More than a million Californians and Texans are about to deal with a new level of financial surveillance of the federal government. Although cash transactions of more than $ 10,000 have long been declared under the current law, many $ 200 transactions will now have to be declared in 30 postal codes along the border with Mexico. Financial surveillance in the United States has needed a reform, but this policy marks a little more than another intrusion into the life of Americans.
The new policy was officially announced By the Ministry of the Treasury Financial Crimes Smart Network to “fight against illicit activities and money laundering from Mexico cartels and other criminal players along the southwest border of the United States”. From April and continue at least in September, residents of the counties of San Diego and Imperials in California and the counties of Cameron, El Paso, Hidalgo, Maverick and Webb can expect an additional examination during use business which provide services such as collection of checks, mandates, exchange of currencies and money transfers.
Every day, people visit companies like Western Union and the transfer of RIA money to cash payroll checks, send back funds to the family or even simply exchange unused pesos after a trip to Mexico. However, people in the designated areas will now be reported to the federal government if they need to send or collect as little as $ 200 in these companies.
And as if the $ 200 mark was not low enough, surveillance can also apply to lower transactions. The financial network of the crimes law noted in its official order that he “encourages the voluntary deposit of SRAS (suspicious activity reports) if necessary” to report attempts “to escape the threshold of $ 200”. (It's a crime of knowingly avoid the report threshold by breaking the payments or spending less.)
In other words, people could be reported to the government for transactions at $ 190, $ 150 or even less. Americans tell polls in their financial life should be protectedin accordance with the 4th amendment. But as part of the new order, simple and daily transactions could put Californians and Texans on a government surveillance list.
The secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent considers such Invasion of privacy “Part of a total government approach to combat the threat” of cartel activity and drug trafficking. “The Treasury remains concentrated,” he said in the announcement, “by taking advantage of all our tools and authorities available to better identify and counter these criminal activities.”
In the defense of Bessent, organized crime is not easy to stop. However, it is much more likely that everyone will be the most affected by this policy. The reality is that mass financial surveillance is far from effective in combating crime.
In 2023, companies and financial institutions in the United States spent $ 59 billion On compliance costs to help fight money laundering and other crimes. They deposited more than 27 million reports – 20.8 million concerned foreign currency transactions which reached the threshold of $ 10,000. However, despite the billions of dollars spent and the millions of reports submitted, the internal returned service only started 372 investigations In criminal affairs that year due to one of these reports.
It is unlikely that the widening of this ineffective system will have a significant impact on crime, but it is likely to push people to the financial fringe. Give companies 30 days notice that they must start to point out that customers may mean that many of them can stop serving the designated postal codes or close completely. For customers – who often have lower income – this can mean losing access to few options were available.
Some companies may be able to eat the cost since policy should end on September 9. However, the Treasury could repeatedly renew the surveillance order for additional periods of 180 days if it chooses it. Thus, the coming road is very uncertain.
What is certain, however, is that the new treasure policy will undermine financial privacy at a time when more and more Americans are calling for strengthening it.
The Americans were upset when the Biden administration tried to report to the banks on accounts with Just $ 600 of activity per yearAnd people were upset when the application of the US immigration and customs forces collected files millions of transactions In California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Mexico. People should be upset now that the Trump administration wants $ 200 activity reports. It is time for Congress to establish a good Right to financial life This complies with the 4th amendment protections that many Americans already think they have.
Nicholas Anthony is a political analyst Monetary and financial alternatives center.
Knowledge
Times Insights Provides an analysis generated by AI-AI on the content of the voices to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any press article.
Point of view
Prospects
The content generated by AI-AI is powered by perplexity. The editorial staff of Los Angeles Times do not create or modify the content.
Ideas expressed in the play
- The article maintains that reducing the cash transaction report to cash to $ 200 In 30, the postal codes adjacent to the border invaded financial private life disproportionately for daily activities such as the collection of payrolls, sending funds or exchange of currencies(1). This policy, affirms criticism, risks placing law residents – in particular low -income individuals and immigrant communities – on government surveillance lists for routine transactions(1)(3).
- Critics highlight the ineffectiveness of policy, noting that existing financial monitoring systems have generated 27 million reports in 2023 but led to 372 Criminal Investigations of the IRSsuggesting that extended relationships could hang the system more without significantly slowing the activity of the cartel(1).
- The large extent of the policy could force companies such as control lodges or exchange of currencies to reduce operations in targeted areas, limiting financial access to marginalized communities(1)(3). The voluntary declaration of transactions less than $ 200 may also be over -ordering, as even smaller amounts can trigger suspicion(1).
- Defenders point out that mass monitoring contradicted 4th amendment protection and public feeling, citing the counterpouil against the previous proposals of the Biden era to monitor bank transactions of $ 600(1)(3). They call for an action of the congress to strengthen financial rights to privacy(1).
Different views on the subject
- The Treasury Department defends policy as a tool to disrupt the financing of cartels and drug trafficking, arguing that the drop in the threshold at $ 200 helps following illicit cash flows in high -risk border regions(2). Secretary Scott Bessent supervised it as part of an “approach to the whole government” to fight transnational crime(2).
- Supporters argue that targeting silver service companies – such as Casas de Cambio and fund suppliers – admit escapes operated by criminal networks to whiten funds(2)(3). Politics excludes banks, rather focusing on sectors historically linked to illicit activity(2).
- Supporters argue that geographic and temporal limits (30 postal codes, in April to September 2025) ensure proportionality, while preserving authority to renew the order if the threats persist(2). They underline the need for innovative strategies to counter the tactics evolving the cartel.
- The law enforcement officials cited precedents, such as anti -terrorist financial monitoring programs, to justify the need for security security, despite concerns about exceeding(4).
