The IRS is starting to crack down on cash-app-like payments, the enablers for deposit transactions. Is this going to curtail women looking for excessively large deposits?

The provisions in the American Rescue Plan relating to cash transaction Apps don’t just apply to singular deposits over $600, they apply to any sum of deposits exceeding $600.

there are other ways of providing large deposits.  

Most ladies that I have encountered ask for 25% or so. If a person books a $2000 date. the deposit on that would still be below $600. In addition, many women take deposits by taking pictures of GCs and sending them in a proton email so this might make those more popular.

Any deposit that I've paid in the past was for 50% of total rate. I've noticed other providers requiring up to 100% of total rate.

and an overnight can easily exceed $2400 ($600 deposit at 25%). Lots of women out there looking for 35-50% deposits.  

I'd hate to test the IRS anti-circumvention rules. I'd just pay the fee and let her worry about whether some yahoo says it was for something illicit.

How about crypto? Some providers are beginning to accept crypto more and more which I think is a great thing. Looks like TER also registered theeroticreview.eth which makes me believe they will also begin to accept different types of crypto currencies as payment. Great step in the right direction imo.

Unfortunately, no. Once the total amount of payments = $600, it gets reported to the IRS. If you send your daughter $100 a week for 6 weeks, it’s getting reported to the IRS. Somehow this procedure is supposed to help the IRS expose billionaires who cheat on their taxes. But the reporting applies to all of us.

for USA payers if the IRS and Congress decide they will treat it as an appreciable asset. If so, any time you make a payment you might find yourself with a capital gains liability and need to know that basis for that little bit of cryptocurrency you just transferred.

Anyone gambling with deposits all I can say is good luck. Please search Winter Kay. Looks reputable but I like many were scammed.

Its pretty traceable. Cash and gcs are way less traceable.

Gee, this sounds kinda like a politician might have thought of it as a way to "sell" the intrusive uptick of MORE governmental intrusion into our finances.

Gents who book overnights and fly me to you dates are easily spending over 600+ for a deposit.
I have received quite a few deposits over 600.
There are various ways of accepting deposits besides cashapp.
I do not ask for deposits for any appts that are not overnights,clock-free,or fly me to you dates.

I don't think any ladies have chimed in yet, but they should definitely check previous threads on the topic of setting up a legal business to make the handling of their money legitimate to the IRS and other entities. E.g., even before this $600 cutoff, a $10,000 transaction (buying a car or house) would attract IRS attention if there was no prior reporting of how that $10,000 was obtained.  
.
Form an LLC or DBA. E.g., maybe a consulting business. Put your money in the bank. Pay your taxes. Save up your money and buy a nice house!
.
Some recent threads:  
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/newbie---faq-33/re-im-not-a-tax-pro-but-170497
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/newbie---faq-33/from-previously-posted-qas--170473

This is just making the technology comply with existing 1099 reporting requirements. That is where the $600 number comes from.

I'd advice everyone to be careful with advocating money laundering explicitly....

I seem to recall that some big time pol got tripped up by making deposits just below the reporting limit, and apparently doing that is illegal in and of itself.

The formal term for it is "structuring". And yea, it's illegal.

is if its a business account.  Businesses can deposit and withdraw cash on a daily basis and it doesn't trigger any notification unless the aggregate amounts are more than you are reporting for gross revenues on your corporate tax returns or that there are substantial fluctuations from the norm that are not self-explanatory.  You have to make it look like its all in the ordinary course of business.  Otherwise, its flagged for potential money-laundering.  Computers are also programmed to flag larger transactions that are out of the ordinary for that kind of business or that look suspicious.  These laws for businesses are already on the books and are not part of the new law on personal accounts.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think is missing #2 to be money laundering:  
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/money_laundering
Money laundering refers to a financial transaction scheme that aims to conceal the identity, source, and destination of illicitly-obtained money. The money laundering process can be broken down into three stages. First, the illegal activity that garners the money places it in the launderer’s hands. [Condition 1 maybe applies unless "Money is for my time and companionship only" works. Maybe "Money is for my time, companionship and consulting services only."]  
Second, the launderer passes the money through a complex scheme of transactions to obscure who initially received the money from the criminal enterprise. [I think Condition 2 doesn't apply if the proceeds from the consulting go directly into her business or personal bank account.] Third, the scheme returns the money to the launderer in an obscure and indirect way. [Condition 3 might not apply because she is just spending money in her bank account. "Move along people. Nothing obscure
to see here. Simple deposits and withdrawals. Move along, please."]  
.
Does that argument work? Now, if someone has accumulated $250,000 of unreported income and wants to buy a house and THEN tries to come up with crazy stories ("I found it in a shopping bag in the park last week. I'm going to pay taxes on it." "My relative gave it to me in cash just before they died last week. I'm going to pay taxes on it." "My Halloween collections were REALLY REALLY good this year. I'll pay the taxes." ...). THAT would be attempted money laundering, trying to hide the source of money through complex schemes and (made up) transactions.  
.
As people often point out, Al Capone wasn't taken down for murdering, robbing or bootlegging. He was convicted of tax evasion. (I don't think there were money laundering statutes back then.)