Taking $200 Out of an ATM Should Not Trigger Federal Financial Surveillance
No, not even if you do it in a county that borders Mexico.

One of President Donald Trump's Day 1 executive orders designated "certain international cartels" as "foreign terrorist organizations," a classification that according to the State Department "play[s] a critical role in our fight against terrorism and [is] an effective means of curtailing support for terrorist activities and pressuring groups to get out of the terrorism business."
To that end, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) announced a new rule cracking down on cash transactions this week, but only in certain geographical regions. No matter the administration's intent to target cartels, the rule will expand government surveillance of its citizens.
FinCEN "issued a Geographic Targeting Order (GTO) to further combat the illicit activities and money laundering of Mexico-based cartels and other criminal actors along the southwest border of the United States," according to the announcement. "The GTO requires all money services businesses (MSBs) located in 30 ZIP codes across California and Texas near the southwest border to file Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) with FinCEN at a $200 threshold, in connection with cash transactions."
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the change "underscores our deep concern with the significant risk to the U.S. financial system of the cartels, drug traffickers, and other criminal actors along the Southwest border."
The order lists all 30 ZIP codes in counties that each abut the U.S.–Mexico border: San Diego and Imperial Counties in California; and Cameron, El Paso, Hidalgo, Maverick, and Webb Counties in Texas. California's are the state's only two border counties, but the five in Texas encompass only a small portion of the state's total southern border. It's not clear why these seven counties were chosen out of the 44 total border counties, including any in Arizona or New Mexico.
Federal law requires banks, as well as businesses that provide services like check cashing or currency exchange, to fill out CTRs as a means of protecting against illegal activity like money laundering. Financial transactions totaling at least $10,000 in cash per day—including deposits, withdrawals, or a combination—require a CTR, where the institution must collect and record personal identifying information from the client, like a Social Security or tax ID number. The reports are then sent to FinCEN. (CTRs are different from suspicious activity reports, which are only triggered when a financial institution actively suspects the customer might be doing something illegal.)
The rule remains in effect in the rest of the country, but in those seven border counties, FinCEN has dropped the reporting threshold from $10,000 to $200. While ATM transactions don't often qualify since they typically have a much lower withdrawal limit, they are technically also subject to the CTR threshold—meaning a $200 cash withdrawal in one of seven counties could soon make one subject to a federal financial report.
"More than one million Americans are about to face a new level of financial surveillance," writes Nicholas Anthony, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute. "Financial surveillance in the United States has long needed reform, but this move is in the wrong direction."
Anthony says rather than lowering the threshold, the $10,000 baseline is overdue to be raised.
The federal government first began requiring banks to log and report all cash transactions of $10,000 or more in 1952. The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 established CTRs as we know them today, and Treasury regulations enacted in 1972 set the threshold at $10,000.
As Anthony points out, the $10,000 threshold has remained since that time. If it had been raised even just to keep up with inflation, the current minimum for filing a CTR would be anywhere between $80,000 and $180,000, depending on whether you start from the pre-CTR rules in 1952 or the adoption of the current rules two decades later.
Instead, the CTR minimum has remained the same since it was first enacted, even as the power of the dollar has declined: $10,000 today is equivalent to $1,372 in 1972—a fraction of what the regulation required.
For this reason, the number of CTRs has ballooned far past the point that any bureaucracy could feasibly find it useful. Last year, FinCEN reported that for FY 2023, businesses and financial institutions filed around 20.8 million CTRs—an average of 57,000 per day.
"Inflation may have contributed to the increase in volume of CTRs filed, which has increased by about 62 percent since fiscal year 2002," according to a December 2024 report from the Government Accountability Office. "The inflation-adjusted threshold in 2023 would have been about $72,880. Using an inflation-adjusted threshold would have reduced the number of CTRs filed by at least 90 percent annually since 2014."
The Trump administration's push to crack down on penny-ante cash transactions is reminiscent of actions the Biden administration attempted.
In a 2021 bill ostensibly passed to provide relief from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Biden administration included a provision that would require gig economy companies like Uber, eBay, and Etsy to report anyone to the IRS who earned at least $600 per year on their platform—a dramatic cut from the previous minimum of $20,000 per year or 200 transactions.
The Biden administration also proposed a rule requiring banks to report to the IRS any customers with at least $600 in annual deposits and withdrawals—in other words, nearly everybody. (The IRS has since delayed the gig worker rule, and the Biden administration raised the reporting requirement on the latter from $600 to $10,000 annually.)
Clearly, the Trump administration is adamant that drug cartels south of the border should be brought to heel—hence the repeated calls by Republicans over the past few years for the U.S. to invade or bomb Mexico. But just as those methods would be an aggressive overreach of U.S. foreign policy, subjecting innumerable law-abiding citizens to additional financial surveillance is an aggressive overreach of fiscal policy.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
You never said anything when Democrats did it you hypocrite. That makes it ok.
ZZZZZZZ
We need to collectively put Sac on ignore. He wants attention.
He does not provide content. He is hitting SQRSLY levels.
If comparing Dems and Reps is so wrong why have you responded to every criticism of Dem spending by comparing them to Reps? What is different now that makes this wrong? I mean, besides that when you whatabouted it was protecting Dems and now attacking whataboutism attacks Reps.
Because Republicans always fuck things up.
Bush the Lesser had full control of Congress and took a Clinton surplus and ran up the first $1 trillion plus deficits.
Trump V.1. took a $500 billion Obama deficit (yes, he cut it in half) and left a $3 trillion deficit.
Trump V.2 will blow up the deficit again, I assure you. Part of it is structural (the debt service), the coming recession and his tax cuts without spending cuts.
The first trillion-dollar deficit was 2008-9 and was for a budget signed by Obama, not by Bush.
Hmm, the $3T came only in 2020. Did something happen that year?
You don't know the difference between budget and actual.
The actual budget was scored $1.2 trillion by the CBO while Dumbya was president.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna28539403
Suck on that, bitch.
A 3 second google proves you demonstrably wrong, and a worthless cuck.
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/
There was no remarkable debt until Obama who skyrocketed it from nothing into the trillions. Then the debt went down significantly under Trump, then went off the charts with the deep state as president.
Dear god I hope you didn’t reproduce.
Comparing is fine. But that’s not what the constant accusations of hypocrisy directed at Trump critics are. They are dismissing criticism by attacking the critic. Thinking people call that a fallacy while Trump defenders call it airtight logic.
They are dismissing criticism by attacking the critic. Thinking people call that a fallacy while Trump defenders call it airtight logic.
Not just Trump defenders though, you did it as well. Why did it only become a fallacy when they did it?
You are so incredibly boring. It is, literally, the same thing from you. Every. Single. Post.
Because everyone knows what a catastrophe of a person Trump is. In the same way Jamie "Mr. Haney" Comer hick-yodeled for a year about the "Biden Crime Family" as a way to make Biden somehow seem "just as bad" as Trump, the cultists believe that raging screeds are the only way to distract from the actuality of their guy. If you look crazier than the guy you're arguing with, he'll quit thinking about the point he is making to concern himself with your craziness. What are you expecting, critical thinking and self reflection? Please.
Depends on what an 8-ball costs.
Who tf buys 8 balls? You must be hanging with a bunch of bubble gummers if you’re trying to score a fucking 8 ball of anything. Poseur
The Surveillance State is akin to a police state.
One cannot have one without the other, and keep in mind those who are monitoring your actions are not your ordinary Karen.
They have badges, guns and fascist judges who have no problem arresting and imprisoning you for any and all minor financial transactions.
The surveillance state is now being weaponized toward women, their menstrual cycles, contraception choice, and travel proclivities.
At least in the Red states.
Can you provide evidence of this?
Also, can you explain why you're SPB #2?
On the up side, Elon plans to fire them too.
Or just on a technicality.
Or just for the fuck lf it.
Get a warrant, assholes!
Yeah, fuck that. No surveillance or reporting requirements of cash transactions of any size are OK. The war on cash is a war on personal freedom and independence. If you want to secure the border, do that. Leave people on this side of it alone (or get a warrant).
Perfectly said!
I think it is bad policy as well. Innocents do not lose rights because terrible people do very bad things.
As much as I support the idea of removing incentives for (illegal) border crossing, I completely agree with you. This is stupid. You don't have a right to attack cash.
On the other hand, to be sure, they aren't doing anything Google isn't.
My ATM doesn't even offer amounts in the quick options that are under 200. You have to go deep down into the other options and press lots of buttons to enter something smaller.
Not, perhaps, a violation of libertarian principles to privacy, no mention of MYOB? Not even bad fiscal policy, just an overreach?
One would be hard-pressed to find any libertarian slant in this article.
This is nothing new. FinCEN has a long history of geographic targeting orders intended to track potential money laundering, etc. See: https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-renews-real-estate-geographic-targeting-orders
I agree that the $200 threshold is impractical as it will generate a tsunami of CTRs affecting a majority of all financial bank and MSB transactions within these zip codes. There's no way they have the staff to review even 1 tenth of a percent of the new reports. Not to mention the added work load to file them by the various financial institutions. I would not be surprised if the FinCEN CTR reporting web site crashes under the load. Time for DOGE to look into this grossly inefficient order.
Also, a technical correction. The general limit for filing a CTR is a transaction the is more than $10,000. Not $10,000 or more. The system will not allow you to file a CTR for only $10,000. I know, I tried.
Misleading article and headline - the rule impacts Money Services Businesses - NOT banks.
https://www.fincen.gov/money-services-business-definition
Cash and Bitcoin are the answer. I haven't used an ATM in ten years.
ATMs are how you get cash.
So would that mean that someone who regularly takes $100 out of the ATM is guilty of structuring?
It's not clear why these seven counties were chosen out of the 44 total border counties, including any in Arizona or New Mexico.
Sure it is. Existing surveillance and monitoring has almost certainly turned up a lot of sketchy stuff in those seven counties. Or perhaps the ATMs there get a lot of disproportionate use compared to the other counties. Yea, you're right that's an educated guess at best - but we're cracking down on this border, we're cracking down on people exploiting it, and we're cracking down on criminal activity that's tied to illegal alienage. And we're going to hit them where it hurts - their financial operations.
There's nothing wrong with that. You're not their target.