What are the good reasons? I can understand one party not wanting to deal with a large amount of cash. But the government shouldn't have any say in how much cash you use.
Or you know so that if someone kidnaps your wife and gets a mil in ransom or sells enough hard drugs to kids he can't just go buy a yacht and casually sail away to Fiji
In that scenario, where your wife is dead if you don't pay the ransom, is it good that the government stops you from paying the ransom?
Maybe, because if the government stops everyone from paying ransoms, there is no point demanding a ransom. The person whose wife is being held as a hostage probably won't see it that way.
> is it good that the government stops you from paying the ransom
The government does not hover a drone with you at all times that counts your cash and stops you. But are two sides to every transaction. if transaction breaks the law any side can go to the law enforcement. Depending on country they may get a bonus for this too.
Now please picture me how your wife's kidnapper goes to the police saying that the ransom you paid exceeded $10k.
Crimes are brought by the government once it discovers the crime, not by anyone. Anyone can provide evidence to the government that a crime was committed.
Correct. Now please picture me how your wife's kidnapper goes to the police saying that the ransom you paid exceeded $10k.
Someone who did a much more serious crime is not gonna go to law enforcement because his ass is going to be the one charged considering the circumstances.
But if a massive cash transaction is illegal good luck kidnapper doing stuff with a bulk of ransom money. Hey it may even put him off that whole kidnapping idea yeah? Or at least get him caught so he doesn't kidnap more people somewhere else
Usually such restrictions are defended as being necessary to ensure the government gets their cut of the action and to keep criminals from being able to easily handle the fruits of their law breaking.
