Ascension Island issues illegal pieces denominated in dollars

[eurocoin]

The government of Ascension Island has authorized the release of illegal pieces denominated in dollars. The pieces will be issued to commemorate the ANA's World Fair of Money. The pieces with a fake denomination of 1 dollar were minted by Osborne Coinage, whereas the ones with fake denominations of 5 and 100 dollars were minted by the Commonwealth Mint. They were developed by the American company Minted Assets. The government of Ascension Island has no right to issue coins denominated in dollars. The pieces are being marketed as legal tender and depict the name and coat of arms of Ascension Island, though neither the name nor the portrait of HM King Charles III.

[eurocoin]

I wonder whether the issuance of illegal pieces was part of this, that was mentioned in April:

"Crown Counsel said the Ascension Island Government is actively exploring other revenue streams, for example by expanding its commemorative coins contract to generate additional revenue."

After the Pitcairn Islands pound, now we have the Ascension Island dollar. I wonder what is next. It seems that for some governments, everything is acceptable as long as it makes them enough money.

[eurocoin]

I asked Minted Assets how these pieces could be legal tender when the official currency of Ascension Island is the St Helena Pound. I also sent them a copy of the Currency Ordinance in regard of Ascension Island. They replied that that only pertains to circulation coins. According to them, the government is allowed to issue dollar denominated pieces for collectors coins. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[<k>]

These pieces are radical proof of our forum member Figleaf's dictum that non-circulating collector coins are not coins because they are not money. He holds that they are not money because, although they have a nominal face value, they are not spendable. UK banks will not accept UK collector 5 pound coins, even though they are theoretically legal tender.

Such pieces should be regarded as ceremonial money only, having only cultural value. The currency in which they are denominated must be of national cultural significance. The Pitcairn Islands are a British overseas territory, therefore the 50 pence collector pieces that they issued followed these cultural rules.

Ascension Island houses a US military base. The island currency is the St. Helena pound, which is fixed at parity with the pound sterling. Both UK and St. Helena currency are accepted at retail outlets and bars. However, certain places, such as the US Air Force Base, accept both dollars and pounds. Therefore these Ascension Island collector coins that are nominally denominated in US dollars have relevant cultural significance and accordingly follow the rules for these ceremonial pieces. These pieces are no more meant to be spent than the Maundy coins that the British monarch distributes to selected members of the public.

The Isle of Man has for long enough issued collector pieces that reference the history and culture of foreign countries that have nothing to do with the Isle of Man. Many countries, the world over, issue coins that celebrate the Chinese New Year. Should these pieces be made illegal? See my humorous topic: Coins of the Modern Chinese Empire.

However, if Ascension Island issued collector pieces that were denominated in yuan, it would be breaking the cultural rule that the nominal currency of such pieces must be of national cultural significance. Likewise if it issued pieces denominated in rubles.

In truth, collector pieces have only some of the characteristics of money, in the same way that the Tamagotchi had only some of the (apparent) characteristics of living beings, which encouraged some people to want to "care for" Tamagotchi  as if they were real pets. Perhaps we should refer to collector coins as Tamagotchi money. 

I point out once again that in the 1990s various EU countries issued collector coins denominated in ECUs, even though there was no such currency at that time! Therefore I suggest that eurocoin should stop moaning about these collector pieces. In fact, it is probably only a matter of time before some African country issues collector pieces denominated in yuan, given the economic infiltration of China into certain African countries.

[<k>]

Here I reiterate my main point. Because collector pieces are not money, the currency in which they are nominally denominated is functionally irrelevant. Because these pieces are of ceremonial value only, the currency in which they are nominally denominated must be of national cultural significance only.

[eurocoin]

No, that is of course nonsense. These are not official collectors coins, they are official fantasies. This phenomenon of official fantasies, that are being sold as legal tender while they are not, should be eradicated. The lawlessness needs to end.

[<k>]

These are not official collectors coins, they are official fantasies.

They are indeed official collector coins. "Official fantasies" is a contradiction in terms - such items do not exist.

[eurocoin]

I have contacted the Government of Ascension Island, aswell as its Crown Counsel, for more information on these pieces and their legal basis.

[Figleaf]

I am of course happy with this discussion. Just to reiterate my usual "yes but": every collector has an unabridged right to collect whatever he wants, but should collect in the knowledge of the status of what he collects. Therefore, this tat (Offa's term) can be freely posted here, provided that its status is made very clear.

My favourite example at this time is NewHikaru089, who has posted a number of threads on fantasies, always explaining who is behind the issues and making clear they did not circulate. This actually returned some interest in series like those treated in his thread on the fantasy currency of Esperanto, that had otherwise sunk to the interest level of the pieces shown above.

Peter

[eurocoin]

The Crown Counsel of Ascension Island, informed me that for the issuance of these dollar-denominated pieces they rely on section 4 (2) in conjunction with section 3 (1) (c) of the Currency Ordinance of Ascension Island, which mentions the following:

Legal tender

3. (1) The following notes and coins are legal tender within Ascension:

[...]

(c) coins issued under section 4, if such coins are of current weight and have not been illegally dealt with.

Coins commemorating notable events

4. (1) The Governor may, with prior approval of the Secretary of State, cause
coins to be made and issued to commemorate notable events of importance to Ascension.

(2) Coins issued under subsection (1) must be of such denominations and of such
weight, form and design and made of such metal or metals as from time to time specified by
Proclamation made by the Governor with the approval of the Secretary of State.

In their interpretation of the law, this means that the Governor, with prior approval of the Secretary of State has the right to invent a denomination for the collectors coins as long as the coins are from time to time specified by proclamation. This, even if that denomination makes no sense whatsoever. Of course this is a ridiculous interpretation, as section 2 of the same Currency Ordinance is very clear:

Unit of currency

2. The unit of currency of Ascension is the St Helena Pound.

The Crown Counsel did not appear to reply to my question whether this means that the Government of Ascension Island has now introduced a new currency, the Ascension Island dollar. They only mentioned that it is currently their intention that the dollar denominations will only be used on pieces for collectors. They also sent me a number of proclamations for dollar-denominated pieces of Ascension Island that will be issued in the near future.

Now it is only a matter of time before we will start seeing the same from other issuers for which Commonwealth Mint is the official manufacturer, such as Tristan da Cunha and possibly Alderney.

I will be sending them some further critical questions about the matter.

[Offa]

I docked at ascension in 1982 en route to the Falkland Islands. US dollars were used alongside St Helena and ascension coins, this was primarily because of the large US base on the island. On our return six months later the dollar was not accepted anymore due to the currency legislation, it could only be used on the American base.

[<k>]

So there we have it. These pieces are NOT illegal. Eurocoin has libelled the authorities of Ascension Island. Yet still he has left his libellous topic title unchanged. I suggest that he pays 100 pounds sterling to each British forum member by way of apology. 

[eurocoin]

So there we have it. These pieces are NOT illegal. Eurocoin has libelled the authorities of Ascension Island. Yet still he has left his libellous topic title unchanged. I suggest that he pays 100 pounds sterling to each British forum member by way of apology. 

"The unit of currency of Ascension is the St Helena Pound.". A pound is not a dollar.

Their explanation and application of the law makes no sense. The Currency Ordinance simply does not offer an option to issue dollars, neither was it made with the intention to create such a possibility.

[FosseWay]

I agree with eurocoin's analysis of the Currency Ordinance and with his opinion of the explanation/justification given by the Ascension Island authorities.

However, I also agree with <k>'s assertion that the whole matter is "functionally irrelevant". Does it affect anyone in a practical way if Ascension issues these, er, objects? Would it affect them more, less or differently if substantially the same objects had been issued but with the dollar sign replaced by the pound sign? I'd argue no, because no-one is likely to be spending these, on Ascension, in the US or anywhere else; and they'd be no more likely to be spending them if they were denominated in pounds; and they'd have no more guarantee of their acceptance if they were in pounds.

To test the "functional irrelevance" of this, let us compare it with the situation that existed until 2016 in the UK with respect to fake £1 coins (of the round brass type).

Fake £1 coins were fairly easy to find in circulation from at least the early 1990s. I've got almost as many fake ones in my collection as I have real ones. Yet the government declined to do anything about it (beyond, presumably, going after the forgers themselves) until 25 years later. During that time, people passed fake coins during transactions apparently without problem, especially if they were of the better sort, made of brass rather than gold-painted lead. For someone who receives a fake coin and then uses it to buy goods, the existence of that fake is "functionally irrelevant" - it has served precisely the same purpose as the real thing. For the problem to become functionally relevant, the numbers of fakes need to be so high as to have an effect on the money supply (the aim behind the Nazis' Operation Bernhard fivers) or the number of embarrassing rejections in shops needs to be so high as to provoke widespread public criticism and dissatisfaction. For a coin of the value of £1, the former is unlikely to arise, certainly not without the latter alongside. I guess the government chose to act in 2016 because the latter issue had grown to an extent that reflected badly on the government apparatus. So, by 2016, the problem with fake £1s had become functionally relevant.

So, consider this. The £1 coin has been used daily in billions of transactions in a major European country with 60 million or so inhabitants, since 1983. Forgeries are by no means uncommon. Yet the functional relevance of their existence only becomes pressing decades later, when quantities start to turn heads.

None of that is remotely applicable to the Ascension objects. They - or some notional "real" equivalent - aren't used in daily commerce at all, not even in the tiny and isolated context of Ascension. They aren't being issued in quantities or contexts that invite daily use. They aren't recognisable as normal money, either in Ascension or in the US, whose currency they've "kidnapped". Basically they're a non-problem.