The Criminal Criminal Activity Intervention Legislation Act 2023 (sic) ( https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2023/0007/latest/LMS754010.h… ) is basically an anti-gang/organised crime measure.

And that means it needs to deal with their currency of choice - cash. There is, therefore a provision for the seizure of cash of NZD10,000 or more found in suspicious circumstances.

But it's Part 4 of the 2023 Act that's crept up on people.

It amends the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009. which is referred to as "The Principal Act" by inserting new provisions and amending others.

Part 4 of the 2023 Act inserts into the 2009 Act Part 2, Subpart 5A

67A is the "prohibition on certain cash transactions." It says

"A person who is in trade must not buy or sell any of the following articles by way of a cash transaction or a series of related cash transactions, if the total value of that transaction or those transactions is equal to or above the applicable threshold value:
(a) jewellery:
(b) watches:
(c) gold, silver, or other precious metals:
(d) diamonds, sapphires, or other precious stones:
(e) motor vehicles (within the meaning of section 6(1) of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003):
(f) ships (within the meaning of section 2(1) of the Maritime Transport Act 1994).

Not wanting to be picky (well, OK, being picky" this refers to buying and selling. There is nothing about renting or other arrangements e.g. lending against the asset as a security.

It's persons "in trade." So we need to know if a farmer who sells his sheep at a market is "in trade," whether or not he sells by auction. What about ad hoc sale of equipment? Well, on hte face of it a tractor would be included but a mechanical thresher would not, even if it's driven by the tractor.

A cab unit for pulling a trailer is included but the trailer is not. But a bulk-carrier trailer costs more than many cars, for example.

The cash limit is NZD10,000. That's actually not very much at all. It's just over GBP5,000.

In rural areas, this is problematic and forcing cash out of the system when cash is an essential lubricant of day to day living.

Reporting will continue because while the cash transaction by the business may be illegal, putting the money into a bank is not illegal.

There is no defence that the money was put into a bank (which is surely what the government really wants), nor that any due diligence was undertaken before receiving the cash.

So will it work?

Probably not, at least until raids are conducted on the premises of traders and cash stashes confiscated. Until them, traders will do what traders have always done: keep packs of stamped notes, known as bricks, and trade them in bundles between themselves. They might not be able to get bundles stamped by banks any more but a group of traders can easily agree on a record of bricks and trace them between themselves.

And from that, it's only a short hop to a secret bank in which the money never moves but there is a record of who owes what to whom.

Oh, wait. Didn't the Chinese have that 4,000 years ago?

Of course they did.