I made $200K and PayPal locked my account

This happened to me back in 2007, contact me for tactics.

The kinder, gentler PayPal can't ignore the law, the tax code, or serious risks of criminal activity on its platform. They made a commitment to cut the red tape in the situations where it didn't make sense, not to throw out the rulebook and the rule of law. None of what happened here is inconsistent with their promise.

This situation isn't some innocent trinket seller whose account was frozen without reason and without recourse. It's a foreign national funneling six figures across borders through multiple anonymous PayPal accounts even after being advised, by PayPal directly, to stop doing so. Above and beyond the breach of contract and ignoring PayPal's guidance to stop using a US account when he's not a US citizen or even in the US, the activity looks pretty much exactly like money laundering. On top of that, PayPal has its own legal obligations to the United States, which it can't fulfill since he's not providing a tax ID while he's passed the IRS reporting threshold by a factor of 10.

They closed his US account, which they gave him warning he wasn't supposed to be using. He hasn't claimed they are keeping any of his money, and they didn't stonewall him about why it's being closed. Should they have allowed him to continue operating illegally forever?

My opinion of many people has dimmed as a result of the comments here. They say you can judge a person's character by how well they treat their waiter at a restaurant. In the startup world, how fast someone is to trot out a "PayPal is evil" comment whenever the company is mentioned, no matter the circumstances, might be a decent analogy.

Sue.

PayPal is not as crooked as people say they are. Just start a company with someone in he US. Payments go,to their company and they pay you. Assuming its a legit business "don't know how I made" 200k doesnt sound legit.

I agree entirely that they're almost certainly tangential. I generally agree with the line of your argument.

But you're being nasty about Paypal, and I very much doubt the implication. I'll bet you 10:1 that Paypal would rather give him his money. But they also want to be in compliance with the law. They also want to spend the least they can on policy-vio detection and fraud detection ("least they can" means "a hell of a lot", say my professional connections; they're serious about fraud), and the least they can on customer service, and have minimal PR consequences.

It's not like they get to keep the money if they decide it's not legal to move it; they have to give it back, or pass it on. They'd rather pass it on and have more future business, from which they can take their cut. But they won't flagrantly break the law to do it, and they can't spend infinite resources making sure the right thing happens in every single case.