
Secret Service Interrogation of Wozniak (2002) - monort
http://archive.woz.org/letters/general/78.html
======
timothya
Here's a video of Woz showing his pad of $2 bills and talking about this
story:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ1TIYxm1vM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ1TIYxm1vM)

~~~
thomble
In this video, Woz never states that his pads assembled from sheets of
legitimate, uncut 2 dollar bills. He implies that he pays a local printer to
create the pads from scratch. The reactions from the host and the audience
seem to reflect that, as well. What's going on here?

~~~
vilhelm_s
He is having fun making literally true, but intentionally misleading,
statements. Just like he did with the Secret Service agent.

~~~
kiba
Trolling an LE agent doesn't seem to be a good thing to do.

~~~
spiritplumber
It is a very good thing to do in that it restores a balance of power.

~~~
wglb
I can't help but think restores the balance of power in much the same way that
sticking your thumb in the eye of a grizzly bear restores the balance.

~~~
spiritplumber
Actually that might be a good way to fight off a grizzly bear, so I'll take
it.

~~~
wglb
Grizzlies would often come down out of the mountains where I grew up. Trust
me, I advise you not to.

------
dalke
While not obvious, this is the $2 bill Secret Service interview from around
2002. The page says the last modification was February 19, 2002 6:09:39 PM.
His Wikipedia page suggests that his youngest was born ~1988, the story takes
place "About 3 years ago", and refers to a 12 year old daughter.

Thus, a (2002) addition to the headline would not be remiss. I thought it was
a new interview, and wondered if it was somehow related to his Australian
citizenship process.

------
jakejake
You can buy your own uncut currency sheets here
[http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/2currencysheetsbeptestsheet...](http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/2currencysheetsbeptestsheet.aspx)

~~~
d23
Wow, that's expensive. $8 worth of bills is $22.50! Seems like it shouldn't be
_more_ expensive to get a set of bills that are _less_ processed.

------
mmorearty
That is awesome. He has a lot more guts than I do. It's one thing to play a
clever prank on a friend. It's quite another to play a clever prank on a
casino security manager. And the secret service? Wow.

~~~
4ad
Having so much money helps a lot.

~~~
CamperBob2
He did stuff like this long before he was wealthy. Calling the Pope with a
blue box, and so forth.

If anything, most people _stop_ kicking legal hornets' nests once they have
something to lose.

------
igonvalue
The real travesty is the last paragraph:

> Well, as we were eating I glanced up at the Keno board and Sara had won
> $7500.

> The downside of this is that Sara gained $7500, I lost $7500, the government
> gained $7500 and the casino lost $7500. You see, I had to fork out the $7500
> to my daughter and collect the winnings myself. But about half the winnings
> would be paid by me on my taxes as income, and other half of $7500 would be
> paid as gift tax for giving the winnings to my daughter (I'd already
> transferred the maximum yearly tax free gift of $10,000 to each of my kids).

~~~
joosters
Could you please explain why?

~~~
fsniper
It's already explaind by Woz.

He collected the money into his account. So that $7500 is taxable as income.
He lost nearly half of it now.

(Balance=savings + 7500 - 7500/2 tax)

Then he transfered $7500 to his daughters account. Up to here, He lost ~7500/2
to taxes.

(Balance=savings - 7500/2 tax)

And this transfer process is also taxable as a inheritance/gift payment.
Another tax paid by his savings.

(Balance=savings - 7500/2 tax - 7500/2 gift tax)

Happy government, Happy daughter, neutral Woz :)

~~~
joosters
So where's the travesty then? Is the complaint that enabling underage gambling
is tax inefficient?

~~~
fsniper
His problem is not with underage gambling restrictions. It's about how
expensive it's to transfer funds to family. Also he's paying income taxes on
behalf of his daughter. That's unavoidable. But the gift tax? that's really
insane.

~~~
dalke
The gift tax exists to prevent estate tax avoidance. Is your view that on
principle estate and gift taxes shouldn't exist? I am philosophically against
inherited capital accumulation, so think it should exist.

FWIW, only those who have given over $5.43 million of gifts in their lifetime
pay the gift tax in the first place. Woz is by all accounts a generous person.
While generous, this also reduced the size of his taxable estate by quite a
bit.

In addition, each parent can give a child up to $14K tax free (now; $10K
then). Spouses can give gifts to each other tax free. If I read it right, each
of Woz's children probably received up to $20K in a year without paying gift
taxes, though he only mentions the $10K from him personally. This gambling win
would have been on top of that $20K.

It's hard for me to be concerned about 12 year olds making 20K/year tax-free.

~~~
fsniper
I do not understand the rational after estate tax. It may be rational to
prevent "depth escaping" in many cases but in death? I think most of the time
some illegal activities or workarounds are used as subtext by government to
take some more cut.

~~~
dalke
I don't know what you mean by "death escaping." I don't know what illegal
activities you are referring to in this matter. The Wikipedia page
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_tax_in_the_United_States](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estate_tax_in_the_United_States)
has a pretty complete coverage of the points both for and against the estate
tax.

While the gift tax is, in the US, closely coupled to the estate tax, they are
distinct things. I made an error in not mentioning income tax as well was the
estate tax.

Gifts could be used to get around income tax. If I pay my children to work in
my store, then they pay income tax. If however I give them gifts, and they
just happen, out of generousness and familial good will, happen to do the same
amount of work as an employee, then that's an illegal scheme to avoid paying
income tax.

Estate taxes are a reflection of a philosophical viewpoint, which is that
inherited wealth is not as good for the country's well-being as wealth from
labor. Consider if I were to own 1/5th of the land of Manhattan, and make
money from leasing out the properties.

If there were no wealth tax, then I could pass that land to one of my
children, who then passes it on to one of my grandchildren, etc. Wealth like
that tends to accumulate, and lead to increased economic inequality. The
philosophical viewpoint is that a humane society does not have drastic
differences between the richest and poorest people. In addition, this would
tend to create de facto nobility, or landed gentry, which is something the US
has traditionally opposed. If Picketty is right, and r > g, then the death tax
or a wealth tax or some other means is needed to limit wealth inequality.

~~~
fsniper
I meant "debt escaping". Being a foreigner I made a bad typo. I don't know
really the term used in English, that's a way to evade debt by transferring
funds to someone else.

~~~
dalke
Unless you regard all taxes as debt, this meant to keep people from escaping
from paying taxes, not paying debts.

Here's a variation of the earlier scenario. I have a company. I give people
gifts of US $40,000, with no strings attached. It happens to be that, in their
free time, they volunteer at my company to help me out with my business, and
spend about 35 hours a week in volunteer labor.

Is this really a "gift" that shouldn't be taxed at all? If so, it's a way to
avoid employment and income taxes.

To prevent that from happening, the gift taxes are going to have to be at
least as high as employment-related taxes would be.

Since the gift tax doesn't kick in until $14,000/year, which is under minimum
wage, the gift tax for higher valued gifts must be much higher than employment
taxes. Otherwise it will still be used to avoid employment and income taxes.

------
shaunxcode
I really like this phrase: "It's hard to separate rights from reality"

------
hurin
_It probably amounted to a real crime. I had my driver 's license as well. But
you only live once and only a few of us even get a chance like this once in
our lives._

~~~
david927
I've always admired Woz but it's lines like this that make me love him.

------
kybernetyk
>We covered each of my friends' names and phone numbers because I couldn't
remember which one had gotten the $2 bills gummed and perforated for me.

That's not cool.

------
mrbill
My grandmother did the same thing with bound "pads" of $2 bills for years,
gave them (in a checkbook-style holder) as Christmas gifts. I don't think the
serial numbers were in order, though, as she got the $2 bills from a local
bank.

------
marcosscriven
The idea of legal tender not being recognised reminds me of a situation here
in the UK.

The Bank of Scotland prints its own notes, but are rarely in circulation in
the rest of the UK. Somehow it's mildly amusing passing over a Scottish fiver
to an unsuspecting checkout assistant in London, and the ensuing suspicion.

~~~
DanBC
A minor point: that's not what legal tender means.

[http://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-
guidelines/leg...](http://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-
guidelines/legal-tender-guidelines)

The shops are free to reject the note, and possibly to lose your custom.

~~~
marcosscriven
Thanks for the correction, interesting.

------
rwmj
Why does the US govt sell uncut sheets of bills? Are they just for fun or is
there a legitimate use for them?

~~~
andrewpi
Just for fun.

------
leoc
People use those dollar-bill sheets as wrapping paper:
[http://www.luxuo.com/super-rich/uncut-sheets-of-real-
dollar-...](http://www.luxuo.com/super-rich/uncut-sheets-of-real-dollar-
bills.html) .

~~~
vitd
There's something weird about paying $55.00 for 32 $1.00 bills, though. I
mean, I can understand shipping and handling, but a 71% markup seems a bit
much.

~~~
ealfert
Buy the uncut sheets straight from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau
of Engraving and Printing at
[http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/](http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/)

The $100 Currency Sheets are _beautiful_ because it is so colorful.
[http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/100currencysheets.aspx](http://www.moneyfactorystore.gov/100currencysheets.aspx)

The markup is much lower on the $100 4-Sheet since it costs $480 for $400 of
spending power. Or reduce the markup further by buying 16-Sheet for $1,800.
Then cut them up into smaller sheets of 4 each. Markup then is only $50 (or
12.5% over face value) per final 4-sheet.

~~~
lostlogin
Ive never heard anyone describe any US currency as colourful before! (I looked
and they do have a bit more colour).

------
TazeTSchnitzel
So because Woz failed to give straight answers to the Casino man and joked
around, he got a visit from the Secret Service. Because Woz failed to give
straight answers to the SS man, he spent 40 minutes under interrogation.

Moral of the story: don't joke about if someone asks you about whether you are
committing a crime?

~~~
monocasa
Or, do if you're out of fucks to give.

------
therein
I don't understand how he didn't get into trouble for what he did. Why wasn't
Secret Service able to prosecute him?

~~~
bgc
What he did is not illegal but perhaps not very smart as the uncut sheets of
currency that are for sale by the BEP cost (significantly) more than the face
value of the actual money that you're getting.

The only reason USSS got involved to begin with is because the casino security
officer was (rightly) suspicious of some guy in the casino ripping bills off a
pad and feeding them into a slot machine...

~~~
sjy
I had to look up the Secret Service because I thought it was strange that the
President's bodyguards would be interested in a suspected counterfeiter.
Apparently their protection role was introduced after their primary mission,
which is fighting financial crime. Weird.

~~~
noir_lord
Not really.

Currency protection is one of the absolute most critical functions of a
government, if people lose faith in your currency it causes a ridiculous
number of problems.

When the US was young it's presidents didn't require the level of protection
they require now (in fact a few of those presidents would have been as likely
to shoot an attacker as not).

Eventually they realised that presidents _do_ require protection but deciding
who to use for that protection is quite a nuanced task, there are risks
involved in having military protection or police protection (remember the
political climate at the time was one of ongoing revolutions around the world
and in Europe) so they needed an agency that existed, was extremely
professional and likely wouldn't ruffle too many feathers.

The US Secret Service fit the bill ideally.

------
vishaldpatel
$7500 pays for at least two more interviews with the Secret Service.

------
curiously
holy crap I just have a renewed respect for Wozniak. He is a true thug.

------
raverbashing
So, "because it's funny, huh!?"

People should know that there's a time for serious business and a time for
jokes.

Talking to LE or even a Casino Security is not one of them.

How would you feel if you went to a doctor and he acted humorously and
dismissively of your complaint (and it looks serious)?

~~~
Ensorceled
How is the example of the doctor even relevant? Woz didn't seek out these
people to prank them, they came to him with unwarranted suspicions.

I don't want to live in a world where talking to "Casino Security", not sure
why they get capital letters in you world, about a matter where you have done
nothing wrong "is serious business".

They wasted his time, he wasted theirs. It all balanced out.

~~~
raverbashing
The example of the doctor is relevant because the doctor is downplaying
someone who has a legitimate query.

While you've done nothing wrong they have a job to do, and I didn't write it
with capital letters because I overestimate them.

Woz just needed to answer "I buy the sheets from US Mint and glue them
together", not go on a diatribe that although technically correct might be not
so obvious

Of course a sense of humour is important, it's more important to know when to
use and what are its limits.

Or feel free to call fire in a crowded theater and tell it's a joke.

~~~
mikeash
Unlike your doctor and theater examples, Woz's behavior here wasn't harming
anybody. What's the problem?

~~~
raverbashing
I might as well stand in front of someone's house and begin taking pictures in
a suspicious manner. I'm not harming anybody and it's perfectly legal.

And then when the owner asks me about it I answer "this is legal, I'm not
doing anything wrong, I have nothing to say, now go away", then be surprised
when the owner calls the cops.

~~~
mikeash
Calling the cops makes sense, but you seem to be arguing that he shouldn't
have done this stuff, not merely that he shouldn't have been surprised.

~~~
tedunangst
I think the point is not that you shouldn't use $2 bills, but that when
someone asks about them, you don't reply with "a little BS about buying them
from a guy that hawked basketball tickets."

~~~
mikeash
Yes, that seems to be the point, but my question is: why not?

~~~
tedunangst
To address your earlier point that woz wasn't harming anybody, insinuating to
casino security that you're passing counterfeit money is essentially saying "I
am doing you harm." We generally frown upon people saying that, even when
there's no real harm to accompany the statement.

~~~
opo
Considering that the casino security person admitted the 2 dollar bills were
legit currency, the fact that he intruded on someone doing nothing wrong and
proceeded to basically interrogate him, it would be more accurate to say that
the casino security person was the one essentially saying he intends to do
harm.

Hopefully in the future he decided to not waste other people's time on his
idle curiosity.

~~~
raverbashing
" casino security person admitted the 2 dollar bills were legit currency"

I think he said "it works with the pen", now this is a test but it's not very
reliable

"Using such pens is not a foolproof method of checking that a banknote is
genuine"

[http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/retailers/hin...](http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/retailers/hintstips.aspx)

(they probably checked other security features, but the older notes have less
features)

