Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 97 posts

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#31

Post by OldSchool »

input_sh wrote: post #3

> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. This is the only shocker for me. Can anyone elaborate? I've always assumed x-ray scanners can't figure out the amount of cash, but shouldn't they be able to detect giant stacks of cash?

Customs can certainly approach you any time right up to the gate. In 2010, my wife and I were approached by an agent and asked very directly if we had more than $10,000 in USD cash with us as we waited at the gate to board a nonstop flight from the US to Moscow. We answered truthfully "no" in a brief conversation and he wished us well almost immediately.

I don't think he suspected we were money launderers. My guess is that upon hearing both of us speak, he easily determined that we were not natives of Russia and thus not, for example, carrying but not declaring a substantial amount of cash intended for family back home.

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#32

Post by foota »

smogcutter wrote: post #19
foota wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you assume that there's an even chance of getting caught (e.g., if searches are random based on the traveler) then fewer larger trips reduces the number of times your agent is caught. Given that it seems reasonable to assume risk is correlated to the number of people caught rather than the amount of money caught (which is the same either way) it seems like fewer largers trips could be rational. I guess the more tr…

> If you assume that there's an even chance of getting caught (e.g., if searches are random based on the traveler) then fewer larger trips reduces the number of times your agent is caught. What? No it doesn’t. It just increases variance.

Yes it does.

Let's say you have 100 trips to send money vs 1 trip. If there's a 10% chance to be caught on each trip, then with 100 trips 10 people are caught on average, whereas with 1 trip a tenth of a person is caught on average (more realistically, I'd look at the probably that more than N people are caught using a binomial, but I don't thinks it's important).

Although that said, maybe it's worth it. With a 1% chance to be caught and 100 trips, there's a 63% chance at least one person is caught, and a 26% chance that more than 1 person is caught. With one person, there's a 1% chance they're caught.

The average money caught is the same though (and as you note the variance in money caught is higher, which is undesirable).

But money caught doesn't land you in jail. You could imagine that with multiple people caught it's easier to track back who they met with. With 1 person caught, there's no other cases to cross reference against.

Probably you would want to balance these factors out.

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#33

Post by nyokodo »

brewtide wrote: post #29
quartesixte wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3750 for committing serious crimes seems so low, one can only imagine the desperation or lack of value understanding involved with participants. Or coercion.

The "kia boys" are out stealing car after car for $100 from interviews online. Incentives seem lower than we all think?

> Incentives seem lower than we all think?

The income for most criminals is a pittance. [1]

1. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-apr-24-oe-dubne...

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#34

Post by [deleted] »

toephu2 wrote: post #16

> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. I think this is false. Anytime I've flown with cash in my checked in luggage, it was always stolen and it was obvious someone went through my suitcase. Then I stopped doing that obviously. (happened in U.S. and Indonesia)

[deleted]

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#35

Post by amenhotep »

throwaway444441 wrote: post #17
crazygringo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is in the article: > The machines can be programmed to find cash, but they aren’t because they are operated by airport-security agents, responsible for passenger safety, not customs and immigration officials. As to why the UK government doesn't pass a regulation that airport security is also responsible for detecting large amounts of cash, I have no idea.

> As to why the UK government doesn't pass a regulation that airport security is also responsible for detecting large amounts of cash, I have no idea. Shouldn't law abiding citizens have the right to possess and carry cash?

Whether or not our citizens should have the right to do something seems rarely related to whether the UK government sticks its noses in our business to make sure we aren't.

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#36

Post by js2 »

crazygringo wrote: post #4

> ...heaved seven heavy suitcases onto the conveyor belt... > ...and a few million more dollars worth of cash in eight suitcases... > ...In October 2020, two other women weren’t so lucky. They were questioned at a Heathrow departure gate by officers of the Border Force, the agency in charge of U.K. customs and immigration. One of the women told officers she checked five suitcases to Dubai because she wasn’t sure what…

Life imitates art: the ending of Stanley Kubrick's The Killing (1956):

https://youtu.be/8J3dbXEBjOA?si=wZ0yK7iPuSAAC84r

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#37

Post by cjbgkagh »

crazygringo wrote: post #4

> ...heaved seven heavy suitcases onto the conveyor belt... > ...and a few million more dollars worth of cash in eight suitcases... > ...In October 2020, two other women weren’t so lucky. They were questioned at a Heathrow departure gate by officers of the Border Force, the agency in charge of U.K. customs and immigration. One of the women told officers she checked five suitcases to Dubai because she wasn’t sure what…

In money laundering there is generally a problem of too much money and a chain of people too dangerous to say no to. This leads to stupid mistakes like this.

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#38

Post by HideousKojima »

lettergram wrote: post #20
toephu2 wrote: post #16

> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. I think this is false. Anytime I've flown with cash in my checked in luggage, it was always stolen and it was obvious someone went through my suitcase. Then I stopped doing that obviously. (happened in U.S. and Indonesia)

How dare you question the TSA, the best and brightest of us. \s As a funny counter, I recently traveled through 6 TSA checkpoints with a loaded magazine in my bag. I had it from when I was at my farm, oops. Was a little concerned because I was in Boston when they found it (I’m based out of Tennessee). But they let me go and confiscated it. Point being, if they can’t find a loaded magazine, I doubt they’d be able to f…

About 15 years ago my dad accidentally carried a pocket knife in his carry-on for about half a dozen different business trips before the TSA found it (he had used the same bag for a camping trip a month or two before). That it took so long to find destroyed what little trust we already had that the TSA was any more than security theater.

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#39

Post by [deleted] »

OldSchool wrote: post #31
input_sh wrote: post #3

> Most airports worldwide, including in the U.S., don’t scan passenger luggage for cash, a costly undertaking in equipment and personnel. This is the only shocker for me. Can anyone elaborate? I've always assumed x-ray scanners can't figure out the amount of cash, but shouldn't they be able to detect giant stacks of cash?

Customs can certainly approach you any time right up to the gate. In 2010, my wife and I were approached by an agent and asked very directly if we had more than $10,000 in USD cash with us as we waited at the gate to board a nonstop flight from the US to Moscow. We answered truthfully "no" in a brief conversation and he wished us well almost immediately. I don't think he suspected we were money launderers. My guess i…

[deleted]

Re: Billions in Dirty Money Flies Under the Radar at Busiest Airports

#40

Post by abhinavstarts »

foota wrote: post #32
smogcutter wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you assume that there's an even chance of getting caught (e.g., if searches are random based on the traveler) then fewer larger trips reduces the number of times your agent is caught. What? No it doesn’t. It just increases variance.

Yes it does. Let's say you have 100 trips to send money vs 1 trip. If there's a 10% chance to be caught on each trip, then with 100 trips 10 people are caught on average, whereas with 1 trip a tenth of a person is caught on average (more realistically, I'd look at the probably that more than N people are caught using a binomial, but I don't thinks it's important). Although that said, maybe it's worth it. With a 1% ch…

Amazing analysis.
Post reply on HN