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

41–50 of 97 posts

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

#41

Post by roenxi »

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…

Article is paywalled, but the headline says billions (10^8) and a suitcase has hundred thousands (10^5), and therefore we might be talking of around 10^3 suitcases. I can see why a 4x increase in the number of trips might be operationally significant. They might even be doing a trial run of 5 suitcases to check if they can make that their usual mode of operation since it'd be a substantial cost reduction.

> They were offered "around $3,750" to fly suitcases containing around $500,000 each. Which is not a high percentage even for just a single suitcase.

Couriers aren't really the value-add part of the operation, so this makes sense to me. Nearly nobody gets paid as a % of the value they are handling. A legal operation could move this for an order of magnitude less so there is actually a hefty premium here.

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

#42

Post by yodsanklai »

quartesixte wrote: post #11
HighlandSpring wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My best guess is a lack of willing participants combined with pressure from up top to move money to keep the operation going/meet targets. We also don't know how much of that 500k is profit - maybe the margins in organised crime aren't what they used to be. Each $3,750 saved is money they can put straight into their pocket as their boss might never find out how many mules they ended up using. Or maybe the reporting i…

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

I remember some very sad news about a drug smuggler, a poor woman from the Philippines, condemned to an insanely harsh sentence in Singapore (perhaps even death penalty?). At least, the UK justice system should be less cruel.

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

#43

Post by yodsanklai »

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?

They have but it needs to be declared so as to avoid tax evasion and money laundering

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

#44

Post by [deleted] »

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?

[deleted]

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

#45

Post by mindslight »

HideousKojima wrote: post #38
lettergram wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're misunderstanding the mechanism of the TSA. How it actually works is that after "terrorists" get all riled up "hating us for our freedom", the experience of having to deal with the diametrically-opposed-to-freedom TSA takes the wind right out of their sails.

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

#46

Post by [deleted] »

imglorp wrote: post #21

If someone really wanted to slow illicit businesses, they would look at ones of the US's biggest exports: shell corporations. Delaware and South Dakota churn them out legally by the hundreds of thousands. This is how all that laundering, tax evasion, and worse is performed. Tie then all to owners and halt much of this.

[deleted]

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

#47

Post by greenavocado »

hiddencost wrote: post #23
lettergram wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Boston is not a gun friendly town. You got lucky.

Boston, along with many Democrat strongholds in America, is strongly in favor of disarming the public, including law abiding citizens. The fact that this is normalized, including confiscation from a law abiding citizen, is absurd. There is an important legal document which states: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Nevermind the fact that legal gun owners and especially CHP holders are responsible for approximately zero crime.

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

#48

Post by FabHK »

yodsanklai wrote: post #42
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.

I remember some very sad news about a drug smuggler, a poor woman from the Philippines, condemned to an insanely harsh sentence in Singapore (perhaps even death penalty?). At least, the UK justice system should be less cruel.

One?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Singapor...

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

#50

Post by FabHK »

roenxi wrote: post #41
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…

Article is paywalled, but the headline says billions (10^8) and a suitcase has hundred thousands (10^5), and therefore we might be talking of around 10^3 suitcases. I can see why a 4x increase in the number of trips might be operationally significant. They might even be doing a trial run of 5 suitcases to check if they can make that their usual mode of operation since it'd be a substantial cost reduction. > They were…

A billion is 10^9, billions around 10^10, thus one or two orders of magnitude more suitcases.
Post reply on HN