Re: Encrypted Economic Speech is Protected

[Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 09:08 AM 11/24/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>Some thoughts on the proposal floating around to require all electronic
>transactions be identified and have IRS-endorse tags. I believe this runs
>smack up against the First Amendment (and possibly the Fourth), and that
>private transactions, contracts, IOUs, and such are essentially untaxable
>and nonvisible to the government (practically speaking, a la the situation
>today and at all times in the past).

Not to mention GATT and the WTO.  I don't think the US can unilaterally 
mandate a particular electronic commerce scheme and force it on electronic 
merchants in Mongolia (the freest trading country on earth these days).  

That's why when Pat said GATT would destroy U.S. soveriegnty, I said "I sure 
hope so."  

>3. Many businesses have started asking for ID for more purchases (perhaps
>because they think it will lessen liability problems, perhaps because they
>just think that all customer-units should be tracked). An example: hotel
>rooms. (Used to be one could just pay cash...now ID is demanded at some
>hotels.) 

Though most hotels actually want credit cards and believe that credit cards 
are a form of ID even though they most certainly are not.

I was asked for a picture ID before being shown an apartment.  Real Estate 
agent concern about crime directed at them?

>Some businesses are even demanding Social Security numbers. (And I
>don't mean banks or other businesses with IRS reporting requirements...a
>local gun range demanded my SS number for their range ID card.)

"I'm Canadian.  I don't have an SS#."  Works for everything that can be 
purchased or joined by Canadians in the US.

>However, these ID requirements are not the norm, and most merchants will
>happily take cash money for any and all purchases.

Very true.

>4. "Receipts" are not even required by law for transactions. Alice and Bob
>can complete a transaction without any paperwork. Or with handwritten
>notes. Or a Xeroxed receipt form. Or with their Palm Pilots or Newtons, or
>whatever.

The Finanzia Guardia (pardon my Italian spelling) (Financial Police) in Italy 
enforce the Italian requirement for receipts by fining customers who can't 
produce them.  Designed to back up VAT collection.  I noticed that most 
receipts there were generated by PCs under control of shopkeepers.  Good 
opportunities for keeping double books.  I wonder if Italy mandates POS and 
accounting software?

>9. In the U.S. at least, there is essentially no attempt to collect sales
>taxes on private, two-party transactions.  This is not enforceable at flea
>markets, garage sales, and other such markets, let alone in private
>transactions between Alice and Bob.

Though the New Jersey Gestapo *have* been attending computer, collector, etc. 
shows and demanding resale certificates, estimating revenue based on 
displayed stock, and seizing stock if not paid.  (Not recommended at gun 
shows -- which have been driven out of NJ in any case).  Hard work for the 
revenooers, though.

>12. The expression "to utter a check" dates back before Eric Hughes' usage
>a few years ago (so I was told by M. Froomkin). A check is a kind of
>promise to pay.  So is an IOU. So is a promissory (sp?) note. So are many
>kinds of contracts.

Uttering checks is from the dawn of commercial paper under common law.  I'm 
sure Eric read it in one of the banking books he likes to read.

>Practically speaking, the idea is a non-starter. There are so many ways to
>skirt the proposed ID systems, using cut-outs, off-shore accounts,
>pseudonyms, etc., that enforcement would be a nightmare.

No kidding.

DCF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBNHnnQYVO4r4sgSPhAQEeBwQApVihguCs7pl49vKS4MEOyFJQAtPAPa8Z
LlvtSES9XkNogf+ko61Am4/KTiBxz6cs11fJJo+g0SP33n852GkUGw0wmgyXYhS7
z9TCfJXnFJFauS/NE1FBF/6An1KFenHCq3qbRGs3rld+mAYwCouiWAR/1QeGMOFf
7MEDFhIxNGk=
=utSo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----