Federal Statutes · Explained

31 U.S.C. § 5332 — Bulk Cash Smuggling

Deandra M. Grant
Reviewed by Deandra M. Grant, ACS-CHAL · SFST Instructor
Updated July 29, 2026
Read time 8 min
The Short Answer

Section 5332 criminalises knowingly concealing more than $10,000 in currency or monetary instruments and transporting it into or out of the United States with intent to evade the reporting requirement. Carrying cash across the border is lawful. Concealing it to avoid the report is not, and the statute carries forfeiture of the entire amount.

It is a persistent misconception that taking more than $10,000 out of the country is illegal. It is not. The obligation is to report it.

Section 5332 punishes concealment plus intent to evade that report — which is why how the money was packed matters more than how much of it there was.

What the statute says

31 U.S.C. § 5332(a) punishes whoever, with intent to evade the currency reporting requirement of § 5316, knowingly conceals more than $10,000 in currency or other monetary instruments on their person or in any conveyance, article of luggage, merchandise, or other container, and transports or attempts to transport it from a place within the United States to a place outside, or vice versa.

In plain English

You may carry any amount of cash across the border. If it exceeds $10,000 you must file a report — a FinCEN Form 105, or CMIR. The crime is hiding the money in order to avoid filing that report.

The elements

1. More than $10,000 in currency or monetary instruments;
2. Knowing concealment — on the person, or in a conveyance, luggage, merchandise, or container;
3. Transportation or attempted transportation across a United States border; and
4. Intent to evade the § 5316 reporting requirement.

Concealment is the element that decides these cases

This is where the defense works. Money in a wallet, a purse, or an ordinary carry-on is not concealed merely because it was not declared — and Congress wrote concealment into the statute precisely to distinguish smuggling from non-reporting.

What the government looks for is affirmative hiding: cash taped to the body, sewn into clothing, packed inside appliances or vehicle panels, wrapped to defeat detection, or distributed among travellers. Where the money was simply in a bag and the traveller answered a question incorrectly or incompletely, § 5332 is the wrong charge and § 5316 is the right one.

Intent to evade is generally proved circumstantially from the same facts — the manner of packing, false answers at inspection, inconsistent explanations, and prior border crossings.

Three statutes people confuse

§ 5316 / § 5322 — failure to report. Not filing a CMIR for over $10,000 crossing the border. No concealment element required.

§ 5324 — structuring. Breaking transactions into amounts below a reporting threshold to avoid a domestic financial institution's report. A different mechanism entirely, and after Ratzlaf and subsequent amendments the mental state here has its own history.

§ 5332 — bulk cash smuggling. Concealment plus cross-border transport plus intent to evade. The most serious of the three.

Which statute fits the facts is a live question in many cases, and moving a charge from § 5332 to § 5316 changes both the exposure and the forfeiture posture.

Penalty range and forfeiture

Up to five years imprisonment. Critically, § 5332(b)(2) provides for forfeiture of any property involved in the offense — which the government reads to include the entire concealed amount, not merely the excess over $10,000.

The forfeiture is frequently the real consequence. It proceeds on its own track and its own deadlines, and it is often defensible on grounds separate from the criminal charge — including the Excessive Fines Clause, which the Supreme Court confirmed applies to forfeitures in Timbs v. Indiana. See our asset forfeiture guide.

Why this statute is charged so heavily in Texas

The Southern and Western Districts of Texas handle an enormous volume of these cases, generated at the international bridges and at outbound inspections along the Rio Grande. Many defendants are couriers rather than owners of the money, and many have plausible non-criminal explanations for carrying cash — business practice, distrust of banks, remittances to family, vehicle purchases.

Those explanations are worth developing properly with documentation, because in a courier case the difference between a § 5332 conviction with full forfeiture and a lesser resolution often turns on whether the defense can evidence a legitimate source and purpose.

31 U.S.C. § 5316 — reports on exporting currency · 31 U.S.C. § 5324 — structuring · Money laundering · Asset forfeiture

Key Terms

The words that come up most on this page, in plain English.

CMIR
Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments — FinCEN Form 105, required for over $10,000 crossing a US border.
Monetary instrument
Currency plus traveller's cheques, money orders, and certain negotiable instruments in bearer form.
Concealment
Affirmative hiding of the currency. The element distinguishing § 5332 smuggling from a simple reporting failure.
Structuring
Breaking transactions into sub-threshold amounts to avoid a domestic reporting requirement, under 31 U.S.C. § 5324. A separate offense.

More on This Topic

The other guides in this section.

Deandra M. Grant, J.D.
Written & Reviewed By

Deandra M. Grant, J.D.

ACS-CHAL Forensic Lawyer-Scientist with an M.S. in Pharmaceutical Science and a Graduate Certificate in Forensic Toxicology. Author of The Texas DWI Manual, and a trained SFST instructor. Defending Texas DWI cases since 1994.

Full profile and credentials →

Your Defense Starts Now

Charged with DWI?

DWI charges don't wait, and neither should you. Every day matters, for the ALR deadline, for preserving evidence, and for the decisions your case turns on. We're available 24/7 across all six Texas offices.

No Cost · No Obligation

Request a Free Case Evaluation

Tell us what happened. We'll respond as soon as possible.