Sure, you may have a hard time opening a bank account with half a million unexplained cash, but just confiscate somebody's life savings, especially when poor, unbanked and possibly black is a very American concept.
In any other civilized place the onus is on the authorities to prove that the money is dirty. Not the other way 'round.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/apr/25/prostitution...
> In November 2008, 20 police officers broke down Finch's front door and searched her house, taking £700 from her purse that she says had been put aside to pay the mortgage. Her laptop computer, mobile phone, driving licence and passport were also taken. No receipt was given.
> Under the Proceeds of Crime Act, the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated from raids, the Crown Prosecution Service keeps another 25%, and the Inland Revenue the rest.
http://prostitutescollective.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/...
> The burden of proof is reversed so people have to prove that any money they have was not earned through “criminal activity”
While you could argue that Columbia and PRC fall into those brackets, those are nevertheless countries with a high occurrence of corruption.