What do you do with 298,745 cents?

[SkyMan]

"A Virginia man who had a beef with the Department of Motor Vehicles settled his sales tax bill with 298,745 pennies."

 

 

Link

[PocketArt]

IDK- looks like he painted a big target on his back. At any rate, I'd hate to do business with the guy unless he brought me a wheelbarrow full of varieties.

 

 

[nk1nk]

That's a lot of freaking pennies! I once lost a 100 dollar bet and spent my day going bank to bank buying rolls of pennies then dumping them in a canvas bag. It was pretty hefty. I can't imagine what this guy went through to get those and deliver them. Hilarious!

[Walkerfan]

He cut off his nose to spite his face imho.

 

All the time, energy and money he spent to empty, load and deliver those pennies just to be a hemorrhoid to someone whom he felt had slighted him.

 

I'd hate to do business with him, as he seems about as unreasonable and vindictive as they come.

[Six Mile Rick]

So that's where all the 2017-P mint mark pennies went.

[thebeav]

The DMV could have demanded that he have them rolled first. I would have required them to be rolled or refuse the money. If that meant he was late on the tax, it would also mean additional penalty and interest.

 

Very true....They were under no obligation to accept them.

[PerryHall]

The DMV could have demanded that he have them rolled first. I would have required them to be rolled or refuse the money. If that meant he was late on the tax, it would also mean additional penalty and interest.

 

Very true....They were under no obligation to accept them.

 

You are wrong. Cents are legal tender for all debts public and private. That said, the guy is a jerk and the only people he hurt were the low paid clerks that had to deal with all these cents.

[johnny9434]

saw that on the news yesterday. had to smile and walk away

[RWB]

RE: "....beef with the Department of Motor Vehicles settled his sales tax bill with 298,745 pennies."

 

1. Virginia DMV does not impose taxes of any kind. They do not accept tax payments.

2. Localities have a personal property tax on vehicles.

3. Neither the state of Virginia nor business are required to accept payments that impose an undue burden on them in processing the payment.

4. DMV does not sell or process beef -- not even if you hit it with your car on a highway.

 

Also, from the Treasury Dept. web site:

 

Q: I thought that United States currency was legal tender for all debts. Some businesses or governmental agencies say that they will only accept checks, money orders or credit cards as payment, and others will only accept currency notes in denominations of $20 or smaller. Isn't this illegal?

 

A: The pertinent portion of law that applies to your question is the Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues."

 

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.

[nk1nk]

Hmmm, must be fake news from Russia! When and where is it going to end?

[Conder101]

You are wrong. Cents are legal tender for all debts public and private.

True but they don't have to accept them. However since they are a legal offer of payment it would prevent any late charges if they did refuse them. If I had been with the BMV I would have accepted them only after he rolled and put his name the tax bill # and hi phone number on each roll. And no he can't use their counting machine. He can pull a stunt like that but I wouldn't let him tie up my employees with it.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The DMV could have demanded that he have them rolled first. I would have required them to be rolled or refuse the money.

 

Of course it could be demanded. Is there a law that requires same? It is lawful money. The question is was it in payment of a debt or public charge.

 

As a citizen he has the right to protest in a non-violent manner. Now whether or not paying persons to use hammers to bust open the rolls is a non-violent protest, maybe it is a little to physical and I guess somebody could have had an injury from a cent hitting their eye, as an example. Other than that caveat, I don't disagree that he may have been more demonstrative in his actions than some, but that is his choice, as is his method of peaceful protest.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

RE: "....beef with the Department of Motor Vehicles settled his sales tax bill with 298,745 pennies."

 

1. Virginia DMV does not impose taxes of any kind. They do not accept tax payments.

2. Localities have a personal property tax on vehicles.

3. Neither the state of Virginia nor business are required to accept payments that impose an undue burden on them in processing the payment.

4. DMV does not sell or process beef -- not even if you hit it with your car on a highway.

 

Also, from the Treasury Dept. web site:

 

Q: I thought that United States currency was legal tender for all debts. Some businesses or governmental agencies say that they will only accept checks, money orders or credit cards as payment, and others will only accept currency notes in denominations of $20 or smaller. Isn't this illegal?

 

A: The pertinent portion of law that applies to your question is the Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues."

 

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.

 

I d not think this is quite correct, unless the State of Virginia is printing money or coining money for debts owed by citizens for the express use of paying State obligations. What is the undue burden imposed on the State in counting U.S. cents?

 

As to A:, the only question is the lack of definition of debt and/or public charge. Don't forget Amendments and previous court cases concerning the subject and 31 U.S.C. Section 5103. Always helpful.

 

[RWB]

RE: "Virginia does assess a motor vehicle sales and use tax that is a certain percentage of the car's value and a minimum fee is set by statute."

 

The motor vehicle sales tax is not assessed by DMV. It is collected by the seller in the same manner as other sales/use taxes. The use tax for commercial vehicles and personal property tax, also are not assessed or collected by DMV. The only DMV direct fees are for state vehicle registration and licenses.

 

So I still wonder why the guy would take $2,000+ in cents to DMV. What debt could he have possibly been paying?

 

RE: "What is the undue burden imposed on the State in counting U.S. cents?"

 

Exactly the same as on your local dry cleaner or any other business or government entity not equipped to accept large quantities of small coins.

 

The Treasury Dept info was copied from their web site.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

RE: "Virginia does assess a motor vehicle sales and use tax that is a certain percentage of the car's value and a minimum fee is set by statute."

 

The motor vehicle sales tax is not assessed by DMV. It is collected by the seller in the same manner as other sales/use taxes. The use tax for commercial vehicles and personal property tax, also are not assessed or collected by DMV. The only DMV direct fees are for state vehicle registration and licenses.

 

So I still wonder why the guy would take $2,000+ in cents to DMV. What debt could he have possibly been paying?

 

RE: "What is the undue burden imposed on the State in counting U.S. cents?"

 

Exactly the same as on your local dry cleaner or any other business or government entity not equipped to accept large quantities of small coins.

 

The Treasury Dept info was copied from their web site.

 

No, it is not the same, at all. The government hopefully has persons employed with usable fingers and opposing thumbs (though not necessary for counting) and I would assume the ability to perform basic arithmetic and write with a pencil on paper.

 

The Treasury Dept info is in need of clarity.

 

The whole tax/non-tax issue is not the point of 31 U.S.C. Section 5103.

 

Not really all that important, anyway. For that matter, neither is Virginia.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

The DMV could have demanded that he have them rolled first. I would have required them to be rolled or refuse the money.

 

Of course it could be demanded. Is there a law that requires same? It is lawful money. The question is was it in payment of a debt or public charge.

 

As a citizen he has the right to protest in a non-violent manner. Now whether or not paying persons to use hammers to bust open the rolls is a non-violent protest, maybe it is a little to physical and I guess somebody could have had an injury from a cent hitting their eye, as an example. Other than that caveat, I don't disagree that he may have been more demonstrative in his actions than some, but that is his choice, as is his method of peaceful protest.

 

If he doesn't comply, he won't have his title and cannot sell his vehicle and would have difficulty finding anyone to insure. What is he going to do, sue the state? Sovereign immunity would shield the DMV as an instrumentality of the Commonwealth.

 

That has nothing to do with his right to protest, or the method of payment, though.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

RE: "Virginia does assess a motor vehicle sales and use tax that is a certain percentage of the car's value and a minimum fee is set by statute."

 

The motor vehicle sales tax is not assessed by DMV. It is collected by the seller in the same manner as other sales/use taxes. The use tax for commercial vehicles and personal property tax, also are not assessed or collected by DMV. The only DMV direct fees are for state vehicle registration and licenses.

 

So I still wonder why the guy would take $2,000+ in cents to DMV. What debt could he have possibly been paying?

 

RE: "What is the undue burden imposed on the State in counting U.S. cents?"

 

Exactly the same as on your local dry cleaner or any other business or government entity not equipped to accept large quantities of small coins.

 

The Treasury Dept info was copied from their web site.

 

I purchased a vehicle this past year from an estate sale. DMV absolutely was responsible for collecting the sales/use tax when I registered the title.

 

Old dominion Law..... a gobbledygook exercise in translation of the English language.

[coinman_23885]

That has nothing to do with his right to protest, or the method of payment, though.

 

Some posters have insisted that the DMV was obligated to accept hundreds of thousands of unrolled cents as payment for a debt. I disagree. Assuming those posters were correct, however, my point is that there is no viable way to force the DMV's hand. That's my point. The DMV could and should have refused them in the unrolled state and not wasted state resources to count them.

 

P.S. Assuming your argument otherwise had merit, requiring that the coins be rolled and labeled with his name and phone number is also not the same as refusing to accept the coins all together.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

That has nothing to do with his right to protest, or the method of payment, though.

 

Some posters have insisted that the DMV was obligated to accept hundreds of thousands of unrolled cents as payment for a debt. I disagree. Assuming those posters were correct, however, my point is that there no viable way to force the DMV's hand. That's my point. The DMV could and should have refused them in the unrolled state and not wasted state resources to count them.

 

All you have stated is a personal position and a verbal protest against the act of another person. That does not constitute a law in the Old Dominion. The State could have refused, yes. The State might not want to jump to "should' as an action of legal commitment, without a Court review. I suspect doing so in the matter of legal U.S. Tender, might escalate the matter to another forum and the Sate might not enjoy that burden.

 

What is the person trying to force the State to do, manually count? The DMV hand can be forced, by the Courts. Improvement in technology does not constitute an undue burden on the State if the State decides not to have the equipment or technology to count U.S. cents. That is entirely their choice. The DMV can lobby for State funds for technological improvement methods of counting cents, if the DMV believes not doing so is wasting State resources.

[Afterword]

As many times as this sort of thing has been reported over the years, I would be surprised by any DMV or other such entity that failed to produce a written policy (perhaps, posted for all to see) addressing this issue.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

That has nothing to do with his right to protest, or the method of payment, though.

 

Some posters have insisted that the DMV was obligated to accept hundreds of thousands of unrolled cents as payment for a debt. I disagree. Assuming those posters were correct, however, my point is that there no viable way to force the DMV's hand. That's my point. The DMV could and should have refused them in the unrolled state and not wasted state resources to count them.

 

All you have stated is a personal position and a verbal protest against the act of another person. That does not constitute a law in the Old Dominion. The State could have refused, yes. The State might not want to jump to "should' as an action of legal commitment, without a Court review. I suspect doing so in the matter of legal U.S. Tender, might escalate the matter to another forum and the Sate might not enjoy that burden.

 

What is the person trying to force the State to do, manually count? The DMV hand can be forced, by the Courts. Improvement in technology does not constitute an undue burden on the State if the State decides not to have the equipment or technology to count U.S. cents. That is entirely their choice. The DMV can lobby for State funds for technological improvement methods of counting cents, if the DMV believes not doing so is wasting State resources.

 

OK. Good luck with that. Nothing would bring me more joy than to see a vindictive person, like the one in the article, to pay thousands of dollars in attorney's fees only to have his suit dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds or to lose on the merits of the case. I don't appreciate him wasting state resources (funded by my tax dollars).

 

Good luck with what, his choice of protest/action? If no law exists that specifically excludes his action(s), then he has every right to proceed. What joy or lack of same it brings you personally does not negate his right, or any law. Your opinion is no more or no less verbally vindictive than his actions, and I am just as adamant in defending your right to state the vindictive action you would personally want to occur to the person. Feelings are not law, though. That is the genius of our form of government.

[coinman_23885]

Good luck with what, his choice of protest/action? If no law exists that specifically excludes his action(s), then he has every right to proceed. What joy or lack of same it brings you personally does not negate his right, or any law. Your opinion is no more or no less verbally vindictive than his actions, and I am just as adamant in defending your right to state the vindictive action you would personally want to occur to the person. Feelings are not law, though. That is the genius of our form of government.

 

Please show me the statute that states that a state government/instrumentality or anyone else must accept unrolled cents in bulk.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

This is my last post on the law because this thread is spiraling out of control on points that are immaterial to Skyman's point. We are arguing over trivial things that don't matter.

 

@RWB - The article is plausible, and there is no reason to believe that it is fake news. Since you won't believe me check out Virginia Code Sections 58.1-2402 and 58.1-2406. The latter provides that if sufficient funds are not paid with an application for certificate of title, it shall be the duty of the "Commissioner or his authorized agent to make an estimate of the tax due to the Commonwealth and to assess such tax." The same statute provides for a cause of action, to be instituted by the commissioner, to include interest and costs if unpaid. Virginia Code Section 58.1-2401 defines commissioner as the "Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles of the Commonwealth."

 

The DMV will collect the tax when an application for certificate of title is filed at the DMV. If you still don't believe me, call or visit your local DMV.

 

I am not sure why you are bringing up personal property taxes. Those are paid to the locality.

 

What is spinning out of control? The issue is his right to pay with U.S. cents, is it not? What is the point Skyman is making that dismisses any discussion of legal rights or is trivial argumentation? Or is it only as you opine...it is an issue of being vindictive in the method of payment of the amount due? That still is not the law. I am surprised a little that you would be so adamantly opposed to the right of an individual to act in a legal manner, whether you agree or not, in the absence of a law stating the individual is acting in an illegal manner. If you were appointed by the court to defend the individual in this situation, would you not? I completely concur, BTW, with your position concerning the interpretation of taxation.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Good luck with what, his choice of protest/action? If no law exists that specifically excludes his action(s), then he has every right to proceed. What joy or lack of same it brings you personally does not negate his right, or any law. Your opinion is no more or no less verbally vindictive than his actions, and I am just as adamant in defending your right to state the vindictive action you would personally want to occur to the person. Feelings are not law, though. That is the genius of our form of government.

 

Please show me the statute that states that a state government/instrumentality or anyone else must accept unrolled cents in bulk.

 

The burden of proof is on you. You are objecting. Please show me where any form of legal U.S. tender in an identifiable form that can be counted is not acceptable in payment of a State obligation. In fact, show me a statute that prevents the State from paying refunds in a like manner. Granted, you can not defile U.S. tender to pay the obligation. That is a given. Other than that, what is the issue?

[RWB]

RE: "I purchased a vehicle this past year from an estate sale. DMV absolutely was responsible for collecting the sales/use tax when I registered the title."

 

That is a situation where you accepted direct responsibility for the purchase. Generally the Estate's Executor will assign this to the buyer. This is not the normal situation.

 

RE: Plausibility. I agree that the situation in the article is plausible - only that there is nothing to clarify why he had to pay them.

 

RE: Mr. Nick Stafford. Irate about getting a call center? Filing multiple suits? Not anyone one could trust in business.

"“If they were going to inconvenience me, then I was going to inconvenience them,” he told the Bristol Herald Courier.

 

"The paper reported that Stafford became incensed in September when he attempted to call the Lebanon DMV and was routed to a call center in faraway Richmond.

 

"That led Stafford to file three lawsuits after he couldn’t get the phone numbers of nine local DMV offices."

 

{PS: The phone numbers are in the local phone book; at the library or on line or in print.}

[Afterword]

From the US Department of the Treasury website.

 

Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues."

 

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.

 

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Good luck with what, his choice of protest/action? If no law exists that specifically excludes his action(s), then he has every right to proceed. What joy or lack of same it brings you personally does not negate his right, or any law. Your opinion is no more or no less verbally vindictive than his actions, and I am just as adamant in defending your right to state the vindictive action you would personally want to occur to the person. Feelings are not law, though. That is the genius of our form of government.

 

Please show me the statute that states that a state government/instrumentality or anyone else must accept unrolled cents in bulk.

 

The burden of proof is on you. You are objecting. Please show me where any form of legal U.S. tender in an identifiable form that can be counted is not acceptable in payment of a State obligation. In fact, show me a statute that prevents the State from paying refunds in a like manner. Granted, you can not defile U.S. tender to pay the obligation. That is a given. Other than that, what is the issue?

 

 

 

You are deflecting. Show me a statute that requires the DMV to accept the unrolled cents. Alternatively, show me case law interpreting the legal tender statute to require the same. There is no "burden of proof" here. This isn't a lawsuit. The DMV can reject the unrolled coins at will and need not prove anything. Similarly, I'm not trying to win an argument. I merely made a casual observation.

 

I am not here to get into a pizzing contest. You are not in agreement with the individual exercising his right to protest in a lawful manner. You can not find legal support for your position. You believe the individual is vindictive and you would be very joyful if the individual experienced the wrath of bureaucracy and the State. I have no reason to deflect. I am stating my position. If the individual is not in defiance of any law, again, what is the problem? You need not answer, and you need not answer concerning if you would defend the individual. It is not important. If he wants to act in a manner that is not in agreement with you, it is your right to opine, as it is my right to opine in support of his right to act legally in any manner, regardless of my personal emotional thoughts about his chosen method. You seem to be quite irate that I voice an opinion counter to yours, and not based on emotion. That is fine, but it is not, in my opinion, the thrust of presentation by the OP. I interpret the basis of the OP is paying in U.S. cents, 298,745 of them to quote the thread title. It is not a lawsuit, I concur.

 

I would state, however, "....The DMV can reject the unrolled coins at will and need not prove anything...." is exactly the reason for my position.

[coinman_23885]

John, I'm not angry or trying to quell your differing opinion at all. If it came off that way, I am sorry. Dry internet prose often comes off in a different way than it was intended. As for the rest, we will have to agree to disagree. I don't think his stunt was legitimate, and even if it was, it isn't worth starting WWIII with a government agency when he could have simply paid his bill and moved on.

 

I'm going to guess that he didn't check the DMV website for a phone number (there is a number to someone who certainly could have helped him with his question), which was supposedly what he was protesting. Even if he was justified (I don't think he was), life is too short to fight and argue over every little thing. Unfortunately people who pull stunts often feel that they deserve special attention, and this article only reinforces that desire and provides an ego boost to him while he is free to waste tax payer resources at already overworked DMV locations where the wait time can be very long. All he did was alienate clerks who had nothing to do with what he was angry about and penalize his fellow citizens (many of them who are taking off time from work) all because of his desire for grandstanding to show up the local DMV in a rural, obscure county.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

John, I'm not angry or trying to quell your differing opinion at all. If it came off that way, I am sorry. Dry internet prose often comes off in a different way than it was intended. As for the rest, we will have to agree to disagree. I don't think his stunt was legitimate, and even if he was, it isn't worth starting WWIII with a government agency when he could have simply paid his bill and moved on. I'm going to venture a guess that he didn't check the DMV website for a phone number, which was supposedly what he was protesting. Even if he was justified (I don't think he was), life is too short to fight and argue over every little thing.

 

I concur. Entirely. But, I am just as adamant in defiance, in fact more so, when the perception by the public (and the reality) is that the State can do whatever it wants, and there is no use in objecting or protesting because A) it costs $, B) the State can do what it wants and C) no law exists to prevent the State doing what it wants.

 

I would have advised as you suggest, had I been asked. But, I am not going to blanket condemn the actions of a person when no law prevents the action, no matter how dufus. It was legitimate, though, because he paid and it was accepted. I will also lay even money the Dominion is addressing the matter. Maybe he does not have a computer. Maybe he was inconvenienced in trying to comply with the law. Maybe he doesn't have a phone book. He did file a lawsuit. His attorney determined he has grounds, because as you know, the penalty for frivolous action by an attorney is not taken lightly, and in the Old Dominion, it can be disastrous. But, he did not act outside any law, and as such, a law should be established, if the State deems it necessary.