PDA

View Full Version : Families rare Double Eagle confiscated buy Feds when sent to be authenticated



slvrbugjim
7th July 2011, 12:19 PM
I would say that it is not a good idea to send your coins to the Federal Government to determine their value.......Just my quick thoughts here...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/family-fights-government-over-rare-double-eagle-gold-151853030.html

jeweler's heirs are fighting the United States government for the right to keep a batch of rare and valuable "Double Eagle" $20 coins that date back to the Franklin Roosevelt administration. It's just the latest coin controversy to make headlines.

Philadelphian Joan Langbord and her sons say they found the 10 coins in 2003 in a bank deposit box kept by Langbord's father, Israel Switt, a jeweler who died in 1990. But when they tried to have the haul authenticated by the U.S. Treasury, the feds, um, flipped.

They said the coins were stolen from the U.S. Mint back in 1933, and are the government's property. The Treasury Department seized the coins, and locked them away at Fort Knox. The court battle is set to kick off this week.

The rare coins (pictured), first struck in 1850, show a flying eagle on one side and a figure representing liberty on the other. One such coin recently sold at auction for $7.6 million, meaning the Langbords' trove could be worth as much as $80 million.

The coins are part of a batch that were struck but then melted down after President Roosevelt took the country off the gold standard in 1933, during the Great Depression. Two were given to the Smithsonian Institute, but a few more mysteriously escaped.

The government has long believed that Switt schemed with a corrupt cashier at the Mint to swipe the coins. They note that the deposit box in which the coins were found was rented six years after Switt's death, and that the family never paid inheritance tax on the coins.

A lawyer for the Langbords counters that the coins could have left the Mint legally since it was permissible to swap gold coins for gold bullion.

Authorities in the Roosevelt era twice looked into Switt's coin dealings, including his possession of Double Eagle coins. In 1944, Switt's license to deal scrap gold was revoked.

The battle over the Double Eagles is hardly the only recent coin contretemps. Two British metal-detecting enthusiasts are said to be locked in a bitter dispute over how to divide the profits from a horde of Iron Age gold coins that they unearthed together in eastern England in 2008.

And an 80-year-old California man was jailed in 2009 after allegedly hitting another man in the head with a metal pipe and firing a gun at a third man during a dispute over missing gold coins.

solid
7th July 2011, 12:42 PM
Yes, gold coins are trouble...trouble I tell you! They will get the gov after you, they are a horde that will cause you a bitter dispute, and worse they may cause you to whack someone over the head with pipe.

I don't know why anyone would want to own any. ::)

Gaillo
7th July 2011, 12:47 PM
We all know what REALLY happened... they lost their PM's in a horrible ".gov-ing accident"! ;D

Ash_Williams
7th July 2011, 12:49 PM
That was a bad idea.
Coins that rare up here are often known as "back door specials".
Every coin show has an RCMP officer in plainclothes striking up a conversation with any vendors that seem to have a lot of oddities on their table.

slvrbugjim
7th July 2011, 12:50 PM
Yes, gold coins are trouble...trouble I tell you! They will get the gov after you, they are a horde that will cause you a bitter dispute, and worse they may cause you to whack someone over the head with pipe.

I don't know why anyone would want to own any. ::)

Yes it is not surprising that the article, which is very poorly written, portreys ownership of PMs as being very dangerous, LOL


Sending the Feds $80 million in PMs. not so smart, count that as a donation to the USA Corporation

palani
7th July 2011, 01:06 PM
This sentence struck me as a little curious.


Switt's license to deal scrap gold was revoked

Here is what Connecticut requires


In Connecticut, A license is not required to make purchases from a wholesaler and/or retailer for the purpose of resale. However, purchases made from a personal owner requires a license. Chapter 414 (Purchasers of Precious Metals and Stones), Secs 21-101 to 21-110 of the Connecticut General Statutes governs licensing.

Sec. 21-100. License required. Fee. Record of transactions. (a) No person may engage in or carry on the business of purchasing gold or gold-plated ware, silver or silver-plated ware, platinum ware, watches, jewelry, precious stones or coins unless such person is licensed by the chief of police or, if there is no chief of police, the first selectman of the municipality in which such person intends to carry on such business; except that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the purchase of such items from a wholesaler by a manufacturer or retail seller whose primary place of business is located in this state. Such person shall pay an annual fee of ten dollars for such license. The license may be revocable for cause, which shall include, but not be limited to, failure to comply with any requirements for licensure specified by the licensing authority at the time of issuance. A chief of police or first selectman shall refuse to issue a license under this subsection to a person who has been convicted of a felony. A chief of police or first selectman may require any applicant for a license to submit to state and national criminal history records checks. If the chief of police or first selectman requires such criminal history records checks, such checks shall be conducted in accordance with section 29-17a. For the purposes of this subsection “wholesaler” means a person in the business of selling tangible personal property to be resold at retail or raw materials to be manufactured into suitable forms for use by consumers.


(b) Each such licensed person shall keep a record in which he shall note at the time of each transaction a description of the goods purchased and the price paid for them, the name and address of the person selling the goods and the date and hour any such goods were received. Each such licensed person shall demand positive identification from the person selling the article and the type or form of identification received shall be noted in the record. Any state police officer or municipal police officer shall have access to the record required to be kept under this section and may inspect the place where the business is carried on as well as any goods purchased or received.

(c) No such licensed person may purchase any goods from a minor unless such minor is accompanied by a parent or guardian. Each such licensed person may only pay for goods received by check, draft or money order and no cash shall be transferred to either party in the course of a transaction subject to the provisions of this section.

(d) At the time of making any purchase each licensed person shall deliver to the person selling goods a receipt containing the information required to be recorded in subsection (b) of this section, the amount paid for any goods sold and the name and address of the purchaser.

(e) Upon request of the licensing authority each such licensed person shall make a weekly sworn statement, describing the goods received and setting forth the name and address of each person from whom goods were purchased, to the chief of police or first selectman of each municipality in which he transacted business that week. Such sworn statement shall not be deemed public records for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act, as defined in section 1-200.

(f) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars.


Note the "snitch" provision in para. (e).

Buddha
7th July 2011, 04:38 PM
Was it tax deductable?