Talk:Structuring

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of crime and criminal biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance). Finance & Investment Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

While it is clear that smurfing relates to the show "The Smurfs", where do a "stream of cheery students arriving in the Cayman Islands with packs of money" factor into it? Also, another way they could arrive at smurf is that the intent is to change the size of the transaction, shrink it, and the smurfs are small. The section also attributes law enforcement and not the criminals with the term. Hackwrench 17:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is such a phoney non-crime. It's non of these governments' business what we do with our own money. --Kalmia 03:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

https://paualready.wordpress.com/tag/misleading-names-of-legislation/ Pretty much explores this concept. I can't remember what the name of the 'law' (in English literary sense) is for ironically-named legislation. There was a famous author who had a great quote. Maybe I'll remember it or find it, and maybe someone else will remember it before I update this. Banking Secrecy Act can't be more ironic as it's a mandatory-spying bill. Not sure if it's sad or funny, but US$10K isn't a whole lot of money for some folks doing legitimate business. Namely, truckers, farmers, or anyone else that has to deal with auctions where they DO NOT take checks. 2601:1:9500:6D5:EDC7:D88B:4DF0:3329 (talk) 05:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just searched for the words "structure" and "structuring" in the consolidated version of the Canadian Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (S.C. 2000, c. 17) It appears to literally be a non-crime in Canada. Just for good measure I checked the consolidated Crimial Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) as well: instances of the word "structure" in that act seems to refer to buildings. Edit: Tried the term "parceling" as well due to the Australian referance in the regulatory table.70.74.233.146 (talk) 16:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why countries are listed in that table when no information (none?) is available for them? Soosed 06:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article states:

In the United States, the Bank Secrecy Act requires the filing of a currency transaction report (CTR) for transactions of US$10,000.01 or more.

Should this be just $10,000? Hgrosser (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to say "over $10,000". I know we are supposed to be exact but, in this instance, that seems nicely to avoid the problem for now (and seems no worse than what the quoted law itself says)— interpret it as $10,000 or $10,000.01 as you wish. SimonTrew (talk) 16:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This section has now been flagged for 3+ months for original research. Reading through it, it seems to be a poorly-written rehash of the rest of the Background section, replacing concrete facts with hypothetical, even contrived, examples. It adds nothing to the article, and, in my opinion, detracts from it. As such, I'm removing this section. Arathald (talk) 06:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few cosmetic edits. The article does include quite a bit of unsourced commentary and opinion. Famspear (talk) 04:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smurfing is also a slang term used for wacking another person in the face with your penis. This is because the mark that is left resembles a smurf hat. This is used in both the US and Britain as far as I know.

Indeed, smurfing is also a term used to describe intentionally losing a game with the intent of helping the other team. It is related to fixing, and is a commonly used term in internet games that have a ranking system that involves PvP content. Examples include Ladder play in WC3, Arena play in World of Warcraft, Guild battles in Guild Wars, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti dan (talk • contribs) 01:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to Canadian structuring laws refers to financial organizations having to band together transactions in a 24 hour period. Nowhere is a reference to show that it is illegal for an individual in Canada to attempt to avoid reporting laws by structuring their transactions or a reference to any specific law. 2607:FEA8:3AE1:E200:B04B:587F:110C:3F61 (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]