not put himself in the position of initiating one unless he intends to comply with the law.

Second point: This is, I believe, the situation that tthree was talking about. A casino may submit a suspicious activity report (SAR) concerning a patron who makes a cash transaction of less than $10,000. You have no legal obligation to identify yourself in order to make a transaction of less than $10,000. If you make or attempt such a transaction, and do not show identification, the casino might take your picture, and might attach it to an SAR. But do you really think that the government is routinely going to pore through thousands of SARs, attempting to match photos to names? I very much doubt it. And if there's some government employee who has nothing better to do, have at it. No harm. To repeat, for the honest AP, the purpose of keeping identification out of the hands of casinos is not to deny the government information (translation--evade taxes), but to deny the casinos the means to keep track of his play, to evaluate him, to have a basis for backing him off or barring him, and to disseminate information about him to other casinos.

 

[aslan]

First point: I would NEVER recommend that anyone refuse to identify himself upon initiating a cash transaction of $10,000 or more, or give false identification in such circumstances. That would be foolish and asking for trouble. I hope that anyone who reads this site is well-informed enough to know that a cash transaction of $10,000 or more will require a CTR, and will not put himself in the position of initiating one unless he intends to comply with the law.

Second point: This is, I believe, the situation that tthree was talking about. A casino may submit a suspicious activity report (SAR) concerning a patron who makes a cash transaction of less than $10,000. You have no legal obligation to identify yourself in order to make a transaction of less than $10,000. If you make or attempt such a transaction, and do not show identification, the casino might take your picture, and might attach it to an SAR. But do you really think that the government is routinely going to pore through thousands of SARs, attempting to match photos to names? I very much doubt it. And if there's some government employee who has nothing better to do, have at it. No harm. To repeat, for the honest AP, the purpose of keeping identification out of the hands of casinos is not to deny the government information (translation--evade taxes), but to deny the casinos the means to keep track of his play, to evaluate him, to have a basis for backing him off or barring him, and to disseminate information about him to other casinos.

I fully agree.

 

[bigplayer]

Only constructive opinions please..

Unfortunately, it sometimes is not that simple to change chips later. You are traveling alone, for example. Or your flight is later the same day.

Occasionally, casinos make it difficult to change a large sum of chips the next day and/or by another person who has not been playing any casino games.

Since you already know the answer why did you bother to ask. You asked what was better and it is a no-brainer that it's better to leave with the chips and cash them on another visit. Whether you have a flight the next day is irrelevant. If you come back on the next shift and cash out $2,500 then walk around and cashout another $2,500 you won't have a problem as long as no single chip is above their verification threshold (usually $1K or $5K depending on the casino).

 

[bigplayer]

The ctr law does not require you to show your ID for transactions $10,000 or less. However, some casinos keep a list of transactions of $3,000 or $5,000 which is used to catch "structuring" attempts to circumvent the ctr rules. Some of these same casinos take advantage of these less than $10,000 transaction points to force an ID check; this check is not required by law, and does not result in a "refusal" filing with the IRS. It does result in a refusal notation with the casino for other than CTR purposes, which is kept along with your picture. The only way a refusal is filed with the IRS is when you have a transaction of more than $10,000 and refuse to show your ID to the casino.

The CTR law does not require ID for 3K to 10K but does require casinos to establish in-house rules to get to know the customer for cashouts in that range and often those rules require ID or players card with personal info on file. If the casino has that rule it carries he same force as the CTR law itself unless state law otherwise requires the casino to cashout unless CTR is required. That's why New Jersey allows patrons to cashout $9,900 with no ID or players card required and Nevada casinos screw with you relentlessly for ID at $3,000 and up. Several NV casinos will just confiscate your chips and give you a receipt if you refuse to show players card or ID. Sure gaming will force them to pay you but often not until you've produced ID. If you want to avoid nasty entanglements in Vegas and many other places just cashout $2,500 multiple times. If your total cashouts for the day are less than $10K you are perfectly within the law....especially if your intent is not to evade the CTR law but just to protect your ability to continue to play via anonymity.

 

[aslan]

The CTR law does not require ID for 3K to 10K but does require casinos to establish in-house rules to get to know the customer for cashouts in that range and often those rules require ID or players card with personal info on file. If the casino has that rule it carries he same force as the CTR law itself unless state law otherwise requires the casino to cashout unless CTR is required. That's why New Jersey allows patrons to cashout $9,900 with no ID or players card required and Nevada casinos screw with you relentlessly for ID at $3,000 and up. Several NV casinos will just confiscate your chips and give you a receipt if you refuse to show players card or ID. Sure gaming will force them to pay you but often not until you've produced ID. If you want to avoid nasty entanglements in Vegas and many other places just cashout $2,500 multiple times. If your total cashouts for the day are less than $10K you are perfectly within the law....especially if your intent is not to evade the CTR law but just to protect your ability to continue to play via anonymity.

I did not know that the casino could establish a rule that reduced the threshold for requiring an ID. From my reading, in Vegas anyway, they do oftentimes try to check IDs at lesser than CTR amounts, and that is with the blessing of the IRS, but that they do not have the right to withhold one's chips upon refusal to show ID. I'll try to determine what the current law is for Vegas over the next week. I'd like to know where a casino rule to check at lesser amounts, say $1,000, has the full force of the law. That would mean that no AP could play unrated and survive without a false ID, and if that is a matter of law, the false ID would be a violation of the law.

 

[BOND]

Since you already know the answer why did you bother to ask. You asked what was better and it is a no-brainer that it's better to leave with the chips and cash them on another visit. Whether you have a flight the next day is irrelevant. If you come back on the next shift and cash out $2,500 then walk around and cashout another $2,500 you won't have a problem as long as no single chip is above their verification threshold (usually $1K or $5K depending on the casino).

I raised the question about changing chips on another visit or a different shift, because it is problematic sometimes. Personally, I prefer to cash chips on another visit in increments of $1000-$2500 to avoid hassles with IDs and CTRs.

I know many longtime APs who do not like to cash chips on another visit for different reasons. One AP I know came back the next day to cash some chips and the small casino was closed and he was unable to cash his remaining chips. Fortunately, it was a small quantity. But if it was a large sum, he would not be a happy camper.:flame:

Another longtime AP, who had a winning session, took several weeks to cash about $8k in chips after wrangling with the casino, etc..The casino wanted to make it as difficult as possible for him to cash the chips. He won the chips on a baccarat promotion that he took full advantage of; the casino was not too happy after being outsmarted by an AP.

Read Feyman's advice:

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of
certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure about anything."
… Richard Feynman, 1965 Nobel Laureate

 

[WRX]

The CTR law does not require ID for 3K to 10K but does require casinos to establish in-house rules to get to know the customer for cashouts in that range and often those rules require ID or players card with personal info on file. If the casino has that rule it carries he same force as the CTR law itself unless state law otherwise requires the casino to cashout unless CTR is required. That's why New Jersey allows patrons to cashout $9,900 with no ID or players card required and Nevada casinos screw with you relentlessly for ID at $3,000 and up. Several NV casinos will just confiscate your chips and give you a receipt if you refuse to show players card or ID. Sure gaming will force them to pay you but often not until you've produced ID. If you want to avoid nasty entanglements in Vegas and many other places just cashout $2,500 multiple times. If your total cashouts for the day are less than $10K you are perfectly within the law....especially if your intent is not to evade the CTR law but just to protect your ability to continue to play via anonymity.

Essential information from bigplayer, as so often, without which my advice was incomplete.

 

[BOND]

Thanks both to WRX and BigPlayer for the useful information and discussion. Now I hope no one has problems cashing chips after a winning session.:grin:

 

[Jet]

Since you already know the answer why did you bother to ask. You asked what was better and it is a no-brainer that it's better to leave with the chips and cash them on another visit. Whether you have a flight the next day is irrelevant. If you come back on the next shift and cash out $2,500 then walk around and cashout another $2,500 you won't have a problem as long as no single chip is above their verification threshold (usually $1K or $5K depending on the casino).

Really, some casinos it's a 1k only to trigger an ID verification?

 

[Jet]

I did not know that the casino could establish a rule that reduced the threshold for requiring an ID. From my reading, in Vegas anyway, they do oftentimes try to check IDs at lesser than CTR amounts, and that is with the blessing of the IRS, but that they do not have the right to withhold one's chips upon refusal to show ID. I'll try to determine what the current law is for Vegas over the next week. I'd like to know where a casino rule to check at lesser amounts, say $1,000, has the full force of the law. That would mean that no AP could play unrated and survive without a false ID, and if that is a matter of law, the false ID would be a violation of the law.

Did you find about that issue? Thanks.

 

[aslan]

Did you find about that issue? Thanks.

I did not get anything definitive. Most persons I talked with, including casinos, thought I was correct. However, they could still ask you to leave the casino, if you failed to produce an ID upon being asked, under the right to refuse service law. It remains to be seen what a judge would rule if such a case were brought to court. My guess is that they would reinstate the customer, since the casino had no good cause for refusing service. In my state, Virginia, that's the way it is. A business can bar you because they don't like your looks, but a judge can overturn such an action if they find it unreasonable. Barring for drunkenness, disturbing the peace, and the usual suspects, are generally upheld by the courts, but unwarranted reasons (illegal discrimination aside) generally go in favor of the customer. Of course, a casino could argue that they were checking IDs because they had a tip that a certain criminal was in their casino; I don't know how far they can stretch their need to know your identity. It's a good question, however, and one that needs to be litigated for clarification if it has not already been.

PS-- This the second encounter we've had. I sense you are a casino employee or ex-Griffin employee. Do you want to fess up. :laugh:

 

[Jet]

I did not get anything definitive. Most persons I talked with, including casinos, thought I was correct. However, they could still ask you to leave the casino, if you failed to produce an ID upon being asked, under the right to refuse service law. It remains to be seen what a judge would rule if such a case were brought to court. My guess is that they would reinstate the customer, since the casino had no good cause for refusing service. In my state, Virginia, that's the way it is. A business can bar you because they don't like your looks, but a judge can overturn such an action if they find it unreasonable. Barring for drunkenness, disturbing the peace, and the usual suspects, are generally upheld by the courts, but unwarranted reasons (illegal discrimination aside) generally go in favor of the customer. Of course, a casino could argue that they were checking IDs because they had a tip that a certain criminal was in their casino; I don't know how far they can stretch their need to know your identity. It's a good question, however, and one that needs to be litigated for clarification if it has not already been.

PS-- This the second encounter we've had. I sense you are a casino employee or ex-Griffin employee. Do you want to fess up. :laugh:

...

I'll retract from that statement a little bit. It takes two to tangle since it's up to the casino to give out dubious labels to honest players in the first place and then Griffin to look the other way and defame and libel you along the way as well.

BTW, this site is awe*!@#.

 

[aslan]

Heck no. It's too bad I just found out about this site. Just seeing or hearing about Griffin makes me repulse in disgust. To me, they are unscrupulous and should be shot - maybe not literally. At least somebody blow up their Mom and Pop's get-up after office ours so they can get the message and retire but that would be terrorism so...

Non-violent terrorists are welcome here! :laugh:

 

[Nynefingers]

Really, some casinos it's a 1k only to trigger an ID verification?

If you reread bigplayer's post, you'll see that he was referring to the single-chip verification limits. That said, I've been to casinos where any cashouts of $1k and up require not supervisor verification, but security guard verification. They call security to the cage so they can watch the cashier pay you. I don't recall how hard they pressed for ID at that amount. This was at a place that as far as I could tell didn't own any chips bigger than black.

 

[Jet]

If you are playing an amount unrated (no players card) to win that kind of money they already took your picture. That is one of the biggest red flags out there. What gambler who has been around the block a few times isnt going to want comps for his action? If they ask for a card and you decline to give them one or have them make one from your ID, you might as well write counter on your forehead. That's what they will see.

If you have to cash out $10,000 or more, have them cut you a check. No ctr involved. No limit to the amount.

So if they cut you a check of over 10k, will you still be asked for an ID ? Stupid question, but I have to ask.