The Supreme Court issued a unanimous, but controversial, decision in May allowing the IRS to summon some bank accounts, records, books, papers and other data, without notice, depriving the subject of the summons the opportunity to object to the seizure of those documents by government officials.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Listen to "Unanimous Court Limits Taxpayer Privacy - The Supreme Court released the much-anticipated decision in Polselli v. IRS. This case concerned a collection action of the IRS. So, I took a specific" by Today's Tax Talk with Attorney Steven Leahy. <a href="https://t.co/1T4S5sxLia">https://t.co/1T4S5sxLia</a> <a href="https://t.co/PhYUFwbCRL">pic.twitter.com/PhYUFwbCRL</a>— Steven Leahy (@AttorneyLeahy) <a href="https://twitter.com/AttorneyLeahy/status/1659362034771804163?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><h3>Probable cause</h3>Normally, the IRS must give notice at least <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7609" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">23 days</a> before accounts and records subject to a summons may be examined. In that time, the account or record holder may file a motion to quash the summons if they believe the summons to be unjustified. A bank account owner may object, for example, that there is no “probable cause” for the IRS to seize their records and that the summons therefore violates their Fourth Amendment rights.<blockquote><h3>Amendment IV</h3>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [Emphases added].</blockquote><h3>Exceptions</h3>Congress made an exception to the notice requirement when an account or record holder has already been assessed or judged to have a tax debt. In that case, the person has already had a chance to argue their side and Congress wanted to ease the process whereby the IRS seizes funds or property to satisfy a proven debt. That is, they did not want to afford a tax debtor the opportunity to move funds out of the reach of government before it could locate and seize those funds.Congress extended this notice exception to a summons for accounts and records of even innocent third parties if the summons is “issued in aid of the collection" of a tax debt. The question before the Supreme Court was whether third parties could have their records seized without notice even where the tax debtor has no legal interest in the third party's accounts or business.<h4>You subpoenaed my bank records because I once had a customer who owes money?</h4>In the <a href="https://aboutblaw.com/75Q" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">case</a> before the Supreme Court, the IRS aggressively pursued a debt of $2 million for taxes and penalties that were assessed for 13 years of underpayment. An IRS agent subpoenaed the records of a law firm that represented the debtor, hoping to discover an undisclosed bank account used by the debtor to pay for legal services.&nbsp;When the law firm responded to the IRS that it “did not retain" any records of payments by the debtor, the agent summoned the bank accounts of the law firm and one of their lawyers, directly from their banks, without notifying the law firm, the lawyer or the debtor — essentially a secret subpoena designed to prevent any of the parties from objecting to the records search until it would be too late.<h3>Supremes allow</h3>The law firm and the lawyer, as well as the debtor's wife, whose accounts were also secretly subpoenaed though she was not connected to the IRS debt, objected to the lack of notice, arguing that they had a right to receive notice since the debtor had no interest in their accounts — his name was not on the accounts and he had no ability to withdraw funds from those accounts.The Supreme Court rejected their argument, holding that secret subpoenas may be issued for accounts and records, even where the debtor has no interest in those accounts, if the subpoenaed information may “aid” the IRS in collecting a debt.&nbsp;<h3>In the legislature's hands</h3>The statute allowing searches without notice did not require that the debtor have an interest in the accounts and the Court declined to read one into the statute. If it was the intent of Congress to limit no-notice summonses to accounts partially owned by an IRS debtor, they will have to pass a new law making that clear.<h4>Until then</h4>Kiplinger therefore <a href="https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/supreme-court-irs-can-secretly-obtain-bank-records" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">warns</a> tax debtors to quickly make a payment arrangement to avoid infringement of privacy of uninvolved relatives.<blockquote>The IRS scored a win at the U.S. Supreme Court that could impact your privacy . . . the IRS can secretly probe your bank records and potentially your relatives’ bank records without notice . . . Given that the agency has significant resources at its disposal (including the power to issue bank summonses) to collect a tax debt that you owe, it’s usually a good idea to pay the IRS taxes you owe on time or as soon as you can.But what if you can’t pay the IRS? The IRS offers options including agreements to pay your taxes within a certain amount of time.</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Supreme Court: Yes, the IRS Can Secretly Obtain Your Bank Records <a href="https://t.co/0u0z5xw1Ua">https://t.co/0u0z5xw1Ua</a>— Mare (@marewho12) <a href="https://twitter.com/marewho12/status/1665439602948075520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h3>How far does it go?</h3>Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, while agreeing with the court decision allowing an exception to the notice rule even where the tax debtor has no interest in an account, still voiced concern for how broadly this exception could be applied by overzealous IRS agents. She described, in a concurrence, a disturbing, though hypothetical, case where the government might bring its resources down on a totally innocent third party.<blockquote>Imagine, for example, a delinquent taxpayer who routinely visits his local mom-and-pop dry cleaning business. Imagine also that the IRS suspects this delinquent taxpayer sometimes uses credit cards with different names. Under a broad reading of §7609(c)(2)(D)(i), I suppose the IRS could issue a summons to the dry cleaner’s bank with out notice to the dry cleaner, seeking years of the dry cleaner’s financial records.&nbsp;</blockquote>She then concludes that the exception provided by Congress should only be applied on a case-by-case basis.<blockquote>The bottom line is this: As I read the statute, the IRS is not necessarily exempt from notice obligations any time a tax-delinquency matter enters the collection phase.&nbsp;</blockquote>Being that Justice Jackson was not able to prevail on the majority of her colleagues to include that wording in the opinion of the Court, fears have been raised that people only “remotely connected” to a tax debtor will have their accounts raided.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">“The Supreme Court’s ruling grants the IRS startlingly broad authority to pry into the financial records of people who may be only remotely connected to a delinquent taxpayer...” <a href="https://t.co/xxDQ8VE9fX">https://t.co/xxDQ8VE9fX</a>— The Pug (@thepugnews) <a href="https://twitter.com/thepugnews/status/1660356863278415875?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 21, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h3>Verdict</h3>The ACLU filed an amicus <a href="https://www.aclu.org/cases/polselli-v-internal-revenue-service?document=ACLU-et-als-Amicus-Brief-in-Support-of-Petitioners#legal-documents" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">brief</a> with the Court specifically warning that accepting the IRS position would make it far too easy for the IRS to claim an exception to the notice requirement.<blockquote>[The IRS's] interpretation allows the IRS to drive a truck through this limited exception and to swallow the remainder of the statute, making notice the exception rather than the rule.&nbsp;</blockquote>The ACLU's position having been rejected, social media has seen an abundance of posts warning of the consequences.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">IRS Can Secretly Obtain Bank Records of Americans NOT under Investigation, Supreme Court Rules <a href="https://t.co/TF0NNwueKK">https://t.co/TF0NNwueKK</a>— V.Streifel (@streifel_v) <a href="https://twitter.com/streifel_v/status/1660770888797626369?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div>Posts like the above, claiming that now the “IRS Can Secretly Obtain Bank Records of Americans NOT under Investigation,” are technically correct. The IRS may do so. But not always; not every American can have their records secretly summoned. A more accurate statement would add context:<blockquote>The IRS can secretly obtain bank records of Americans NOT under investigation if they have some connection to a person who has been judged or assessed to have a tax debt.</blockquote>We therefore judge the claim that the IRS can seize bank records without notice as technically true but in need of the above clarification. And yes, business owners should be concerned that their records may be secretly subpoenaed if they enter into transactions with tax debtors, particularly if there are multiple transactions. Close relatives like spouses should consider the possibility of being subject to a secret summons even in the absence of transactions with the debtor.&nbsp;Even Justice Clarence Thomas, a strict constitutionalist, found himself unable to assist the subjects of the secret subpoenas, <a href="https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/justices-mull-need-for-limit-on-irs-power-to-demand-bank-records" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">stating</a> during oral argument, “This is quite a broad statute," leaving business associates and relatives of tax debtors with the sole option of petitioning Congress to amend the law and expressly limit the use of notice exceptions. Till then, claims of secret IRS subpoenas will remain “mostly true.”

iStock-1440589183.jpg

Legal News

US News

Should business owners fear transactions with tax debtors?

Fact Check: Can the IRS secretly seize bank records?

A British vigilante group known as the “Blade Runners” is receiving widespread support from British taxpayers as it continues to destroy climate surveillance cameras across London.<h2>The ULEZ mandate</h2>By order of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the city is peppered with ultra-low emission zones (ULEZs), areas accessible only to low-emission vehicles. Cars that do not meet the city’s environmental standards are charged £12.50 ($16) for entering the ULEZ. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras positioned around the zones read license plates and check them against the vehicles’ make and model in real time. If a vehicle does not meet the environmental threshold, a fine is levied against the car owner.&nbsp;The ULEZ climate mandate has drawn heavy&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-hundreds-protest-against-climate-mandates">protests</a> from residents, including&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/british-veteran-launches-hunger-strike-as-unrest-grows-over-climate-mandates">hunger strikes</a> and refusals to pay fines. Taxpayers have also taken to disabling the ANPR surveillance cameras which Transport for London (TfL), the city’s transportation department, said will be used both for climate and law enforcement.<h2>Taxpayers cheer the ‘Blade Runners’</h2>Since the climate restrictions were expanded last year, the Blade Runners have taken to disabling and destroying hundreds of cameras. Between April and September 2023, Metropolitan Police recorded 200 reports of cameras being stolen and 595 reports of cameras being vandalized.TfL began placing black boxes around ULEZ camera wirings to protect them from being cut, but taxpayers found other ways to disable the cameras — like removing them completely.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"> MUST SEE: Blade Runners topple THREE ULEZ cameras in a coordinated strike… The people are fighting back! <a href="https://t.co/Yvr2Xr7Lun">pic.twitter.com/Yvr2Xr7Lun</a>— David Morgan #StayFree (@david_r_morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/david_r_morgan/status/1802726912050995623?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>In response, the city&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-taxpayers-attack-surveillance-vans-in-continued-revolt">deployed</a> mobile surveillance vans mounted with ANPR cameras across London in the hopes of evading attacks, but Blade Runners soon began targeting those as well. Some surveillance vans have been spotted covered in graffiti with their tires slashed, while others have been completely covered in tarp.Last month, 21 cameras were destroyed in the hours after Sadiq Khan was re-elected mayor of London, the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13538797/Moment-Blade-Runner-uses-power-tool-cut-ULEZ-camera-traffic-light-latest-attack-Sadiq-Khans-hated-scheme.html">reported</a>. Last weekend, Blade Runners used power tools to topple a ULEZ camera and traffic lights to the delight of some fellow taxpayers. In a video that was posted to social media, passing cars can be heard honking in support.The video received over 37,000 likes. Comments on the post were largely supportive, with users writing that, “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty,” and “Fair play to them, it's a complete scam that does nothing.”Blade Runner Matt Hardy told the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;that the Blade Runners are “people pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us and getting out and doing things about it – real votes, real boys here.”<h2>‘These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control’</h2>British actor and influencer Laurence Fox said this week he was just given back his electronic devices by police after being arrested earlier this year for cheering on the Blade Runners:<blockquote>These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control. They are the primary infrastructure for all sorts of things that ideologues like the midget dictator [Sadiq Khan] would like to impose upon us.I can now finally say the word ‘Bladerunners’ again. One of the ridiculous restrictions on free speech imposed by the police.It’s a dreadful shame to see so many of these cameras dying suddenly. I’m not at all thrilled about it. Just because I am smiling like a Cheshire Cat, it doesn’t mean that I am over the moon that these scameras continue to topple in high winds.&nbsp;Vive la résistance!</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">POLICE UPDATE Following 6 coppers bursting into my house earlier this year to arrest me for saying how pleased I was that the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ULEZ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ULEZ</a> scam was meeting such robust resistance, this morning the <a href="https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@metpoliceuk</a> were ordered by the magistrate to hand back all my devices, including my…— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) <a href="https://twitter.com/LozzaFox/status/1803030521095622912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 18, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div> &nbsp;

ulez sign camera.jpg

Pushback_Resistance

Climate Change

‘Pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us’

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Fisker is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the electric vehicle (EV) company announced Tuesday.<h2>‘Like other companies in the electric vehicle industry’</h2>“Fisker has made incredible progress since our founding, bringing the Ocean SUV to market twice as fast as expected in the auto industry and making good on our promises to deliver the most sustainable vehicle in the world,” a spokesperson <a href="https://assets.ctfassets.net/cghen8gr8e1n/6W19OiEBJDVIFVEmo4feHA/df902c5cb2b067251a300efb0b35f611/Fisker-Filing-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>.The California-based company added it is not the only EV maker that has been struggling to stay in business.“We are proud of our achievements, and we have put thousands of Fisker Ocean SUVs in customers’ hands in both North American [sic] and Europe. But like other companies in the electric vehicle industry, we have faced various market and macroeconomic headwinds that have impacted our ability to operate efficiently. After evaluating all options for our business, we determined that proceeding with a sale of our assets under Chapter 11 is the most viable path forward for the company.”Fisker’s collapse is the latest indication that the EV industry is folding due to sinking demand. Other EV industry players are also cutting their losses as they jump ship.<h2>Hertz</h2>In March, Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motorfinanceonline.com/news/hertz-ceo-resigns-amid-ev-investment-setback/#:~:text=Scherr's%20departure%20coincides%20with%20Hertz's,electric%20vehicle%20(EV)%20rentals">resigned</a> after his bet on EVs cost the car rental giant its biggest quarterly loss since 2020. Hertz had been praised by the Biden administration for its ambition to convert 25% of its fleet to EVs by the end of this year. In January, however, the company announced it would instead be selling its 20,000 EVs — including Teslas — at heavily discounted prices and replacing them with gas-powered cars.<h2>Mercedes-Benz</h2>Mercedes-Benz also recently had to give up its ambition to only sell electric cars by 2030. Instead, EVs are expected to make up only 50% of the German carmaker’s sales over the next decade.<h2>Apple</h2>In February, Apple abandoned its multi-billion dollar effort to create an electric car. Despite being a decade in the works and employing 2,000 people, Project Titan was axed due to falling consumer demand.<h2>Aston Martin</h2>A lack of consumer demand is also partly to blame for Aston Martin&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13138123/Aston-Martin-puts-brakes-new-electric-supercar-2026-bosses-say-drivers-want-engines-throaty-roar.html">placing</a> its battery-operated “supercar” on hold until 2026.“Demand, certainly at an Aston Martin price point, is not what we thought it was going to be two years ago,” said Aston Martin Executive Chairman Lawrence Stroll.&nbsp;<h2>Ford</h2>In December, Ford slashed production of its flagship EV at its assembly plant in Dearborn, Michigan by half. The automaker cut the monthly production quote for the all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck from 3,200 units to 1,600 units per month.<h2>Biden administration continues to force EV production</h2>Nevertheless, the Biden administration in March issued new climate mandates aimed at forcing more EV production. The new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contain tight emissions standards that will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/epa-electric-vehicles-emissions-limits-climate-biden-e6d581324af51294048df24269b5d20a">require</a> 56% of new vehicle sales to be fully electric by 2032, with an additional 13% required to be hybrids.

car market decline.jpg

Biden administration continues to force EV production

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

For the last two years, British authorities have been testing AI-powered emotion recognition cameras on travelers in train stations, according to recently disclosed documents.<h2>What can the cameras see?</h2>In each of eight train stations around the UK, five to seven cameras or sensors scan the passing crowds. Using AI software from Amazon, the cameras use object recognition algorithms to spot criminal activity, trespassing, weapons, wet floors, overcrowding, and overstuffed trash cans.&nbsp;They can also alert authorities when passengers engage in “unusual behavior,” such as shouting, running, smoking, or skateboarding.&nbsp;A combination of existing cameras and newly installed smart cameras are being used for the surveillance project. All are equipped with Amazon’s Rekognition surveillance system.<h2>Emotional recognition</h2>Through a combination of facial and behavioral analyses, the Rekognition software allows officials to also <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">analyze visitors’ emotions</a>. Internal documents note that the cameras can detect whether a passenger is “happy, sad [or] angry.” They can also recognize passenger satisfaction, which “could be utilized to maximum advertising and retail revenue.”<h2>Anti-social behavior</h2>Authorities can also detect passengers who exhibit “anti-social behaviour,” which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/asb/asb/antisocial-behaviour/what-is-antisocial-behaviour/">according</a> to London’s Metropolitan Police Service means “behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person.”<h2>Social distancing, face masks, and demographics</h2>Other&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24757655-usecases_dpas_review_managed_stations?responsive=1&amp;title=1">use cases</a> for the surveillance cameras include detecting whether passengers are keeping to social distancing rules and wearing face masks. The cameras can also scan for demographics by identifying people’s age profiles and “socio-economic classification,” which the documents note can create “revenue opportunities for better targeted advertising and product placement.”<h2>‘Quite a concerning step’</h2>The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch, a civil rights and government watchdog group, in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. Network Rail, a body within the Department of Transportation which manages most of the country’s train network, has been overseeing the surveillance project.&nbsp;“The rollout and normalization of AI surveillance in these public spaces, without much consultation and conversation, is quite a concerning step,” Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/">told</a> Wired.As of now, the surveillance systems do not use facial recognition technology, which analyzes faces and matches them against facial images stored in certain databases.

crowd surveillance.jpg

surveillance

World News

Cameras can also detect 'anti-social behavior,' social distancing

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations

The European Union (EU) is considering subjecting foreign travelers to lie detector tests administered by AI technology.&nbsp;<h2>How would it work?</h2>Authorities at airports and ferry ports would use cameras equipped with machine-learning software to detect whether a person is being untruthful. As travelers fill out their entry applications, their eye, facial, and behavioral movements would be analyzed. If the camera indicates the traveler is lying, the software will send an alert to an immigration officer who will investigate.The technology has already been successfully tested in trials conducted by EU countries in the last few years. iBorderCtrl and TRESPASS, two such trials, explored how to create an automated border control system. Several features were tested, including the lie detector tests described above. They also piloted a feature in which AI software scans the social media accounts of travelers before granting them entry.Critics of the lie-detection scheme include Patrick Breyer, a German MEP. Breyer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13534215/Outrage-British-tourists-going-away-EU-countries-face-lie-detector-test-carried-artificial-intelligence-granted-entry.html">told</a> The Mail on Sunday that the technology is “pseudoscience” that threatens to profile the wrong people.&nbsp;“It will discriminate against anyone who is disabled or who has an anxious personality. It will not work,” said Breyer.<h2>Part of the Entry-Exit System</h2>If the EU decides to implement AI-powered lie detection, it will likely be introduced as part of the new Entry-Exit System (EES) due to take effect on October 6th. EES will replace the passport-stamping process by having foreign travelers apply for entry through self-service kiosks. These kiosks will collect the travelers’ biometric data, including their fingerprints and facial images.These data will eventually be stored in the Common Identity Repository (CIR), a massive database being built by the EU. The CIR will be capable of storing biometric files on 300 million individuals.&nbsp;<h2>EES for outsiders, digital ID for insiders</h2>While the EU prepares to roll out the EES for foreigners, including British citizens, it is also rolling out a digital ID program for EU citizens .Regulations that took effect last month&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/europe-launches-digital-id-scheme/">require</a> EU&nbsp;Member States in the European Union to provide a digital ID wallet to their citizens by 2026 which must conform to the European Union Digital Identity (EUDI) wallet specifications. These specifications include the ability to store a taxpayer’s identity papers, such as driver’s licenses, health insurance cards, diplomas and other official documents.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>How will the wallet be used?</h2>The digital wallet will allow access to both public and private services. Uses include making payments, opening a bank account, getting prescriptions, signing contracts, traveling, accessing government services, receiving social security benefits, logging into social media accounts, and more.&nbsp;“It can also be used to facilitate the freedom of movement by storing documents such as the European Health Insurance Card,” explains the European Commission (EC) on its&nbsp;<a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eudi-wallet-implementation">website</a>.Under the current rules, the EUDI wallet will be optional for taxpayers.&nbsp;<h2>Critics raise concerns about the wallet</h2>The EUDI wallet’s main selling point is that users will be able to share only the details necessary to authenticate themselves for a given service. All other personal information will remain hidden. The EC expects this feature to satisfy widespread privacy concerns.But concerns about the wallet remain. The main worry is that while users only share those details that are necessary, the government can decide at any point which information is “necessary” to share. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, the European Commission made proof of vaccination necessary to access services and establishments. Prior to that, each taxpayer’s health information was considered confidential.

face scanning.jpg

Technology could be introduced with new biometric entry system

Europe may subject travelers to lie detector tests

Fact Check: Can the IRS secretly seize bank records?

Should business owners fear transactions with tax debtors?

Related Articles

Supreme Court deals blow to government censorship

Journalist threatened with jail: ‘For now, I am a free man’

Judge taunts elderly pro-life woman after prison sentence

Groups sue NY attorney general for crackdown on pregnancy centers that 'reverse' the abortion pill

Latest Articles

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations

Europe may subject travelers to lie detector tests