decent replicas (sort'a)

[RI AL]

I was cruising around on E-Bay, looking for good deals on Tibet coins (a passing interest of mine...started a small collection a couple of years back) and up pops #270272218693. Y'know...these replicas are not too bad looking if you don't look too closely...but the 1797 date on the Trade Dollar is just a bit of a giveaway.

 

RI AL

[Just Bob]

I don't see "copy" or "replica" anywhere on these coins.

 

Does the Secret Service have jurisdiction outside of our borders?

[Conder101]

Does the Secret Service have jurisdiction outside of our borders?

Nope. Although in some cases if the government of the other country is on good terms with ours, and if the coin violates their laws as well they might extend a helping hand and do the confiscation and arrest for them.

[awb]

I wonder if a "1797 trade dollar" does violate any of our laws, even if it was being sold within the US. It's not a copy of a real US coin. It's a nonsense token. Note that whenever you hear about the Wal-Mart cashiers being duped with a "fake/counterfeit" $200 bill, they don't arrest the buyer for counterfeiting US currency, they bust them for "theft by deception."

[Conder101]

Yes it does violate the law. Title 15 Sect 2101 (b) Coins and other numismatic items

The manufacture in the United States, or the importation into the United States, for introduction into or distribution in commerce of any imitation numismatic item which is not plainly and permanently marked “copy”, is unlawful and is an unfair or deceptive act or practice in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

 

Imitation Numismatic item is defined under Sect 2106 as (4) The term “imitation numismatic item” means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item.

 

So even though it bears a date not used for the trade dollar, it still purports to be an original numismatic item which makes it fit under the definition of "imitation numismatic item" and therefore must be marked. If not marked it is illegal.

 

Then there is Title 18 Part 1 Chapter 25 Sect 489 Whoever, within the United States, makes or brings therein from any foreign country, or possesses with intent to sell, give away, or in any other manner uses the same, except under authority of the Secretary of the Treasury or other proper officer of the United States, any token, disk, or device in the likeness or similitude as to design, color, or the inscription thereon of any of the coins of the United States or of any foreign country issued as money, either under the authority of the United States or under the authority of any foreign government shall be fined under this title.

 

So selling a "coin" that even looks SIMILAR to a US or foreign coin is illegal. (unless it is marked or course.)

[awb]

Conder, thanks for the information. The law you quote supports your point, even if it does violate my sense of fairness. I know, who said law was fair, or even just?

 

This begs the question, are the 4" diameter pewter tokens at museum gift shops that look like Indian head cents illegal, since they're in the likeness of an actual design? It wouldn't take a master wordsmith to construct a strong argument that they are, based on the law you mention.

 

:shrug:

[Conder101]

I would say that based on the way the law is written, yes they are illegal. If someone wanted to put the time and effort into it they could probably get a conviction, but what kind of penalty would be handed down?