In August 2013, a traveler arrived at Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport on a flight from London, headed onward to Washington, D.C. Asked how much money he was carrying, he said $5,000. He was asked again and gave the same answer. CBP officers then went through his luggage and found multiple envelopes wrapped inside clothing holding U.S. and foreign currency worth the equivalent of $45,283.
CBP seized $44,783 and handed back $500. The port director’s statement made the point plainly: the traveler had been given more than one chance to declare the money accurately.
This is a far more typical CBP currency seizure than the seven-figure vehicle cases that dominate the news. A real person, a real sum, money that in many cases could have been documented. And it went wrong at the single moment that decides most of these cases: the answer to the question.
Under-Declaring Is Worse Than Not Declaring At All
People who declare a number below the threshold usually believe they are being clever. They are doing the opposite of what they intend, for three reasons.
It invites verification. A declaration of $5,000 is close enough to the threshold to be interesting. Officers who suspect a figure is understated confirm it the only way available, which is a secondary referral and a count of everything in the bags. A stated amount is not accepted on trust; it is a claim that can be checked.
It eliminates the honest-mistake argument. A traveler who filed nothing can sometimes argue confusion about the form, a language barrier, or an assumption that the limit applied per person. A traveler who was asked directly, answered with a specific number, and was then contradicted by a search has none of those arguments left.
It supplies intent. The difference between a reporting violation and a smuggling allegation under 31 U.S.C. § 5332 is intent to evade the requirement. A deliberate understatement is direct evidence of exactly that, and it is also an aggravating factor in CBP’s mitigation analysis, which reduces the relief available even where no criminal charge follows.
Reporting costs nothing
There is no limit on how much money may lawfully be carried into or out of the United States, no tax on it, and no fee for filing. FinCEN Form 105 takes a few minutes. The entire penalty structure exists to punish the failure to report, not the money itself. The filing obligation is explained on our page covering the CBP cash reporting requirement and FinCEN Form 105.
Where Packing Ends and Concealment Begins
The money here was in envelopes wrapped in clothing. That detail was included in the release deliberately, because concealment carries legal weight, but it is also the kind of fact worth examining rather than conceding.
Currency sealed into a fuel tank or an altered compartment is concealment by any measure. Cash in envelopes tucked among clothes in a suitcase is how a great many people ordinarily pack valuables, particularly travelers who have been advised to keep money out of sight from baggage handlers or hotel staff. The same physical arrangement can reflect an intent to hide from customs officers or nothing more than ordinary caution about theft.
Which reading applies depends on the surrounding facts, and in this case the surrounding facts were unhelpful: the packing did not create the problem, the repeated false answer did. But in a case where the traveler declared honestly and the money simply happened to be in an envelope, the characterization is contestable and should be contested. It is worth pushing back when a submission is met with a concealment finding that the physical facts do not actually support.
The On-Site Relief Window Almost Nobody Knows About
CBP officers have discretion, in narrow circumstances, to resolve a currency reporting violation at the port rather than referring it into the full seizure and forfeiture process. It typically arises where the discrepancy is small, the traveler has no violation history, and the circumstances are consistent with genuine human error rather than evasion.
A $40,000 gap is not human error
On-site relief is discretionary, not a right, and it is unavailable in most cases. Someone who miscounts and reports $11,000 while carrying $12,400 may find officers willing to treat it as a mistake. Someone who reports $5,000 while carrying $45,283 has removed that option entirely. The window closes the moment the discrepancy looks intentional.
The practical implication is worth stating clearly: a traveler who realizes mid-inspection that the number they gave was wrong should correct it immediately, before the counting is finished. Correcting an answer is a materially different fact from being contradicted by a search.
What the $500 Actually Was
CBP returned $500 to the traveler, described in the release as humanitarian relief. This is a real practice and it is routinely misread.
Officers may return a small sum so that a traveler is not left in an airport with no means to get home, eat, or make a phone call. It is discretionary, it is usually a few hundred dollars, and it is not a partial victory. It is not an acknowledgment that any portion of the money was lawfully held, it does not reduce the amount at issue in the forfeiture, and accepting it waives nothing. It also should not be mistaken for a signal about how CBP views the case.
“Advised the Traveler How to Petition”
The release notes that officers explained how to petition for return of the money. That is accurate and it is also the limit of what a seizing officer can do. They provide the custody receipt and, in due course, the Notice of Seizure with its election of proceedings form and its deadline. They are not there to advise a claimant on which option to elect or how to build the argument.
Those documents are the beginning of the case, not a formality. Our pages on responding to the custody receipt from CBP and on the petition for remission or mitigation of seized cash cover what each document is and what a substantive response contains: a factual narrative, documentary proof of the source and intended use of the funds, and an argument applying CBP’s own mitigation guidelines to the circumstances, addressing the aggravating factors rather than ignoring them.
Decisions take time, and outcomes depend heavily on the specific facts and the quality of the documentation. Our page on how long CBP takes to decide a petition sets expectations on timing.
Cash Seized at the Airport?
Great Lakes Customs Law handles currency seizures at airports and ports nationwide, including BWI. Contact us for a confidential case evaluation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it better to declare a lower amount than to declare nothing?
No. An understated declaration invites verification, removes any argument that the failure was an honest mistake, and supplies evidence of intent to evade. It is treated as an aggravating factor rather than a partial compliance.
Can I fix my answer after I have already given a number?
Until the inspection concludes, yes, and it is far better than being contradicted by a search. Officers have narrow discretion to resolve small, apparently honest discrepancies at the port, though that discretion disappears where the gap looks intentional.
CBP gave me back a few hundred dollars. Does that mean I won part of my case?
No. Small returns are discretionary humanitarian relief so a traveler is not stranded. It is not a finding about the money, it does not reduce the amount subject to forfeiture, and accepting it waives nothing.
Does keeping cash in envelopes count as concealment?
Not automatically. Many travelers pack valuables out of sight to guard against theft. Whether packaging amounts to concealment depends on the surrounding facts, and a concealment finding that the physical circumstances do not support is worth challenging.
Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it, or contacting Great Lakes Customs Law through this website, does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, regulations, and CBP procedures change, and the outcome of any customs seizure or forfeiture matter depends heavily on its specific facts and circumstances. No result is guaranteed or implied. You should consult a licensed attorney about your particular situation before taking or refraining from any action.