As for proper money laundering, the main way was always offshort based (Mmm, Swiss Bank Acounts(, butthe classics still apply.

For example, you have a small drug ring doing penny-ante gang level dealing. You have a guy that runs a laundrymat. Now, you being an unemployed goober, it looks weird you bringing in wads of cash, so, you work out a deal where you just GIVE the money to your pal, he deposits it in his bank so that it looks legit, then he cuts you a check for the original money, minus a small slice for a transaction fee, and you get to drop off your new, "Clean" money in a bank somewhere. Resteraunts, art dealerships, "Import-Export Houses", and, heck, even *banks* are all ways of doing this, depending on how much is going through.

Yoinking somebody's Commlink, then buying new Aztidas sneakers? Not quite the same concept.

Also wrong per Runners Companion SR4 p.160


and yes I do know the Advanced lifestyle rules are an optional rule. Just saying though.

I suspect you're going to find most businesses must properly report their income, so unless the fellow is paying $5,000 to get a pair of jeans washed, it'll still run a risk of triggering alarms. There's a certain amount of leeway one way or the other (so an employed person can probably babysit under the table without any trouble, but if he makes $20k running drugs, it's likely to raise a flag somewhere), however I don't believe those limits are significantly different between a legitimate business and an unemployed person. So 'laundering' it through a for-profit business doesn't really help anyone.

However, groups like charities do not need to report their income, since they allow for anonymous charity donations. If the 'employed' person ran a church, the drug-dealer could 'donate' $20k to that church. The church can then cut the person a non-interest 'loan' with no stated collection date for some particular person.

Snow Fox wrote a fantastic post on this subject which is well worth your time if you're interested in the subject.

The key to a good money laundering operation is to have a reasonable explanation for that extra income, to "cook the books" as they say. Done well, it can take several man-years of forensic accounting work to discover the discrepancies. Done perfectly, it would be impossible to detect without inside knowledge.

That is what I was thinking of. Once you get it on the certified stick you are home free. It is as good as cash. the trick is getting it on the stick in the first place.

A laundromat would be particularly tricky to verify income on, unless you have a money counter in each machine. If they go they way I think they are, you use a credstick to buy a prepaid card. An increase of 5,000 might be a bit large, but depending on how much you usually bring in, it might not show up.

The best places to launder money are casinos. Because no one can verify how much was won or lost for a given night, you can easily launder a large sum of money. You don't even need to gamble much, or have the casino's permission. You just go in, buy 10,000 in chips, gamble away a thousand or so, and walk out of there with 9,000 in "winnings".

The weakness of the laundromat is in the utility bills. It is fairly simple to calculate the wattage used by an appliance and the price is written right on the machine. With those numbers and the reported income you can find a minimum value and a maximum value for power usage going by the numbers. If the actual power usage is significantly outside that range (to a degree that can't be accounted for by fiddling with the thermostat), then you know that something is wrong.

RFID tags on every article of clothing cleaned? When ever you need to find a way to make it not work out, just tap into the mess that is limitless wireless Matrix!

You could still keep the machines running 24/7. And calculate out how much cash per month you can launder with that fake business.

I really, sincerely doubt that a laundromat would keep that sort of information. And that's even assuming that RFID chips aren't hurt by the washing and drying process. But you're right that this aspect of the matrix makes no sense whatsoever.

So you'd have to have the IRS snooping on every laundromat, and have machines that won't start if the load in them differs much from the load as calculated from the RFID chips inside it... Tricky, that last. Especially for driers.

With boots on the ground and sufficient resource allocated, most laundering operations can be detected. Whether the Organised Crime Division (ooo. OCD.) of the Star are interested in penny-ante amounts is another matter.

Remember also that those clothes have owners that the RFID will flag. If you're washing and drying the same pair of jeans for the same customer 200 times a day, it will look odd. And yes, by the silly wireless standards of SR4 that data will exist (unless hacked), but nobody will really notice - until the IRS investigates.

Pfff, tell them you accept certified creds as its in a shitty part of town, and most of the people there can't afford the clothes with RFID in them.

Hmm. I guess I just assumed that since the amounts on certsticks were set upon creation at the bank, they would only be able to be changed at the bank. Like a cashier's check. But as long as they're tied to an account, I don't see why the account couldn't be debited.

AFAICT, all clothes have RFID in them - only the wealthy can afford the tech to remove them.

That alone will get you a hairly eyeball from the auditor if large amounts of your funds are coming or going in certified cred. Only two types deal in it with any regularity - the fabulously wealthy and criminals. I doubt our laundromat is catering to the AAA crowd.

That's not necessarily true. The SINless aren't criminals, but they'd use certified cred exclusively. Our laundromat could be catering to the SINless.

That's all well and good until large sums of money start moving through. When the non-taxed populace shows signs of having large amounts of money it attracts attention.

It would explain large amounts of (taxable) cred, though. Which is the point; business in a laundromat is harder to track than, say, a McHugh's. You can go off of inventory, and discover where the money came from. A laundromat? Not so much.

But like I said, the best bet is a casino. You can't track money in a casino; and depending on the game, you might not be allowed to tax it, either.

Cain is right ,if you use a stick with 50 on it to make a 30 purchase then all that happens is that the 30 is deduced from the stick leaving you with 20 left over. As for needing a whole pocket full of them the standard ones have a max of 5000 on them with the ebony have a max of 1,000,000 .

So just capture the data of your regulars and run them through 10 or 20 percent more often by tossing a handful of cloned RFID tags into the washer while it's running.



The data will be available to be collected, yes, but who's going to do that? Will RFID tag loggers be made mandatory in industrial washer-dryers?

Always assuming that there's still a high cash flow place for the laundromat in a world of disposables...

1) The SINless ARE necessarily criminals. They are, by definition, living illegally (if it's not illegal to be on UCAS turf without a SIN, it's certainly illegal to engage in commerce without one available, as people who don't have a SIN don't pay taxes, and people who don't pay taxes are breaking the law.)

2) They don't have to use certified cred exclusively. In places where a given currency is not available, another method of trade will evolve. Mafia-backed currency, corporate scrip, actual bills and coins and conventional barter are all noted as methods available for the SINless to use. From what I've read, most SINless won't have certified cred because of the difficulty inherit and acquiring it (at minimum, you have to get your butt to a bank and convince them to accept mafia currency, corporate scrip, actual bills and coins or barter as payment, without the benefit of an ID. Just try doing that now.)

This generates a very hard line between the rich and the poor. The poor need to struggle just to BUY essential services. This results in zones which are clearly barrios, and zones which clearly are not, because a legitimate store catering to SINned people will track costs and identities and won't accept SINless, while an illegitimate store will do the opposite.

Debatably, extraterritoriality (or straight bribery) allows some stores to operate in both arenas. This could be part of the success of Stuffer Shack. If it's officially extraterritorial, it may have different reporting requirements than the Kwik-E-Mart down the street. When the IRS agent is doing the rounds, he demands to see the number of supplies used at the Kwik-E-Mart, number of customers services and their identities, to determine actual profit. When he goes to the Stuffer Shack, he goes to Aztechnology and can get a 'condensed report' or somesuch.

Is it really mandatory to present a SIN at a street soydog seller to get your lunch?

When you let him charge your commlink, it will flash your sin to his, which will check it before processing the transaction... so yes.

You can do no-show jobs. Chicago municipal departments are full of them. Person is on the payroll, shows hours worked every day, has taxes withdrawn, etc. But essentially he just gets a check deposited in his account every two weeks, he may have never even SEEN the place he is supposed to work.

Like was said before, nowadays you can get a prepaid credit card without showing ID, all you need is cash. So yes, I can do that now: I can buy a bearer bond, or a credit card, with no ID and no hassle.

If you use certified cred, you don't need to flash a SIN.

I've never bought a prepaid credit card, however I can't buy money orders, even with cash, without showing an ID (I have no idea why, but thems the rules.) Heck, at many places I can't even buy train tickets without showing ID!

Using certified cred will not flash a SIN, however, there are many purchases you cannot make without a SIN (as has been previously established), and we aren't sure what is required to buy certified cred. So it could be this data is still tracked somehow, even if it isn't necessarily linked to the user.

I've worked at a grocery store as a cashier. We sold the prepaid debit cards. (100$ card = 108$ cost to you)

To sell them? We scan it, take their money, and it prints out an activation receipt, never had to check an ID unless you were trying to exceed our stores amount in one transaction policy and needed a manager to override it.

Transportation does require a SIN, although there might be ways around it. Right now, in theory you can't use air travel without an ID. But if you tell them you forgot your ID, you just go through a severe security check. You're also more likely to be "pulled aside" for a more intensive check. As for the money order, I just bought one without showing ID. Maybe things are different where you live?

To buy certified cred is apparently a lot like buying a bearer bond or prepaid credit card. You hand them your money; they take a transaction fee, and hand you your money.

To be clear, are you selling them a prepaid credit card, like American Express gift cards, or are you selling prepaid store gift cards, like say a Sears or Target card? Because the two are apples to oranges. I can't use a Target card to buy gas or pay rent.

Prepaid visa/american express/discover cards. They have a service fee, I think it was about 8$ for a 100$ card.

Gift cards, such as a sears or target card that we sold did not have any service fee. You put 100$ on it, you got 100$ value at that store.

Okay, so just having a commlink gives free access to small quantity transactions, without any buggering about with PINs or biometrics? And every tiny transaction gets checked against... something? That, I don't buy.

I think the point I'm trying to make, rhetorically, is that "checking stuff" costs money, and if that amount is a significant proportion of the transaction, then it's not worth making the transaction. You have to determine that limit for your view of the Sixth World. If all the "check" is, is a checksum calculation, then it's not worth doing (easy to fake the checksum), so it won't be done. If it's got to query some central database and check fingerprint hashes and DNA, then your street vendor isn't going to be able to make enough sales to make a living.

I believe that there will still be a small cash economy, and I think there's "official" support for that. Not every sale has to have an ID alongwith it, AFAIAC, since that would be dim, IMO.

I've bought a 41¢ stamp from the store on my debit/credit card. Most larger business don't give a damn. Most smaller ones will impose a minimum charge before allowing you to pay with credit.

I think commlinks function similarly to this.

Well, I know that McDonalds doesn't require credit card signatures for transactions under $25; or at least the ones near where I used to live did. But they still ran the card, and checked to make sure you had enough balance on it. They've got to do a minimal amount of check-ups on you, just to make sure your money is legit.

[boggle]

Over here in rightpondia, you will have a problem using a card with a signature for anything, and you will *always* be asked for your PIN. Almost no one will take a card transaction for less than £5.



Do hot dog vendors take a lot of their trade via card?

Here in the US, most credit cards don't have pins, its only debit cards that do.

I don't know about SR4. From what I remember, however, it was the user's choice. He could set it to either require PIN/biometrics for every purchase or not, to either transfer lots of data to the seller or only the minimal necessary. There may have been one to not transmit any data to the seller, but the data is still getting transmitted to the bank and the bank is just affirming it's okay, so the information is still tracked, even if not tracked by the seller himself.

In SR3, I was under the impression that it always requires authentication, although I couldn't find a page quote for you. Certified cred is the exception.



Checking if the account has money costs money, since you have to send a message to the credit card company. I believe they charge about .25% of the transaction amount, or some flat fee, per charge. It doesn't cost anything additional to require a PIN or check your signature, but it does cost time (and yes, time is money). I've read up some on how credit cards worked, and I've not seen anything anywhere which changes the price based on how many security features you use or don't use (although I believe you accept increased liability for theft if you don't use the security features - probably why some stores don't require a signature for under $25. They decided the risk of theft * $25 is less than the value of the time spent prompting for a signature.)




Do note, that is in violation of their credit card agreement. If they charge you $.25 for using a Visa card instead of cash, if you call Visa, they will refund you and deal with the vendor appropriately. When Visa set up their machine, it was on the condition that every buyer get charged the same whether they're using cash or credit card.

You misunderstood me. I mean, they will not accept credit card for payment unless your total is more than 4-5$ generally. The price doesn't change, but if you want to guy a gumball for 25¢, they're gonna ask for cash, and won't run a card.

Depends, but increasingly yes. We also have a lot of fast food hamburger joints, and they all take credit and debit cards.

IIRC, it depended on the amount transacted. So, a small purchase would only require a PIN, while more expensive purchases required an increasing amount of biometric data.

Depending on your state laws, that may be illegal. I know that in Washington state, they can't apply a minimum purchase fee to your card, and they frown on minimum purchase policies in general.

No FEE! What is so hard to understand.

You walk up there with your gumball, and he says "thats 25 cents." You whip out your credit card, and he goes "no, sorry, gotta use cash, the amounts too low."

Why would he say that? Probably because it costs him close to 25cents to charge your card, so its not worth it for him to sell you the gumball.

Ahem.

While I see where you're coming from, that doesn't change the fact that minimum purchase policies might be illegal in your jurisdiction.

I don't think they can be illegal. They have the right to refuse to do business with a customer if they want.

Like I said, I don't know your state laws. I do know that you can't discriminate: if you allow some purchases with a credit card, you have to allow everyone to purchase with a credit card. Rather or not that translates into removing minimum purchase requirements is up to your local laws.

The credit card thing is not a state law, it's part of the contract. When your hot dog vendor decides he wants to be able to accept Visa cards, he calls up Visa, pays them a down payment on the card reader and such, and they send him a fat contract. One of the conditions of that contract is 'you will not charge extra for using a credit card over cash' and, I suspect, 'you will not require a minimum purchase to allow for the use of credit card'. Should the vendor violate the agreement and Visa finds out, they go over, take his card reader, and he can no longer use Visa ever again (and knowing Visa, they may have other penalties wrapped into the contract). State jurisdiction doesn't really come into it.



I should have been more clear.

I believe the situation is, when you're given your credstick, you can manually change the settings on your account to require more or less verification, just like right now I can set something that, in theory, online purchases require a password. The default would be as you described, but I believe a user could set it to require more identification with some purchases, or less with others (with suitable acceptance of liability). But again, I couldn't get a reference for you on that.

There are plenty of places over here in the UK that will charge you for credit cards (because they take a whopping three (3) percent gross commission) but not debit cards (which don't). I don't know whether these retailers are in breach of their CC trader contract, but it certainly occurs. The advent of legislation forcing cards to be accepted for small transactions would see some classes of shops ceasing to accept cards, or going out of business, given the competition from the big supermarket chains and the inherent lack of economies of scale of the smaller concern.

Some of these issues go away with the pervasive Matrix, but I still think there would be a place for a small-value anonymous "coin replacement" or even actual currency.

I'll agree to that. My paypal account is set up so that I get an email every time a purchase is made. IIRC, this is a standard, but optional, feature.



There was a major crackdown a few years ago, at least in Washington state. The news channels were all reporting that a vendor could not add a minimum-use charge for anything; Visa came down on some people as well. I suspect it's a matter of time before Visa comes knocking on doors in the UK; they're probably buys cracking down over here.

As far as the Shadowrun issues go, I think you hit on one of the reason certified cred still exists. It's the last replacement for cash out there.

Its a convenient replacement for cash, since it can be used in automated and register-less systems. And since nuyen is the international standard, certified cred can be used in any jurisdiction without a hassle. This feature is most useful in a world where your corner grocery store and your shopping mall are technically in different countries. Actual cash still exist, but is much rarer.