: Antiques dealers and auctioneers are breathing easier now that a
proposed bill that would have resulted in them having to
fingerprint those that they buy from failed to pass the state's
assembly committee on business and professions.
Defeated on June 22 with only three yea votes from the 13
members, the bill, SB 1893, was referred back to the committee on
appropriations. The bill had been passed by the California state
senate earlier in June by a 33-to-3 vote. It would have been on
its way to the state assembly and then to the governor had it
been approved last week.
SB 1893 proposed stringent regulations for antiques dealers and
auctioneers, including such drastic measures as taking a
fingerprint from everyone that they buy or take consignments from
for items exceeding $250 in value. Dealers and auction houses
would have also been required to report all purchases of $250 or
more to police within 24 hours, and hold the merchandise for 30
days prior to selling it. The proposed bill was aimed at
curtailing the trafficking of stolen merchandise.
Alan Michaan of Auctions By The Bay in Alameda was clearly
ecstatic over the bill's defeat. He and a number of others from
the antiques and coin trade were on hand for the hearings, and
testified in opposition to the bill. "I see this as a major
victory, but it is also a battle that we will have to continue to
wage in coming years," said Michaan. "We were completely
blindsided by this, and we cannot let it happen again."
"No one from the antiques business knew about [the bill] during
the initial phase," said Norman Haigh, president of the
California State Auctioneers Association (CSAA). "We didn't find
out until it had already been passed by the senate." Banding
together, antiques dealers and auctioneers, headed by CSAA,
Michaan and the online auctioneer eBay, created a groundswell of
opposition that ultimately led to the defeat of the bill.
Michaan handed out flyers and sent emails by the
tens-of-thousands pleading for support and stating, "Don't let
our business or hobby be regulated into oblivion." Michaan's
efforts created an awareness of the bill among local dealers,
auctioneers and show promoters, as well as municipalities and
police. "I have been in contact with the chief in Alameda and he
is pulling his hair out over this," he said, explaining that the
chief could potentially receive thousands of these forms after
every antiques show, flea market and auction.
"The sheer logistics of this are impossible," stated Michaan,
"This bill was crafted to aid in the return of stolen materials
and to increase revenue; in fact, the bill achieves neither. It
is not a rational concept that it will recover stolen property."
Michaan commented that the process would have also cost the state
untold amounts of both money and resources. "It creates a huge
burden on our police departments that are already overburdened
and underfunded," he said. "They are already having a hard time
responding to serious crimes."
Michaan also queried, "What about eBay? Does this law affect
everyone from California that is selling items to California
residents?"
The proposed bill did not specifically address Internet auctions;
however, eBay clearly believed it would be affected. An eBay
representative, Michelle Peacock, testified before the committee
and stated that "the bill's 'one-size-fits-all' approach would
unfairly discriminate against many legitimate sellers in
California."
The online auction giant also commented that the legislation
would "needlessly burden the vast majority of resellers and
stifle the rapidly growing use of the Internet by ordinary
Californians seeking to resell property."
Support for the bill was presented by Best Collateral, Inc and a
couple of police departments in the state. Best Collateral
commented that the "bill will facilitate the longstanding
legislative goals to prevent the theft of property and evasion of
sales tax." The Santa Maria Police Department stated that the
"goal of existing law to curtail the dissemination of stolen
property and facilitate the recovery of stolen property can only
be enhanced by the establishment of a statewide electronic data
reporting system."
The office of the state's attorney general did not agree with the
police department's support of the bill. The attorney general's
office opposed the bill, asserting "under the provisions of this
bill, secondhand dealers would end up reporting items such as
straw baskets, books, salt and pepper shakers and wall prints.
These items would simply clutter up the existing 'Automated
Property System,' making it more cumbersome for law enforcement
to use."
Other groups opposing the bill included the California Coin and
Bullion Merchants Association, Expos Unlimited, iSold It, PayPal
and the Video Software Dealers Association.
Further information can be obtained through Michaan at
510-740-0220, ext 103, or by email at CSAA can be reached at
888-541-8084, its website is http://www.caauctioneers.org/.
A copy of SB1893 may be viewed at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.
