Yes. But my initial point was that a check for $1.00 does not constitute an alternative currency and you do not seem to be disagreeing with this. Merely the fact that an instrument is denominated in USA dollars is irrelevant to legality. What I was saying is that there are other activities that would be the ones ruled illegal. I think that whether the $5000 is transferred as greenbacks or as $e is irrelevant, if the creation of $e is handled correctly. Irrelevant to whom? As long as it's _not_ irrelevant to the government, it will be irrelevant to very few other parties.
A company engaged in the business of issuing such notes [etc.]
To clarify, I'm talking about a digital money company here, and since USA regulation is what is at issue, I'm talking about a USA digital money company. Every bank in the United States that allows checks to be made out to cash already does this. The one-at-a-time has never been an issue. And it's not banks that "allow" this, it's the Uniform Commercial Code. A second point, relating to this paragraph: obviously, a foreign bank cannot be constrained in the same way to report financial transactions to US authorities. Well, this is just what I've been talking about for some time. It's clearly possible to have the issuer in another country. Eric