Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Leith

(7,864 posts)

7. That SARS thing is the most surprising thing to me

Reply to UniteFightBack (Reply #2)

Wed May 22, 2019, 07:39 PM

May 2019

When I was a bank teller, SARs were important to my employer. They pushed them hard. We filled the simple form out every time a cash transaction was under $2,00 and suspicious (which was not often) and every time the cash transaction was between $2,000 and $10,000. If a cash transaction was $10,000 or over, even for a business, they had to fill out and sign the long form and sign it or we refused the transaction. No exceptions.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Congress's case for its subpoena on Deutsche bank was a SLAM DUNK. How do I know? [View all] pnwmom May 2019 OP

Excellent news. iluvtennis May 2019 #1

Yes this is very very very bad for rump and his whole family. They said this will provide quite the UniteFightBack May 2019 #2

That SARS thing is the most surprising thing to me Leith May 2019 #7

I work in the financial industry and that is what they push at every opportunity with all the UniteFightBack May 2019 #11

I Worked At SunTrust When The PATRIOT Act And Sarbanes-Oxley Were Enacted corbettkroehler May 2019 #12

I work in IT for a bank KatyMan May 2019 #15

I know nothing about banking, and this is probably out of the IT area, but just in case pnwmom May 2019 #16

Could have photocopied last week's decision... Wounded Bear May 2019 #3

Sort of like today's hissy fit about cover ups BigmanPigman May 2019 #4

So much for the claim that the only way to get the courts to move quickly StarfishSaver May 2019 #5

So far, my thought that the Judicial Branch would be unlikely pnwmom May 2019 #6

Be interesting to find out Linda Ed May 2019 #8

Well, that's a curious story at the Financial Times. pnwmom May 2019 #9

It was rock solid. herding cats May 2019 #10

That's because the 2 sides filed briefs to the Court previously. Honeycombe8 May 2019 #13

They had also filed briefs previously in the Mazars case, but that judge took a week. pnwmom May 2019 #14

KnR Hekate May 2019 #17

Just like we should have had articles if impeachment Laura PourMeADrink May 2019 #18

In that case the impeachment would look like an entirely partisan action. pnwmom May 2019 #19

I sincerely hope so...because some people are saying Laura PourMeADrink May 2019 #20

Think it may matter whether or not you think Laura PourMeADrink May 2019 #21