If someone gives me cash legally, can my deposit trigger an audit for them?
Am I right to worry about both of these? Of course. Who carries $75K in cash for no good reason? Your friend got the cash from somewhere, didn't he? If its legit - there's paper trail to show. Same for your parents. If you/they can show the legit paper trail - there's nothing to worry about, the hassle, at worse, is a couple of letters to the IRS. If the money is not legit (your friend is selling crack to the kids in the hood and your parents robbed a 7/11 to give you the money, for example) - there may be problems. "Yes you should worry and take care not to violate the law or provide any appearance of impropriety.   Every bank in the USA is required under the Bank Secrecy Act to report cash transactions over $10,000 the same day to the IRS -- and here's the fun secret part -- without notification to the depositor.   But splitting the deposits up into smaller amounts is also a crime, called ""structuring"".   On occasion there is a news story where a retail business that naturally must deposit cash from customers will be (falsely?) accused of structuring, e.g.:  Feds seize grocery store's entire bank account -- Institute for Justice defends grocer Under the legal doctrine of civil asset forfeiture, your money can be accused of a crime, seized, and tried separately from its owner.  The actual cases indicate the money as defendant, i.e. ""US v $124,700"" In this somewhat bizarre system of ""justice"", the owner need not be charged with a crime, and is not in immediate peril of going to prison (about the only upside in this, but might be temporary because the authorities haven't charged the owner yet).  When only the money is charged with a crime, there is no requirement for the government to supply a public defender for the owners who can not afford a lawyer.... can not afford a lawyer, because the government took all their money...." In the event of an audit, you AND your friends need to have already reported the cash the same way in previous tax filings. Even differences between legitimate sources can result in civil and criminal sanctions from the IRS, let alone questionable, dubious and illegal sources. Why would you even accept 75K in cash? If anything is going to trigger an audit, this will be it. 75K in cash deposited will look like money laundring, so you better have a paper trail ready to prove this is legal or this won't end well.
Making a payment of any amount is usually legal, although of course the specific circumstances matter, and I'm not qualified to give legal advice. Just had to throw in that disclaimer not because I think there's a problem here, but because it is impossible to give a definite answer to a legal question in a specific situation on Stack Exchange. But the government will be involved. There are two parts to that. First, as part of anti-money-laundering laws, banks have to report all transactions above a certain limit; I believe $10k. When you use a check or similar to pay, that happens pretty much automatically. When making a cash payment, you may have to fill out some forms. An secondly, Edward Snowden revealed that the government also tapped into banking networks, so pretty much every transaction is recorded, even if it is not reportable. "No. The full text of the Landlord-Tenant Act (specifically, section 554.614 of Act 348 of the year 1972) makes no mention of this. Searching the law for ""interest"" doesn't yield anything of interest (pardon the pun).  Specifically, section 554.604 of the same law states that: (1) The security deposit shall be deposited in a regulated financial   institution. A landlord may use the moneys so deposited for any   purposes he desires if he deposits with the secretary of state a cash   bond or surety bond written by a surety company licensed to do   business in this state and acceptable to the attorney general to   secure the entire deposits up to $50,000.00 and 25% of any amount   exceeding $50,000.00. The attorney general may find a bond   unacceptable based only upon reasonable criteria relating to the   sufficiency of the bond, and shall notify the landlord in writing of   his reasons for the unacceptability of the bond. (2) The bond shall be for the benefit of persons making security   deposits with the landlord. A person for whose benefit the bond is   written or his legal representative may bring an action in the   district, common pleas or municipal court where the landlord resides   or does business for collection on the bond. While it does sound like the landlord is required to deposit the money in a bank or other secured form, e.g. the Secretary of State, he/she isn't required to place it in an account that will earn interest." Also see who has the authority to delete bills or items on bills. This was a huge scam with some servers I've worked with. If you can delete an entire bill that was paid in cash then that's money in your pocket. "It can be a money laundering scheme. The stranger gives you cash for free at first, then proposes to give you more but this time asks you to ""spend"" a fraction of it (like 80%). So on his side the money comes from a legitimate source.  So you do it because after all you get to keep the rest of it and it is ""free"" money. But you are now involved in something illegal.  Having money for which you cannot tell the origin is also something highly suspicious. You will not pay tax on it, and the fiscal administration of your country might give you a fine. Customs might also be able to confiscate the money if they suspect it comes from an illegal source." I know that many HSBC ATMs at branches in the US and Canada offer this service (they actually scan and shred checks as you deposit them). Perhaps they do same in Germany... but not all ATMs offer this feature. "There will be no police involved. The police do not care. Only the feds care, and they only care about large amounts (over $100,000). What will happen is that the teller will deposit the money like nothing is unusual, but the amount will trigger a ""Suspicious Transaction Report"" to be filed by the bank. This information goes to the US Treasury and is then circulated by the Treasury to basically every agency in the government: the Department of Defense, the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, the DEA, the IRS, etc. What happens next depends on your relationship with your bank and the personality of the bank. In my case I have made large cash transactions at two different banks, one that I had a long relationship with, and another that I had a long-standing but dormant account. The long-term one was a high end savings bank in a city. The dormant one was one of those bozo retail banks (think ""Citizens"" or ""Bank of America"") in a suburb. The long-term bank ignored my first deposit, but after I made some more including one over $50,000 in cash they summoned me via a letter. I went in, talked to the branch manager and explained why I was making the deposits. He said ""That sounds plausible."" and that was the end of the interview. It is unlikely that they transferred the information. They probably just wrote it down. They did this because they have ""know your customer"" regulations and they wanted to be able to prove that they did ""due diligence"" in case anybody asked about it later. The suburban bank never asked any questions, but they did file the STRs. In general, there is no way to know if the bank will interview you or not. It depends on a lot of different factors. The basic factors are: how much money is it, are you doing a lot of business normally, and how well does the bank know you. If you refuse to answer the bank's questions to their satisfaction, it is a 100% chance that they will close your account. They can also file higher level reports that flag your activity as ""highly suspicious"" as opposed to just the normal ""suspicious"". As long as it is a bank employee, you should have no serious concerns unless the guy seems strange and asks really pointed questions. If you have any question whether the ""employee"" is legitimate, just verify that he/she is a bank employee. Obviously if the feds visit you, you should say nothing. The chance of this happening is 1 in a million." Banks in the US have to report deposits of more than $10,000, so they'll contact you to complete form 8300 or something. It should not be a problem, though, if you specify that it's someone else's money, not your income. I do not think banks have an obligation to report any deposits to the IRS, however, they probably have an obligation to report deposits exceeding certain threshold amounts to FinCEN. At least that's how it works in Canada, and we're known to model our Big Brother-style activities after our neighbour to the South. "There is no ""reason why this cannot be done"", but you can tell your friend that these actions are officially shady in the eyes of the US government. Any bank transactions with a value of $10,000 or more are automatically reported to the government as a way to prevent money laundering, tax evasion, and other criminal shenanigans. ""Structuring"" bank deposits to avoid this monetary limit is a crime in and of itself.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_transaction_report" Structuring, as noted in another answer, involves breaking up cash transactions to avoid the required reporting limits.   There are a couple of important things to note.   And, the biggest caveat - there have been many cases of perfectly legitimate transactions that have fallen foul of the reporting requirements.  One case springs to mind of a small business that routinely deposited the previous day's receipts as cash, and due to the size of the business, those deposits typically fell in the $9,000-$9,500 range.  This business ended up going through a lot of headaches and barely survived.  Some don't.   A single batch of transactions, if it is only 2 or 3 parts and they are separated by reasonable intervals, is not likely in and of itself to be suspicious.  However, any set of such transactions does run the risk of being flagged.   In your case, you also run afoul of the Know Your Customer rules, because it's not even you depositing the cash - it's your friend.  (Why can your friend not simply write you a check?  What is your friend doing with $5k of cash at a time?  How do you know he's not generating illegal income and using you to launder it for him?)  Were I your bank, you can be very certain I'd be reporting these transactions.  Just from this description, this seems questionable to me.   IRS seizes millions from law-abiding businesses This is a case where you sit down with an advisor or two. There are legal, and tax issues.  When you deposit the cash, or buy a car with it, the large cash transaction will trigger a notice to the US Government. So they will eventually find out.  Before you get to that point you need to know what obligations and consequences you will be facing. Because you don't know if it was a gift, or found money, or if the owner will be back looking for you to return it; therefore you need expert advice. "The whole concept of ""spending a fraudulent check"" is misleading. Both in practice and legally there are two separate transactions - you (not) receiving funds by depositing a fraudulent check, and you sending a cash transfer further on. Regarding the fraudulent check, generally your bank is 'responsible' in the sense that it's their responsibility to recover the money from you - it will not receive any money from the bank that supposedly issued the fake check, and if they give it to you, you spend all that money and are unable to pay it back, that's their problem and not of the other institutions. Regarding the cash transfer, from the bank point of view it's solely your responsibility - it was really you who made that payment, you explicitly authorised/instructed the banks to deliver money to the recipient, and none of those banks have the duty to return it. You have been defrauded by the recipient of this payment, and may attempt to recover the money from the fraudster - but that's not particularly likely to happen even in the case of a successful arrest and conviction.  Very fast reaction with involvement of police may block the ""vendor's"" account before they are able to withdraw the money. If that is the case, you might be able to recover your money or part of it." http://www.consumerismcommentary.com/buying-house-with-cash/ It looks like you can, but it's a bad idea because you lack protection of a receipt, there's no record of you actually giving the money over, and the money would need to be counted - bill by bill - which increases time and likelihood of error.   In general, paying large amounts in cash won't bring up any scrutiny because there's no record. How can the IRS scrutinize something that it can't know about? Of course, if you withdraw 200k from your bank account, or deposit 200k into it then the government would know and it would certainly be flagged as suspicious. Ask your bank to write a letter asserting that you have $xxxxx on deposit with them, on their letterhead? Though realistically, the chance of your getting hit with identity theft In this situation, when you presumably know exactly who you're dealing with, are vanishingly small. "Subtracting the loan from a deposit is known as ""setting-off"", and in general whether you can do it would depend on the terms of your contract with the bank. It's quite likely that they wouldn't state it either way and at best you might end up with a legal fight. So I'd recommend assuming that it won't be possible."