Why should $200 cost me my privacy?

SURVEILLANCE STATE

There are numerous currency exchange houses located in San Ysidro that could be affected by a new U.S. Treasury Department regulation that requires them to track names, addresses and Social Security numbers of many of their customers. The rule is now on hold because of a court order. LAURA CASTAÑEDA — San Diego Union-Tribune

Image

You don’t need to be a financial expert to predict the consequences of this. The math is easy. The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) recently issued a Geographic Targeting Order that lowers significantly the standard reporting threshold for money services businesses operating in 30 ZIP codes along the U.S.-Mexico border.

While two temporary restraining orders have stalled the regulations for now, the Trump administration is determined to require that money services businesses located in the specific areas in San Diego and Imperial counties in California and Cameron, El Paso, Hidalgo, Maverick and Webb counties in Texas must file Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) for cash transactions exceeding $200.

Additionally, money services businesses will be required to verify and record the identity of individuals conducting these transactions, including their name, address, and taxpayer identification number or Social Security Number.

The strategy is clear, and, while the intention of curbing money laundering is valid, this policy — if implemented — will disproportionately harm legitimate businesses and communities, rather than solve the problem. And a lot of small businesses — especially mom-and-pop money services or local check-cashing spots near the border — are probably going to take a big hit from this.

Imagine a hardworking family in San Diego needing to send money to a relative across the border for an emergency and how a simple $200 transaction can become a bureaucratic nightmare. The family might be forced to make the transaction online instead, sacrificing the convenience or cost-effectiveness of local businesses.

Now picture the group of four tourists, ready for a weekend trip to the wineries near Ensenada. Each must have cash to exchange before leaving the country, or perhaps they will choose to do it south of the border, where the rate will be lower but they won’t be scrutinized for exchanging over $200.

You can also figure out that the patient who is trying to cross from San Diego to Tijuana to visit a dentist or a plastic surgeon will choose a practical solution to the unnecessary hurdles the U.S. government wants to create for something that should be quick and easy.

Having lived and worked on both sides of the border, I have been one of the many cross-border workers who use these businesses to cash checks, send money abroad or exchange money before heading to Mexico. And having traveled through other countries and borders around the world, I know it is understandable to be questioned when having over $10,000, even $1,000. But $200? That’s less than 4,000 Mexican pesos. Why is that suspicious?

What is clear is that these regulations will make it harder for everyday people to conduct routine financial transactions, adding stress and potential costs to those just trying to send money to loved ones or pay bills.

But there’s hope, as shown by the temporary restraining orders issued by federal courts in California and Texas. One came after a San Diego small business owner sued the Trump administration, saying that the new reporting requirement “will sweep up information about countless everyday transactions” in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The other judicial order came in Texas, where at least 11 businesses won temporary relief from having to report these transactions to the Department of Treasury.

But in the larger picture, now is when our authorities should develop new and more targeted strategies to combat money laundering, focusing on larger transactions or better enforcement of existing laws. And now is when those leading the country should consider the realities of life on the border before implementing sweeping changes.

Yes, money flows differently in the border regions — that is why we are culturally and economically different. But that should not be an excuse to treat us differently or to bend our rights. Our communities’ sustainability and well-being will be defended.

Around these days, there’s a song floating in my head, but I have to change some of the lyrics to adapt it to this new era. “It’s The End Of The World As We Know It” — but I don’t feel fine.

Tania Navarro is community opinion editor at The San Diego Union-Tribune. She is a transfronteriza who lives on both sides of the border.