Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post

In a casino if you cash 8k at one cage and then 3k at the other, that is structuring the 11k transaction to avoid a CTR.
You are talking about attempting to avoid or circumvent a threshold that requires additional reporting. THAT is the very definition of structuring.

And there are actually legitimate reasons why a player would only cash out part. Lets say a player wins $11,000 but only cashes out $8000

1) Card counters like to keep a chip inventory for easy entrance into a game at a later time. So you are saving out $3000 towards that chip inventory.

2) maybe player is going to eat dinner and plans on playing after dinner, but doesn't want to have the entire amount of chips on him, in an attempt to limit losses. just wants to sit down with 3000-4000 to play with.

3) Maybe you want to lend someone you came with $3000 to gamble with, so you hold out $3000 in chips.

But guess what, none of these excuses really matter. It is still structuring by the letter of the law.

You write of the "letter of the law" as if it were a mere metaphor and not something which you could easily learn yourself.

Here: https://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/irm_04-026-013

In particular:

4.26.13.2 (04-10-2020)
Overview
Structuring is the practice of conducting financial transactions in a specific pattern calculated to avoid the creation of certain records and reports required by the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and/or IRC 6050I, Returns Relating to Cash received in Trade or Business, etc. (Form 8300, Report of Cash Payments Over $10,000 Received in a Trade or Business)


Which does not cover w2gs as far as I care to look.

Furthermore the casino is under no obligation to make quads pay 25:1, just as you are under no obligation to continue playing when you are close to a 10k win. They are not structuring an existing transaction, they are offering odds on wagers.
Correct. No casino is "structuring" when they offer a way for a player to keep from getting a signer via pay table changes. That's ridiculous. Casinos only do that to entice people who fear W2G's, to play. If the structuring nonsense were true then there wouldn't be an option for the player to play just a few credits less for the purpose of avoiding tax slips. And casinos like the Peppermill--where almost every vp machine offers betting between 1-25 credits on many denominations--would never be allowed such exploitable betting options.

Kew: wise up. You dont know a thing about how things "work"....or why.