Market Restrictions & Overregulation

Those in the bullion business are familiar with extremely thin margins. A-Mark Precious Metals, the owner of many online bullion dealers, reported a gross profit margin of around just 2 percent in 2025. Coin dealers as well are often faced with margins that leave little room for additional expenses. The unforgiving nature of both businesses means that increasing government regulation and interference can prove incredibly costly and disruptive to those in the market.

Coins

The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG) demonstrated this in 2009 when, in an attempt to win a test case, the group tried to import 23 ancient coins from London into the United States. U.S. Customs seized the coins under the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA), a 1983 law passed in response to a wave of anti-cultural-looting sentiment. The fear of an illicit antiquities trade, robbing countries of their cultural heritage and even funding terrorism, had since spurred the federal government to expand the CPIA’s enforcement from targeted import restrictions on specific artifact categories to blanket restrictions on anything exported from certain ancient regions.

The ACCG’s test case did not end well. Federal courts sided with Customs, ruling that the burden of proof for imported coins lies with the importer. While unique artifacts are relatively easy to document with proof of legal export, common ancient coins are not. CPIA import restrictions typically apply only to coins exported from their home country after a “date of enforcement,” but for common ancient coins, it is nearly impossible to prove provenance.

Recent talks with the Italian government have even seen attempts to expand import restrictions to Roman Republic/Imperial coinage. This move would be detrimental to this collecting base, especially as only 5 percent of Imperial Roman coins have even been found in Italy. Combined with the ACCG federal court ruling, this means that today, ever-increasing regulations on imported coins pose a serious issue to the continued vitality of ancient coin collecting. 

Bullion

However, it’s not only numismatic coin collectors impacted by blanket restrictions being applied in a nuanced market. Bullion dealers, who up until recently had benefited from an increasing push to remove sales tax on bullion, will be impacted greatly by new general tariffs. As recently as August 8, a U.S. Customs ruling declared certain Swiss-refined products do fall under new tariffs—a reversal from a previous statement that clarified bullion was exempt.

This confusion could affect gold prices and bullion dealers, who would have no choice but to pass on increased duties to consumers. This would lead to higher gold premiums and potential shortages. Collectable coins never benefited from an exemption from tariffs, and if enacted for long enough, similar price patterns could also occur in numismatic markets.

The Compromise

Today, both bullion and coin collectors find themselves impacted by poorly thought-out but often well-intentioned government regulation that threatens the stability of the numismatic marketplace. The ACCG’s legal battle and many collectors’ recent experiences of being charged costly new tariffs for imports show how disruptive over-generalized regulation can be.

Protecting countries’ heritage is important, and looting artifacts to fund illicit activities is a real threat. However, new research by the RAND Corporation suggests this threat has been exaggerated. Additionally, import regulations are meaningful only if they promote rather than undermine scholarship, public interest, and cultural conservation. Rather than adopting a black-and-white approach to regulations surrounding coinage and precious metals, policymakers should pursue nuanced restrictions that protect both heritage and hobby—ensuring history is enjoyed, studied, and protected.