CAMS Questions and Answers

 A significant reduction in suspicious transaction report (STR) filings at a particular branch could indicate that the branch is not properly identifying and reporting suspicious activities, or that the branch is experiencing a change in customer behavior or risk profile. Therefore, the most appropriate action for an anti-money laundering specialist is to review the branch exception reports, which are reports that highlight transactions or activities that deviate from the expected or normal patterns, based on the customer profiles and risk assessments. By reviewing the branch exception reports, the specialist can determine whether there are any changes in activity that warrant further investigation or reporting, or whether there are any gaps or weaknesses in the branch’s compliance program or procedures.

The other options are not as appropriate as reviewing the branch exception reports, as they do not directly address the issue of suspicious activity reporting. Placing the branch on the watchlist may be a subsequent action, but it does not provide immediate insight into the reason for the reduction in STR filings. Analyzing the branch activity reports may show whether there has been a decrease in branch activity, but it does not explain why the activity has decreased, or whether the remaining activity is suspicious or not. Reviewing the staff records may reveal whether inexperienced personnel are in critical positions without appropriate training, but it does not account for other factors that may affect the branch’s compliance performance, such as management oversight, internal controls, or customer risk.

References: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 361; ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 12; What Is a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)? Triggers and Filing3; Reporting suspicious transactions to FINTRAC4.

According to the CAMS study guide, chapter 4, page 1191, transaction records include any records that reflect the movement of funds or assets, such as wire transfers, checks, deposits, withdrawals, securities trades, etc. Therefore, items 1, 2, and 4 are examples of transaction records that should be delivered in response to a legal request. Item 3, signature cards, are not transaction records, but rather account opening documents that contain the customer’s name, address, identification, and signature. These documents may be relevant for customer due diligence or identification purposes, but they do not reflect the transaction activities of the customer.

References:

1: ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 119: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf

According to the BSA/AML Manual1, a financial institution’s board of directors and senior management are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the institution has a comprehensive and effective BSA/AML compliance program and oversight framework. This includes ensuring that the institution timely identifies, reports, and responds to suspicious activity involving its products, services, customers, or employees. Therefore, when an anti-money laundering specialist is concerned that several suspicious transaction reports will discuss potential illegal activity of bank employees, the immediate concern for the institution is to ensure no delay in informing the board of directors and senior management of the situation, as well as the actions taken or planned to address the risks and mitigate the potential harm. The board and senior management should be kept informed of the status and outcome of any internal or external investigations, as well as any regulatory or law enforcement inquiries or actions, related to the suspicious activity involving bank employees.

References:

BSA/AML Manual1

Suspicious Activity Reporting - Overview2

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) Basics3

What’s Suspicious? Here’s How Banks Apply the Smell Test4

 The correct answer is B, as a customer acceptance policy is an essential element of KYC standards according to the Basel Committee’s Customer Due Diligence for Banks paper1. A customer acceptance policy defines the types of customers that the bank is willing to accept, and the conditions and limitations that apply to such relationships. A customer acceptance policy helps the bank to avoid customers who are likely to pose a higher than average risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, or who are not willing to provide sufficient information for identification and verification purposes1.

References: 1: Customer due diligence for banks - Bank for International Settlements, page 9.

'https://www.wolfsberg-principles.com/sites/default/files/wb/pdfs/wolfsberg-standards/8.%20Wolfsberg-Correspondent-Banking-Principles-2014.pdf - page 6 Monitoring and Reporting of Suspicious Activities The institution shall implement bank-wide policies and procedures to detect and investigate unusual or suspicious activity and report any such activity as required by applicable law. These will include guidance on what is considered to be unusual or suspicious and give examples thereof. The policies and proce dures shall include appropriate monitoring of the Correspondent Bank’s activity, incorporating due diligence results such as customer risk rating and other factors considered meaningful in the assessment of transaction activity risk. In turn, the results of suspicious activity monitoring shall be factored into the periodic review of the client’s file, particularly when the results of transaction monitoring indicate elevated risk levels.

A law enforcement agency may request account opening documents and account statements from the institution to facilitate its investigation of a suspicious transaction report (STR). These documents can provide valuable information about the identity, background, source of funds, and transaction patterns of the customer, as well as any red flags or anomalies that may indicate money laundering or other criminal activities. Account opening documents may include identification documents, verification documents, customer due diligence forms, risk assessment forms, etc. Account statements may include transaction details, balances, fees, charges, etc.

References:

ACAMS, CAMS Examination Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, pp. 115-116

FATF Guidance: The Role of Hawala and Other Similar Service Providers in Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, October 20131, p. 20

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism, June 20172, p. 11

Q  Law enforcement may be given access to a financial institution customer’s financial records if they serve a legal summons or subpoena, or if they have circumstantial evidence to suspect money laundering. These are two of the exceptions to the general rule that financial institutions must protect the privacy of their customers’ financial information under the Right to Financial Privacy Act (RFPA) of 19781. The RFPA also allows access to customer records in other situations, such as with the customer’s consent, in response to judicial orders, or for certain intelligence or counterintelligence purposes1.

Option A is incorrect because a suspicious transaction report (STR) does not automatically grant law enforcement access to the customer’s financial records. The STR is a confidential document that is filed by the financial institution to the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the country, and the FIU may decide to share the information with law enforcement if it deems appropriate2. However, law enforcement still needs to follow the RFPA procedures to obtain the customer’s records from the financial institution.

Option C is incorrect because the investigation of a customer being made public in the media does not give law enforcement the right to access the customer’s financial records. The media exposure may raise the public interest or the urgency of the investigation, but it does not override the RFPA requirements. Law enforcement still needs to obtain a legal summons, subpoena, or other valid authorization to access the customer’s records from the financial institution.

References:

1: Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978, 12 U.S.C. §§ 3401-3422 2: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), p. 47

UESTION NO: 86

Findings from a regulatory examination report states that the job descriptions of personnel outside of the

compliance department do not include references to anti-money laundering responsibilities.

Which action should the firm take?

A. Update all job descriptions to include anti-money laundering responsibilities

B. Respond that only compliance personnel have anti-money laundering responsibilities

C. Send an email to all staff stating that personnel must observe the anti-money laundering policy

D. Reply that a description of anti-money laundering responsibilities is included in the annual training

Answer: A

According to the ACAMS Study Guide, one of the essential elements of an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program is to assign clear roles and responsibilities to all staff members, regardless of their position or department1. This ensures that everyone is aware of their obligations and expectations in relation to AML compliance, and that they receive appropriate training and guidance. Therefore, the firm should update all job descriptions to include references to AML responsibilities, such as identifying and reporting suspicious activity, conducting customer due diligence, and adhering to AML policies and procedures.

The other options are not sufficient or correct, because:

B. Responding that only compliance personnel have AML responsibilities is incorrect, because AML compliance is not only the responsibility of the compliance department, but of the entire organization1. All staff members should be involved in the AML program and contribute to its effectiveness.

C. Sending an email to all staff stating that personnel must observe the AML policy is not sufficient, because it does not specify what the AML policy entails, or how it applies to different roles and functions. An email is also not a permanent or formal way of communicating AML responsibilities, and it may not reach all staff members or be taken seriously.

D. Replying that a description of AML responsibilities is included in the annual training is not sufficient, because it does not address the issue of the job descriptions, which should reflect the AML responsibilities of each position. Moreover, annual training may not be frequent or comprehensive enough to cover all aspects of AML compliance, and it may not be tailored to the specific needs and risks of each role or department.

References:

1: ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Developing an Effective Anti-Money Laundering Program, page 49.

According to the web search results, one of the methods that FATF-style regional bodies (FSRBs) use to understand the inherent money laundering and terrorist financing risks in their regions is to conduct regional-level research and analysis of the money laundering and terrorist financing methods and trends using standards and templates used for FATF typologies reports12. Typologies are the various techniques used to launder money or finance terrorism, and typologies reports are the documents that describe these techniques, identify the vulnerabilities and risks, and provide case studies and best practices to prevent and detect them3. The FATF and its FSRBs produce typologies reports on a regular basis, covering different topics and sectors relevant to their regions and the global community3. By conducting regional-level research and analysis, FSRBs can enhance their understanding of the specific money laundering and terrorist financing threats and challenges faced by their member countries, and provide them with useful guidance and recommendations to mitigate these risks12.

The other options are not correct because they are either not the methods used by FSRBs to understand the inherent money laundering and terrorist financing risks in their regions, or they are not consistent with the FATF standards and expectations. Requiring member countries to develop statistical metrics over money laundering and terrorist financing crimes may be a useful way to measure the effectiveness of their anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) systems, but it is not a method used by FSRBs to understand the risks in their regions. Rather, it is a requirement imposed by the FATF on all countries to collect and maintain comprehensive statistics on matters relevant to the effectiveness and efficiency of their AML/CFT systems4. Requiring participating financial institutions of their members to file suspicious transaction reports (STRs) to the regional body may be a violation of the FATF standards, which state that financial institutions should report any suspicious transactions to the financial intelligence unit (FIU) of their country, not to any regional or international body5. Moreover, STRs are confidential and protected by legal provisions, and should not be disclosed to any third party without the consent of the FIU5. Conducting global research on money laundering and terrorist financing trends and reporting their findings in their own typologies report may be a duplication of the FATF’s work, as the FATF is the global standard-setter and policy-maker for AML/CFT, and produces typologies reports that cover the global trends and issues3. FSRBs should focus on the regional-level research and analysis, and coordinate and cooperate with the FATF and other FSRBs to share information and experiences12.

References: 5678910

The Egmont Group’s 100 Cases1, the Financial Action Task Force Typologies2, and FinCEN’s SAR Activity Review3 are all sources of information related to money laundering trends, methods, and risks. They provide examples, analysis, and guidance on how to detect, prevent, and report money laundering and other financial crimes. The Wolfsberg Principles4, on the other hand, are a set of global standards for the prevention of money laundering in the correspondent banking and private banking sectors. They are not intended to provide information on money laundering trends, but rather to establish best practices and minimum requirements for financial institutions to comply with anti-money laundering regulations and expectations.

References:

Egmont Group’s 100 Cases1

Financial Action Task Force Typologies2

FinCEN’s SAR Activity Review3

The Wolfsberg Principles4

One of the most common methods of money laundering in the insurance industry is to purchase a policy with illicit funds and then request a refund of the premiums, either partially or fully, before the policy matures. This way, the money launderer can receive a legitimate payment from the insurance company, effectively washing the dirty money. This technique is also known as premium fraud or early surrender12

According to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the most significant money laundering and terrorist financing risks in the insurance industry are found in life insurance and annuity products, because such products allow a customer to place large amounts of funds into the financial system and seamlessly transfer such funds to disguise their true origin34

Some indicators of potential money laundering through insurance products are: 12

The customer pays the premiums with cash, cashier’s checks, money orders, or other anonymous or unusual payment methods.

The customer overpays the premiums or makes multiple payments in excess of the required amount.

The customer cancels the policy during the free-look or grace period and requests a refund to a different account or a third party.

The customer purchases a policy that is inconsistent with their income, age, or risk profile.

The customer shows little interest in the benefits or terms of the policy, but is more concerned about the cancellation or surrender options.

References:

1: AML in Insurance: How to Detect & Combat Money Laundering, ComplyAdvantage, 2022

2: Anti Money Laundering (AML) In Insurance Industry In 2021, Financial Crime Academy, 2023

3: Money laundering in the insurance industry, Insurance Commission, 2022

4: Money laundering in the insurance industry, Atty. Dennis B. Funa, Business Mirror, 2016

[5]: Anti-Money Laundering Requirements: FAQs for Insurance Companies, FinCEN, 2005

A bank’s risk assessment is a process of identifying, measuring, and mitigating the potential risks that the bank faces in its operations, products, services, and customers. According to the ACAMS Study Guide, a bank should focus on the following areas when performing a risk assessment1:

The type and location of the institution’s clients. This involves analyzing the customer base, the types of accounts and transactions, the source and destination of funds, the level of due diligence and verification, and the risk profile of the customers. For example, a bank should consider whether its customers are individuals or entities, domestic or foreign, politically exposed persons, high-net-worth individuals, non-profit organizations, or cash-intensive businesses. The location of the customers may also indicate the level of exposure to money laundering, terrorist financing, sanctions, or tax evasion risks.

The nature and breadth of the services and products the institution provides. This involves evaluating the range and complexity of the products and services offered by the bank, the delivery channels, the payment methods, and the innovation and technology involved. For example, a bank should consider whether it offers wire transfers, correspondent banking, trade finance, private banking, trust and fiduciary services, prepaid cards, mobile banking, or cryptocurrency services. The nature and breadth of the services and products may also affect the level of transparency, traceability, and compliance of the transactions.

The geographic locations where the institution does business. This involves assessing the jurisdictions where the bank operates, where its customers reside, where its counterparties are located, and where the funds flow. For example, a bank should consider whether it has branches, subsidiaries, or affiliates in high-risk countries, whether it serves customers from high-risk countries, whether it engages in cross-border transactions, and whether it complies with the local laws and regulations of the countries where it does business. The geographic locations where the institution does business may also influence the level of exposure to political, legal, regulatory, or reputational risks.

References:

1: ACAMS Study Guide, Chapter 2: Risk Assessments, 1

The decision of whether or not to file a suspicious transaction report (also known as a suspicious activity report or SAR in the United States) often involves weighing the aggravating and mitigating factors arising from the research conducted during the investigative process. The final decision should be documented and supported by the reasoning that was used to make the determination. The transaction has already been investigated which led to the requesting of the document. The document checked out and the question did not specify the document was suspicious, therefore we can conclude an STR does not need to be completed and thus should move to document the reason why an STR wasn't completed.

According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) 40 Recommendations, simplified customer due diligence (CDD) or reduced measures could be acceptable for certain types of products or transactions that have a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, based on a reasonable assessment of the risk by countries or by financial institutions. These include:

Life insurance policies where the annual premium is no more than USD/EUR 1,000 or a single premium of no more than USD/EUR 2,500. This is because the amount of money involved is relatively small and the payout is usually contingent on a specific event, such as death or disability, which reduces the likelihood of abuse by criminals.

Insurance policies for pension schemes if there is no surrender clause and the policy cannot be used as collateral. This is because the beneficiaries of these policies are usually predetermined and the funds are locked in until retirement age, which limits the possibility of transferring or withdrawing the money for illicit purposes.

A pension, superannuation or similar scheme that provides retirement benefits to employees, where contributions are made by way of deduction from wages and the scheme rules do not permit the assignment of a member’s interest under the scheme. This is because the source of funds is known and verified by the employer and the scheme is regulated and supervised by competent authorities, which reduces the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

The other option, trusts where the settlor, trustee and beneficiaries are identified and the shares are in bearer form, is not eligible for simplified CDD or reduced measures, because the use of bearer shares poses a high risk of anonymity and concealment of beneficial ownership, which could facilitate money laundering or terrorist financing.

References:

FATF 40 Recommendations, Recommendation 10 and Interpretive Note to Recommendation 10, paragraphs 17-18.

The specialist should recommend directing the teller (cashier) to file a suspicious transaction report (STR). This is because the teller (cashier) has failed to comply with the bank’s internal policies and procedures for reporting unusual or suspicious activity, which is a key component of an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program1. The teller (cashier) should have filed an internal report of unusual activity as soon as he or she noticed the suspicious transactions, regardless of the personal circumstances or the length of service of the customer involved2. Failing to do so could expose the bank to regulatory sanctions, reputational damage, or legal liability3.

The other options are not appropriate recommendations for the specialist to make in this situation. Continuing to monitor the accounts is not sufficient, as it does not address the past non-compliance or the potential money laundering risk posed by the suspicious transactions. Refreshing anti-money laundering training for the teller (cashier) is not enough, as it does not ensure that the teller (cashier) will report the suspicious transactions or prevent future violations. Suspending the teller’s (cashier’s) employment is too harsh, as it does not take into account the teller’s (cashier’s) long and exemplary work record, the personal hardship faced by the teller’s (cashier’s) family, or the possibility of remedial actions or corrective measures4.

References:

1: Internal Controls | FinCEN.gov1 2: Reporting Suspicious Transactions - ACAMS2 3: The Consequences of Non-Compliance with AML Regulations - Blog | Unit213 4: Employee Discipline in the Workplace: A Guide for Managers4

These designated nonfinancial businesses and professions (DNFBPs) include — casinos when customers engage in financial transactions equal to or above a designated threshold………. — real estate agents when they are involved in transactions for clients concerning buying and selling properties; — dealers in precious metals and stones when they engage in any cash transaction with a customer at or above a designated threshold; — lawyers, notaries and independent legal professionals and accountants when they prepare or carry out transactions for clients concerning buying and selling real estate; …….; and — trust and company service providers when they prepare or carry out transactions for a client concerning certain activities ….

A bank employee who willfully violates anti-money laundering laws faces the risk of criminal investigation and imprisonment, as these are serious offenses that could result in felony charges and penalties. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, individuals who knowingly violate the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) or other anti-money laundering laws could face up to 10 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $500,0001. Similarly, in other jurisdictions, such as the UK, Canada, and Australia, individuals who commit money laundering offenses could face imprisonment and/or fines234.

References:

1: U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Resource Manual, Title 18 U.S.C. § 1956. Laundering of Monetary Instruments, Section 2101 2: UK Government, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Part 7: Money Laundering Offences, Section 327-329 3: Government of Canada, Criminal Code, Part XII.1: Laundering of Proceeds of Crime, Section 462.31 4: Australian Government, Criminal Code Act 1995, Chapter 10: National Infrastructure, Part 10.2: Money Laundering, Section 400.3-400.9

Penalties for AML/CFT violations, including criminal and civil penalties, fines, jail terms, as well as internal sanctions, such as disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment.

According to the FATF Recommendations, the competent authority that should directly receive suspicious or unusual transaction reports is the financial intelligence unit (FIU). The FIU is a central, national agency responsible for receiving, analyzing and disseminating information related to money laundering and terrorist financing. The FIU should have operational independence and autonomy, and should be able to exchange information with other domestic and foreign authorities. The FIU should also provide feedback to the reporting entities on the use and value of their reports.

References: =

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS1

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS2

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs3

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition)4

FATF Recommendations, Recommendation 29: Financial Intelligence Units

http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/recommendations/pdfs/FATF%20Recommendations%202012.pdf

According to the Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking (2012), the bank should have a clear policy on how to deal with intermediaries, such as lawyers, accountants, trust and company service providers, or other financial institutions, that introduce or manage clients on behalf of the bank. The policy should reflect the following aspects1:

The bank should perform due diligence on the intermediary itself, including its ownership, reputation, regulatory status, and AML policies and procedures.

The bank should obtain the identity and beneficial ownership information of the clients introduced or managed by the intermediary, and verify them using reliable and independent sources, unless there are legal or regulatory impediments to do so.

The bank should assess the level of due diligence performed by the intermediary on its clients, and determine whether it is equivalent or comparable to the bank’s own standards. If not, the bank should perform additional due diligence on the intermediary’s clients, or decline to accept them.

The bank should monitor the transactions and activities of the clients introduced or managed by the intermediary, and report any suspicious or unusual activity to the relevant authorities.

Option B is consistent with these aspects, as it states that the bank must obtain the same type of information with respect to an introduced client that would otherwise be obtained by the bank, absent the involvement of the intermediary. This ensures that the bank has a sufficient understanding of the client’s identity, source of wealth, and risk profile, and can apply appropriate AML measures.

Option C is also consistent with these aspects, as it states that where an intermediary manages assets on behalf of a number of clients and is the account holder with the bank, but that intermediary does not conduct the same level of due diligence as the bank, it is necessary for the bank to undertake due diligence on the intermediary’s clients. This ensures that the bank does not rely solely on the intermediary’s due diligence, and can identify and mitigate any potential money laundering risks associated with the clients.

Option A is not consistent with these aspects, as it states that when an intermediary introduces clients to the bank, it is not necessary for the bank to perform due diligence on the intermediary’s clients. This contradicts the principle that the bank should obtain and verify the identity and beneficial ownership information of the clients introduced by the intermediary, unless there are legal or regulatory impediments to do so.

Option D is also not consistent with these aspects, as it states that where an intermediary manages assets on behalf of a number of clients and arranges for the opening of accounts for its clients with the bank, and that intermediary is a financial institution subject to similar regulations, it is necessary for the bank to perform due diligence on the intermediary’s clients. This contradicts the principle that the bank may rely on the due diligence performed by the intermediary on its clients, if the intermediary is a regulated financial institution that applies equivalent or comparable AML standards to the bank, and if the bank has access to the relevant information and documentation.

References:

1: Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking (2012), Section 3: Intermediaries

According to the ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 37, one of the red flags of money laundering or terrorist financing is the use of nominees, trusts, or third parties to hide the identity, ownership, or control of the funds or assets involved in the transaction. Nominees are individuals or entities that act on behalf of the actual or beneficial owners of a company, trust, or account, and may be used to conceal the source, destination, or purpose of the funds or assets. Nominees may also be used to evade taxes, sanctions, or regulatory requirements.

In this case, the compliance officer is unable to verify the identity of the beneficial owners of the company, and only information on the nominee owners was provided. This raises the suspicion that the company may be involved in money laundering or terrorist financing activities, and that the nominee owners may be acting as fronts or intermediaries for the actual or beneficial owners. The compliance officer should conduct further due diligence on the company, the nominee owners, and the beneficial owners, and report any suspicious or unusual activity to the relevant authorities.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 37

Beneficial Ownership Meaning and Regulation - Investopedia

What is a nominee shareholder? | LawBite

Customer due diligence should be implemented as an ongoing activity that may vary commensurate with the risk profile of the customer. This is because the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing may change over time, depending on the customer’s behavior, transactions, products, services, and geographic locations. The institution should monitor the customer’s activity and update the customer’s information and risk assessment periodically, or when there are red flags or significant changes in the customer’s circumstances. The institution should also apply enhanced due diligence measures for customers that pose higher risks, and simplified due diligence measures for customers that pose lower risks12.

References:

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, p. 18-19 2: FATF Guidance: Customer Due Diligence and Financial Inclusion, February 2018, p. 10-11, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/Guidance-CDD-and-Financial-Inclusion-2018.pdf

The most important consideration when deciding whether to recommend closing the account is the requests from the competent authority, such as the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), the regulator, or the law enforcement. According to the FAQs related to Suspicious Transaction Reporting issued by the Financial Monitoring Unit of Pakistan1, reporting entities should not terminate the relationship with the customer after filing a STR, unless instructed by the competent authority. This is because closing the account may alert the customer of the STR, compromise the investigation, or hinder the collection of further evidence. Therefore, the reporting entity should consult with the competent authority before taking any action to close the account.

The other options are less important or irrelevant considerations. The institution’s anti-money laundering policy may provide some guidance on how to handle high-risk customers or accounts, but it should not override the requests from the competent authority. Customer relations and the Chief Executive’s reputational risk are not valid reasons to keep the account open if there is evidence of money laundering or terrorist financing. The reporting entity should act in accordance with the law and the best interests of the public, not the personal or business interests of the customer or the bank’s management.

References:

1: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to Suspicious Transaction Reporting, 5

An institution should focus on the appropriateness of having a centralized review of suspicious transactions and recommendations to file an STR to ensure consistency. This is because a centralized review process can help to avoid duplication, inconsistency, or omission of STRs, as well as to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and internal policies. A centralized review process can also facilitate the analysis of trends, patterns, and typologies of suspicious transactions across the institution, and enable the communication and coordination with relevant stakeholders, such as law enforcement, regulators, or other financial institutions.

References: =

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 1911

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 5, Lesson 5.3, video time 2:30-4:002

ACAMS CAMS Certification Practice Exam, Question 124, page 2843

According to the Wolfsberg Principles on Correspondent Banking1, an institution should consider the following three elements in its enhanced due diligence process for higher risk respondent bank customers:

The quality of the respondent’s AML and client identification controls: The correspondent should assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the respondent’s AML policies, procedures, and systems, as well as its compliance with applicable AML laws and regulations. The correspondent should also verify that the respondent has implemented appropriate customer identification and verification measures, and that it maintains sufficient records of its customers and transactions.

A risk-based determination as to whether or not the respondent is a shell bank: The correspondent should ensure that the respondent is not a shell bank, which is defined as a bank that has no physical presence in any country and is not affiliated with a regulated financial group. The correspondent should also avoid establishing or maintaining relationships with banks that are known to allow their accounts to be used by shell banks.

Whether a Politically Exposed Person (PEP) has an interest or management role in the respondent: The correspondent should identify and assess the potential risks associated with any PEPs who have an ownership or management interest in the respondent, or who are customers of the respondent. The correspondent should apply enhanced scrutiny and monitoring to such relationships, and obtain senior management approval before establishing or continuing them.

References:

Wolfsberg Correspondent Banking Principles 2022 by the Wolfsberg Group, October 2022.

According to the ACAMS study guide1, some of the common red flags for money laundering or financing terrorism are:

Customers who provide insufficient or suspicious information, such as unusual or unverifiable identification documents, different taxpayer identification numbers, or vague or inconsistent information about their business or source of funds.

Transactions that have unusual features, such as large cash payments, unexplained payments from a third party, use of multiple or foreign accounts, complex or illogical transactions, or transactions that are inconsistent with the customer’s profile or expected behavior.

Geographic concerns, such as transactions involving high-risk jurisdictions, offshore financial centers, secrecy havens, or countries subject to sanctions or embargoes.

Ultimate beneficial ownership that is unclear, such as customers who use shell companies, trusts, or other legal entities to obscure their identity or the identity of the true owners or controllers of the funds or assets.

In this scenario, two red flags that could indicate money laundering or financing terrorism are:

B. The guarantor company’s ownership structure is overly complex. This could be an attempt to hide the true source or destination of the funds, or to evade regulatory or law enforcement scrutiny. The use of a trust formed in a Caribbean island and a holding company based in a European secrecy haven could also indicate geographic concerns, as these jurisdictions are known for their low transparency and high confidentiality.

D. The ultimate beneficial owner is a young lady who has gained her wealth through a small business. This could be a case of false or misleading information, as the source of funds is not commensurate with the size or nature of the transaction. The fitness studio business could be a front or a cover for illicit activities, or the young lady could be a nominee or a straw man for the real owner or beneficiary.

References: = 1 ACAMS. (2020). Study Guide for the Certification Examination: Sixth Edition. Miami, FL: ACAMS.

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), the bank’s anti-money laundering officer is responsible for overseeing the implementation and maintenance of the bank’s anti-money laundering program, which includes reporting and escalating suspicious activities involving PEPs. The anti-money laundering officer should be informed of any unusual or potentially illicit transactions involving PEPs, and decide on the appropriate course of action, such as filing additional reports, conducting enhanced due diligence, or terminating the relationship with the PEP. The other options are not correct because they are either not directly involved in the anti-money laundering program, or not the appropriate authority to contact in this situation.

References: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 77-78. 123456789

 This involves breaking down large amounts of cash into smaller transactions that are below the reporting threshold of $10,000 in the United States, in order to avoid detection and reporting by the financial institution. Structuring is a red flag for money laundering and should be reported to the authorities as a suspicious activity. The other options are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, as they could have legitimate explanations. For example, the customers may have a family or business connection to the same recipient in Country B, or they may have a regular need to send money three times a week.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.2: Common Money Laundering Techniques

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 91

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Study Guide, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Page 38

"The decision of whether or not to file a suspicious transaction report (also known as a suspicious activity report or SAR in the United States) often involves weighing the aggravating and mitigating factors arising from the research conducted during the investigative process. Financial institutions should draft procedures that document the factors to consider when determining whether a suspicious transaction report (STR) is appropriate."

Evaluating the risk scoring model and conducting the risk assessment itself may need to be performed annually, every eighteen to twenty-four months, before the launch of a new product, or when an acquisition of another financial institution occurs.

This method is indicative of potential money laundering and terrorist financing activity because it involves several red flags, such as:

The use of cash, which is anonymous and difficult to trace

The urgency of the transfer, which may suggest a need to move funds quickly before they are detected

The destination of the transfer, which may be a high risk country with weak anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) controls or sanctions

The lack of information about the client and the beneficiary, which may indicate a lack of due diligence or customer identification

These factors may indicate that the client is trying to conceal the source, ownership, or purpose of the funds, or that the funds are related to illicit activities such as money laundering or terrorist financing.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course1, Module 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Lesson 2.2: Money Laundering Methods

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition2, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.2: Money Laundering Methods, pp. 35-36

ACAMS CAMS Examination Preparation Seminar, 6th Edition3, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.2: Money Laundering Methods, Slide 14

The board of directors has the ultimate responsibility within a bank for ensuring that the bank has a comprehensive and effective BSA/AML program and oversight framework that is reasonably designed to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. According to the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) BSA/AML Examination Manual, the board of directors must approve the BSA/AML compliance program, which includes the BSA/AML policy, internal controls, independent testing, designated BSA/AML compliance officer, and training1. The board of directors must also provide sufficient resources, ensure qualified staff, and hold senior management accountable for implementing and adhering to the BSA/AML compliance program1.

References:

1: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Board of Directors and Senior Management Oversight

 it describes the organization that a national Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) should consider becoming a member of, which is the Egmont Group. The Egmont Group is an international network of FIUs that was established in 1995 to facilitate the exchange of financial intelligence and information among its members, and to promote cooperation and coordination in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. The Egmont Group currently has 166 member FIUs from different jurisdictions, and provides them with various benefits, such as access to secure communication channels, best practices, training, and technical assistance. The Egmont Group also works closely with other international organizations, such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the United Nations, and the World Bank, to enhance the global anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) framework.

The other options are not necessarily organizations that a national FIU should consider becoming a member of, although they may have some relevance or influence on the AML/CTF field. Option B describes the Wolfsberg Group, which is an association of 13 global banks that was formed in 2000 to develop standards and guidance for the financial industry on AML/CTF and other financial crime issues. The Wolfsberg Group is not an organization for FIUs, but rather for financial institutions. Option C describes the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which is an inter-governmental body that was established in 1989 to set the international standards and recommendations for AML/CTF and to monitor the compliance and effectiveness of its members and other jurisdictions. The FATF is not an organization for FIUs, but rather for governments and policy-makers. Option D describes the Basel Committee, which is a forum of central bank governors and heads of banking supervision authorities from 28 jurisdictions that was established in 1974 to enhance the quality and consistency of banking supervision and regulation. The Basel Committee is not an organization for FIUs, but rather for banking regulators and supervisors.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - 6th Edition1

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition)2

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, pages 108-109

https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-5.pdf

 The compliance officer should provide regular updates of corrective action to the designated board committee, as they are ultimately responsible for the oversight of the organization’s anti-money laundering program. The board committee should be informed of the audit findings, the corrective action plan, the progress and challenges, and the completion of the remediation. This will help ensure that the board committee is aware of the risks and issues, and can provide guidance and support to the compliance officer and the management.

References: =

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 671

ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 2, Task 2.52

ACAMS CAMS Certification Flashcards, Question 893

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) issued a paper in October 2001 titled Customer due diligence for banks, which outlined four essential elements of a sound Know Your Customer (KYC) programme. These elements are: customer acceptance policy, customer identification, on-going monitoring of higher risk accounts, and risk management. The paper also recommended that these standards should be applicable to all banks in all countries, regardless of their size, nature, or location. The paper stated that "KYC safeguards go beyond simple account opening and record-keeping and require banks to formulate a customer acceptance policy and a tiered customer identification programme that involves more extensive due diligence for higher risk accounts, and includes proactive account monitoring for suspicious activities."1

References:

Customer due diligence for banks by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, October 2001.

Consolidated KYC Risk Management by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, October 2004.

Editorial The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision report on customer … by Journal of Banking Regulation, 2002.

The bank should request a formal letter be submitted to verify the validity of the request, as this is the best practice to ensure compliance with the law and protect customer privacy. The bank should not confirm or deny the existence of a customer relationship, nor provide any information without proper authorization. The bank should also not inform the board of directors before responding to the request, as this could compromise the confidentiality of the investigation or alert the customer.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Section 2.3: Data Protection and Privacy, Slide 10

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Page 51

An institution should incorporate on-going training, periodic audits, and ability to incorporate relevant legislative and regulatory AML changes in its AML policies and procedures. These are essential elements of an effective AML program, as they ensure that the staff are aware of their roles and responsibilities, the institution is compliant with the applicable laws and regulations, and the AML program is updated and adapted to the changing risks and environment.

References: =

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS1

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS2

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs3

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition)4

Dealers in antiques, precious metals, precious stones, jewelry, and art are advised to follow these practices to reduce the element of money laundering risk:

Verify the identities of all new vendors and customers and conduct due diligence on them. This is to ensure that the dealers know who they are dealing with and can assess the risk level of each customer or vendor. Due diligence may include obtaining and verifying identification documents, checking against sanctions lists or watchlists, obtaining information on the source and purpose of funds, and applying a risk-based approach to the level and frequency of due diligence.

Avoid accepting cash payment from the buyers. This is to prevent the dealers from being used as a conduit for laundering illicit cash or facilitating cash smuggling. Cash transactions are more difficult to trace and may indicate attempts to evade reporting or record-keeping requirements. Dealers should encourage the use of non-cash payment methods, such as bank transfers, cheques, or credit cards, and keep records of all payment transactions.

Insist all vendors submit an appropriate license issued by enforcement agencies authorizing the sale. This is to ensure that the dealers are not involved in the trade of stolen, smuggled, or counterfeit goods, which may be linked to money laundering or other criminal activities. Dealers should verify the authenticity and validity of the licenses and keep copies of them for record-keeping purposes.

References:

FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones, pages 9-10, 13-14, 17-18, 21-22

AML-CFT Handbook for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones, pages 25-26, 37-38, 52-53

The anti-money laundering framework for precious stones and metals dealers in Singapore, pages 7-8, 11-12, 15-16

Dealers in Precious Metals, Stones or Jewels Required to Establish Anti-Money Laundering Programs, pages 2-3, 6-7, 10-11

QUE According to the ACAMS Study Guide, one of the skills of an effective AML investigator is to conduct investigative interviews using appropriate techniques and methods1. One of the techniques is to use open-ended questions that elicit detailed responses from the interviewee, and to avoid leading or suggestive questions that may reveal the investigator’s assumptions or suspicions1. Therefore, the best option is to ask question of a material nature about the suspected false statements without revealing the suspected deception, as this would allow the investigator to gather more information and evidence, and to test the consistency and credibility of the interviewee’s answers.

The other options are not advisable or effective, because:

A. Informing the suspect that deception is obvious and continuing the interview is not a good strategy, because it may antagonize the suspect and make them less cooperative or more defensive. It may also alert the suspect to the investigator’s knowledge and sources, and give them an opportunity to change or modify their story2.

B. Advising the suspect that the interview will be terminated if there is suspicion of deception is not a good strategy, because it may create a negative impression of the investigator and the investigation, and it may discourage the suspect from providing any useful information. It may also imply that the investigator has insufficient evidence or authority to pursue the case2.

C. Directing the interview in another direction until there is better rapport before returning back to the troubling question is not a good strategy, because it may waste time and resources, and it may lose the focus and momentum of the investigation. It may also signal to the suspect that the investigator is not confident or competent, and it may give the suspect a chance to prepare or rehearse their answers2.

References:

1: ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4: Conducting and Supporting the Investigation, page 105. 2: 46 AML Investigator Interview Questions (And Sample Answers)

STION NO: 96

A bank employee recently opened an account for a new restaurant. Daily cash deposits over a three-month

period are close to $9,500.

What are two red flags that indicate possible money laundering or terrorist financing? (Choose two.)

A. The restaurant is located in a different city

B. The daily cash deposits are so close in amount

C. It is a new account that has daily cash deposits

D. The new account demonstrates a steady flow of income

Answer: BD

These two options are potential red flags for money laundering or terrorist financing because they could indicate an attempt to avoid the reporting threshold of $10,000 for cash transactions, or to conceal the source or origin of the funds. According to the ACAMS Study Guide, some common indicators of money laundering are:

Transactions structured to avoid recordkeeping or reporting requirements

Transactions inconsistent with the customer’s profile or business activity

Transactions involving the use of multiple accounts or locations

Transactions involving high-risk jurisdictions or entities

Transactions involving cash or complex crypto assets

The other two options are not necessarily red flags by themselves, as they could have legitimate explanations. For example, the restaurant could be located in a different city because of market demand, or the new account could demonstrate a steady flow of income because of the success of the business.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 41-42

FFIEC BSA/AML Appendices - Appendix F – Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, page 1-2

4 Red Flags of Money Laundering or Terrorist Financing, page 1

Money Laundering Red Flags | Key Behaviours and Indicators, page 1

This is the correct answer because the institution must ensure that the beneficiaries of the transfers are not on a terrorist watch list, such as the United Nations Security Council Consolidated List, the U.S. Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List, or the European Union Terrorism List. These lists contain the names of individuals, entities, and groups that are subject to sanctions or other measures due to their involvement or association with terrorism or terrorist financing. The institution must screen the beneficiaries of the transfers against these lists and report any matches or hits to the relevant authorities. Failing to do so may expose the institution to legal, regulatory, or reputational risks, as well as facilitate the financing of terrorism.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course1, Module 3: International AML/CTF Standards, Lesson 3.2: International AML/CTF Standards

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition2, Chapter 3: International AML/CTF Standards, Section 3.2: International AML/CTF Standards, pp. 57-58

ACAMS CAMS Examination Preparation Seminar, 6th Edition3, Chapter 3: International AML/CTF Standards, Section 3.2: International AML/CTF Standards, Slide 12

 According to the BSA/AML Manual1, once a financial institution files a SAR, it should maintain a copy of the SAR and the original or business record equivalent of any supporting documentation for a period of five years from the date of filing the SAR. The supporting documentation should be identified and maintained by the financial institution as such, and be deemed to have been filed with the SAR. The financial institution should make all supporting documentation available to FinCEN or any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, or any federal regulatory authority that examines the financial institution for compliance with the BSA, upon request. Therefore, the best action to take regarding a particular account once suspicious activity is reported by the institution is to secure all supporting documentation, as it may be needed for further investigation or examination.

References:

BSA/AML Manual1

Suspicious Activity Reporting - Overview2

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) Basics3

 The important fact to include in the STR is the recent change in the timing of deposits and withdrawals in the account, as this indicates a possible change in the customer’s source and use of funds, and may suggest money laundering or other illicit activity. The customer’s work history, the amount of his monthly retirement check, the fact that he is well known to the bank staff, and the fact that he has lived in the area and banked at this bank for 25 years are not relevant for the STR, as they do not explain the unusual pattern of transactions in his account.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 4: Conducting and Supporting the Investigation Process, page 131

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, CAMS Examination Preparation, page 8

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Video 4.2: Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 97

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision principles, the most important question the banker should ask when opening a numbered or alternate name account is who will control the account. This is because such accounts pose a higher risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, as they can be used to conceal the identity and beneficial ownership of the funds. Therefore, the banker should perform enhanced due diligence and verify the identity and source of funds of the person who has the authority to operate the account, as well as the purpose and nature of the business relationship12

The other questions are less relevant or secondary to the issue of control. The inheritance of the proceeds in the event of the businessman’s death is a matter of succession law and does not affect the identification of the beneficial owner. The amount of money deposited into the account may indicate the level of risk, but does not reveal the origin or destination of the funds. The account-opening date is a procedural detail that does not affect the compliance with the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing standards12

References:

1: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision - Core principles for effective banking supervision, 2012, Principle 14 and Essential Criterion 14.1

2: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision - Sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism, 2014, Paragraphs 30 and 31

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s Customer Due Diligence for Banks, the compliance function should provide an evaluation of a bank’s policies and procedures independent from its management. The compliance function is responsible for ensuring that the bank adheres to the relevant laws, regulations, and standards on customer due diligence, anti-money laundering, and combating the financing of terrorism. The compliance function should also monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the bank’s customer due diligence policies and procedures, identify and report any breaches or deficiencies, and recommend corrective actions or improvements. The compliance function should have sufficient authority, independence, resources, and access to information to perform its duties effectively.

References:

Customer due diligence for banks, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, October 2001, paragraphs 55-56

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 6, page 172

CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 3, Task 3.1, Skill 3.1.2

Anti-Money-Laundering Guidance: Basel Committee Consultative Paper …, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, February 2001, page 2

A corporate account opened on behalf of several beneficial owners is a red flag because it may indicate an attempt to conceal the identity or source of funds of the ultimate beneficiaries1. The customer’s stated investment goal of long-term investment is not reflective of the account activity, which involves frequent and large transfers, currency exchanges, and account depletion within a short period of time. This discrepancy may suggest that the customer is using the account for money laundering or other illicit purposes2.

References: = 1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Module 3, Lesson 4, Topic: Corporate Accounts 2: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Module 3, Lesson 4, Topic: Customer Profile and Account Activity

According to the ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 36, one of the methods that financial institutions can use to identify suspicious or unusual activity is to monitor transactions for red flags or indicators of money laundering or terrorist financing. Some of the common red flags are:

Transactions that are inconsistent with the customer’s profile, business, or source of funds

Transactions that involve high-risk countries or jurisdictions, especially those with weak or inadequate anti-money laundering regulations, or those known to be sources or destinations of illicit funds

Transactions that involve the use of complex or unusual financial instruments or structures, such as multiple accounts, intermediaries, or offshore entities, that have no apparent economic or lawful purpose

Transactions that involve the use of large amounts of cash, checks, or monetary instruments, especially if they are structured or aggregated to avoid reporting or recordkeeping requirements

Transactions that involve the use of third parties or nominees, such as relatives, associates, or shell companies, to conceal the identity, ownership, or control of the funds or assets

Option B is a transaction type that warrants investigation, as it involves sending large number of high dollar international wires to different countries, which could indicate that the customer is involved in layering or integration stages of money laundering, where the illicit funds are moved across borders and disguised as legitimate transfers. This transaction type also raises the risk of exposure to sanctions, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities, depending on the destination and purpose of the wires.

Option D is also a transaction type that warrants investigation, as it involves depositing a lot of checks drawn on banks in foreign countries, which could indicate that the customer is involved in placement or layering stages of money laundering, where the illicit funds are introduced into the financial system or converted into other forms of value. This transaction type also raises the risk of exposure to fraud, counterfeit, or forgery, depending on the origin and authenticity of the checks.

Option A is not a transaction type that warrants investigation, as it involves making regular cash deposits of a few hundred dollars every few days, which could be consistent with the customer’s profile, business, or source of funds, especially if the customer is an ice cream vendor who operates in cash. This transaction type does not raise any red flags of money laundering or terrorist financing, unless there is evidence that the cash deposits are structured or aggregated to avoid reporting or recordkeeping requirements.

Option C is also not a transaction type that warrants investigation, as it involves writing multiple checks for a few hundred dollars to the same dozen payees every two weeks, which could be consistent with the customer’s profile, business, or source of funds, especially if the payees are suppliers, employees, or contractors of the customer. This transaction type does not raise any red flags of money laundering or terrorist financing, unless there is evidence that the checks are used to facilitate illicit activities, such as bribery, kickbacks, or tax evasion.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 36

Red Flags And Atypical Customer Behavior: Anti-Money Laundering Awareness

4 Red Flags of Money Laundering or Terrorist Financing

Financial institutions are required by law to maintain records and documentation of customer transactions and to provide this information to law enforcement agencies upon request. However, financial institutions should also have policies and procedures in place to ensure that they comply with legal and regulatory requirements and protect customer privacy. Providing protected documents that are privileged under attorney-client privilege or freezing an account immediately may not be the appropriate response and may expose the financial institution to legal or reputational risks.

 The bank’s reputation is not a valid criterion for filing a SAR/STR, as it is not related to the objective assessment of the suspiciousness of the transaction or the activity. The bank should file a SAR/STR based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and not on the potential impact on its image or reputation. The other options are possible indicators of money laundering or terrorist financing, and could warrant a SAR/STR filing, depending on the context and the risk profile of the customer and the transaction. For example, a large, round number wire to an obscure organization could suggest an attempt to conceal the source or destination of the funds, or to support a criminal or terrorist entity. A beneficiary that is largely unknown or has no apparent connection to the customer could indicate a lack of transparency or a false identity. A customer activity that is unreasonable or inconsistent with the customer’s profile, business, or expected behavior could indicate a deviation from the normal or legitimate purpose of the account or the transaction.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, ACAMS, Chapter 5, page 123

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified, ACAMS

Suspicious Activity Reporting — Overview, FFIEC, page 2

3.2. Basic Structure of an STR or SAR, CBUAE Rulebook, page 1

What is a suspicious activity report?, Thomson Reuters

How to decide if SAR filing is needed, Wipfli

STR (Suspicious Transaction Reports), Ministry of Finance, India

 A financial institution should consult with its legal counsel before responding to a grand jury subpoena regarding a customer, as such subpoenas may involve complex legal issues and potential conflicts of interest. A grand jury subpoena is a legal order issued by a federal or state grand jury that compels a person or entity to produce documents, testify, or both, in connection with a criminal investigation. A financial institution that receives a grand jury subpoena should not disclose its existence or contents to the customer or any third party, unless authorized by law or the court, as doing so may constitute obstruction of justice or violate the secrecy rules of the grand jury. A financial institution should also assess and review all relevant information it has about the customer that is the subject of the subpoena, in accordance with its risk-based AML program, and consider filing a SAR if it identifies any suspicious activity.

References:

1: This article provides an overview of the legal and practical considerations for financial institutions when responding to subpoenas, including the types of subpoenas, the rules that apply, the confidentiality and privilege issues, and the procedural steps to follow.

2: This document provides answers to frequently asked questions regarding SARs and other AML considerations, including the question of how to handle grand jury subpoenas and other law enforcement inquiries.

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, one of the main challenges of providing on-line services to customers is the verification of their identity and the authentication of their transactions1. The lack of face-to-face contact and the use of electronic documents increase the risk of identity fraud, impersonation, and account takeover2. Therefore, financial institutions offering on-line services need to implement robust customer due diligence (CDD) measures, such as using multiple sources of information, verifying biometric data, and applying risk-based monitoring3.

References:

1: CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1, page 103

2: CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2, page 104

3: CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3, page 105

According to the FATF Recommendation 40, which sets the standards for international cooperation in relation to money laundering, associated predicate offences and terrorist financing, countries should ensure that exchanged information is used only for the purpose for which it was sought or provided, and that any dissemination or use of the information beyond the original scope is subject to prior authorization by the requested competent authority. Moreover, countries should have safeguards in place to ensure that the information exchanged is protected in a manner that is consistent with the way they protect their own information of a similar nature. One of the possible safeguards is to require the use of non-disclosure agreements or other legal instruments to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure of the exchanged information.

References: = FATF Recommendation 40, Section A.3; Compliance Trends: AML Information Sharing, Section: Cross-border AML information sharing; Safeguarding AML Information Exchanged with Other Countries, Section: Answers.

 According to the Basel Committee guidelines, banks should formulate a customer acceptance policy and a tiered customer identification programme that involves more extensive due diligence for higher risk customers12. The customer acceptance policy should be approved by senior management and include clear guidelines on the types of customers that are likely to pose a higher than average risk to the bank1. Senior management should also ensure that the bank has adequate resources and systems to effectively manage the risks associated with higher risk customers1. Therefore, senior management should determine whether or not to enter business relationships with higher risk customers, based on the bank’s risk appetite, policies, and procedures.

References:

CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), page 1843

Customer due diligence for banks - Bank for International Settlements1

The Basel Committee: The Important Set Of International Banking Regulations2

While this behavior may warrant scrutiny in certain circumstances, it is not inherently suspicious or indicative of money laundering. In contrast, the other behaviors listed (living beyond one's means, excessive unresolved exceptions, and using company resources for personal gain) may suggest that an employee is engaging in or facilitating money laundering activity.

According to the CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition1, one of the essential components of customer due diligence is verifying the identity of the customer using reliable and independent sources. This verification process should be done before or during the establishment of the business relationship, and should not be delayed unless there is a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, and the delay is necessary to avoid interrupting the normal course of business. Therefore, after customers have provided acceptable identification, the financial institution should next confirm the validity of the customer information, as option A suggests. Option B is not necessary, as an electronic picture of each customer is not a mandatory requirement for customer verification, and may not be feasible or effective in some cases. Option C is not the next step, as closely monitoring the account for 30 days is part of the ongoing due diligence process, which should be performed after the customer verification is completed and the account is established. Option D is not advisable, as establishing the account based on the information provided without verifying its validity may expose the financial institution to money laundering and terrorist financing risks, and may violate the KYC and AML regulations.

References:

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), pages 69-70.

According to a report by the OECD, government officers are among the occupations that are particularly vulnerable to the use of false identities and identity theft. This is because government officers have access to sensitive and confidential information, such as personal data, tax records, social security benefits, passports, visas, and licenses. Identity fraudsters may target government officers to obtain or alter such information, or to impersonate them to access restricted areas or systems. Identity fraud involving government officers may facilitate tax evasion, money laundering, corruption, terrorism, and other crimes1.

Some examples of identity fraud schemes involving government officers are:

Rogue agents in the immigration services sector who issue fake or fraudulent documents, such as passports, visas, or residence permits, to facilitate the entry or stay of illegal immigrants, criminals, or terrorists12.

Corrupt tax officials who use false identities to create fictitious taxpayers or employers, or to modify tax records, to evade taxes or to claim fraudulent refunds or credits13.

Impostors who pose as government officers, such as police, customs, or revenue agents, to extort money or information from unsuspecting victims, or to access secure facilities or databases1 .

References:

REPORT ON IDENTITY FRAUD: TAX EVASION AND MONEY LAUNDERING VULNERABILITIES

Identity Fraud and Immigration Services

Identity Theft and Tax Fraud

[Identity Theft and Government Impersonation Scams]

A. Geographic risks should be used to identify the priority of the Fl in this scenario. According to the CAMS Manual (6th Edition), "Geographic risk refers to the possibility that the location of a customer, transaction, or product may increase the likelihood of money laundering or terrorist financing because of weak or nonexistent AML/CFT controls" (p. 59). In this scenario, the expansion to an area of the world with weak AML laws would increase the Fl's geographic risk.

The Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) is a global network of FIUs that facilitates and promotes the exchange of information, knowledge, and cooperation among its members to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes1. The Egmont Group has developed operational guidance for international cooperation and information exchange among FIUs, which includes channels, procedures, and forms for making and receiving requests2. Filing a request under Egmont guidelines is therefore a common and effective way for a regulatory body to obtain international assistance in a money laundering inquiry, as it ensures that the request is made through the appropriate and secure channel, and that it meets the standards and expectations of the requested FIU.

References:

1: Home - Egmont Group

2: EGMONT GROUP OF FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE UNITS OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR …

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is an international body that sets standards and guidelines for the prudential regulation of banks. One of its key publications is the Customer Due Diligence for Banks, which outlines the essential elements of Know Your Customer (KYC) standards for banks. According to this document, customer acceptance, customer due diligence, and record-keeping policies and procedures should be changed as necessary to address variations in risk among each line of business within the organization. This means that banks should adopt a risk-based approach to KYC, taking into account the different types, levels, and sources of risk associated with different customers, products, services, transactions, and delivery channels. By doing so, banks can allocate their resources more efficiently and effectively, and mitigate the potential for money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes.

References:

Customer Due Diligence for Banks, BCBS, October 2001, p. 5, 14-15.

The Basel Committee: The Important Set Of International Banking Regulations, Financial Crime Academy, November 2023.

According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the use of large amounts of cash is a common method for money launderers to move illicit funds [1]. Purchasing luxury items with cash can indicate an attempt to convert illegal funds into tangible assets that can be easily resold or moved across borders. As a result, businesses that deal with luxury items are required to implement enhanced due diligence measures, including monitoring transactions involving large amounts of cash [1].

An employee who witnesses suspicious activity from a coworker should not confront the coworker or discuss the activity with their supervisor. Instead, they should report the activity to their employer's conflict line or compliance department, who can investigate the matter and take the appropriate action. It is important to remember that employees are legally obligated to report any suspicious activity they witness.

The scenario described in the question presents several indicators of potential money laundering through real estate, which the broker should be aware of and report accordingly. The most relevant red flags are:

Value: The student wants to buy a home that is overvalued, meaning that the asking price is higher than the market value or the appraisal value of the property. This could indicate that the student is trying to launder a large amount of illicit funds in one transaction, or that the seller is colluding with the student to inflate the price and receive a kickback. Overvaluing or undervaluing properties is a common technique used by money launderers to manipulate the price of real estate and conceal the source or destination of their funds12.

Inconsistency: The student’s behavior and profile are inconsistent with the typical characteristics of a legitimate home buyer. The student cancels the viewing of the home at the last minute due to illness, which could suggest a lack of interest or a pretext to avoid scrutiny. The student also wants to buy an expensive home despite being a student, which could indicate a discrepancy between the student’s income and the source of funds. Moreover, the student disregards the broker’s objections to the asking price, which could imply that the student is not concerned about the value or quality of the property, but rather the amount of money that can be laundered through it34.

Transaction speed: The student wants to quickly buy the home, which could indicate a sense of urgency or pressure to move the illicit funds before they are detected or seized by the authorities. Money launderers often use fast transactions to avoid raising suspicion or leaving a paper trail. Transaction speed is especially relevant when combined with other red flags, such as cash payments, anonymous buyers, or overvalued properties5 .

References:

Understanding Money Laundering in Real Estate

RED FLAG INDICATORS FOR REAL ESTATE SECTOR

Investigating Money Laundering through Real Estate

AML Red Flags Associated with Real Estate Sector Businesses

FinCEN Proposes Rule to Combat Money Laundering and Promote Transparency in Residential Real Estate

[ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 7, pp. 200-201]

This is stated in the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) manual on page 595, which states: “Potential indicators of money laundering associated with Trust and Company Service Providers include the use of legal persons in jurisdictions with strict secrecy laws, structuring cash deposits into third party accounts, multi-jurisdictional wire transfers with no legal purpose, and frequent deposits to or withdrawals from bank accounts.”

these are the enhanced customer due diligence measures that the 5th EU Money Laundering Directive requires for high-risk third country nationals. According to the directive, entities must obtain the approval of senior management for establishing or continuing the business relationship, obtain information on the reasons for intended or performed transactions, and obtain information on the source of funds and source of wealth of the customer and of the beneficial owner(s). These measures are intended to increase the transparency and scrutiny of the customers and their transactions, and to prevent the misuse of the financial system for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3, page 56: “The EU’s Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive”.

ExamTopics, Question 456: “According to the 5th EU Money Laundering Directive, member states require entities to apply enhanced customer due diligence measures with respect to business relationships or transactions involving high-risk third country nationals. Which are included in these requirements? (Choose three.)”

 The FATF conducts peer reviews of each member on an ongoing basis to assess levels of implementation of the FATF Recommendations, providing an in-depth description and analysis of each country’s system for preventing criminal abuse of the financial system. The FATF Methodology for assessing compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the effectiveness of AML/CFT systems sets out the evaluation process. Assessments focus on two areas, effectiveness and technical compliance. The effectiveness component will assess whether the AML/CFT systems are working, and the extent to which the country is achieving the defined set of outcomes. The technical compliance component will assess whether the necessary laws, regulations or other required measures are in force and effect, and whether the supporting AML/CFT institutional framework is in place.

References:

Mutual Evaluations - Financial Action Task Force

FATF Methodology for assessing compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the effectiveness of AML/CFT systems

Procedures for the FATF Fourth Round of AML/CFT Mutual Evaluations

One of the main challenges of online banking is verifying the identity of customers who open accounts or conduct transactions remotely, without face-to-face interaction. This poses a higher risk of money laundering, as criminals may use false or stolen identities, or hide behind shell companies or nominees, to move illicit funds through online platforms. Therefore, online banking providers must implement robust and risk-based customer due diligence (CDD) measures, such as verifying identity documents, using biometric or digital verification methods, screening customers against sanctions and watchlists, and monitoring customer behavior and transactions for any red flags or anomalies.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Section 2.2: Customer Due Diligence (CDD) and Know Your Customer (KYC), p. 32-35.

eWallets: AML Risks & How to Comply1

According to the FATF Guidance on Politically Exposed Persons1, financial institutions should assess the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with a business relationship or transaction with a PEP, their family members and close associates, on a case-by-case basis. This includes obtaining information on the source of wealth and source of funds of the customer and the beneficial owner, as well as conducting enhanced ongoing monitoring of the business relationship. Therefore, the appropriate next step for the analyst is to review the beneficial ownership of the customer to determine if the PEP or any other person poses a higher risk, and to apply additional measures accordingly. Removing the PEP as the authorized signatory, re-categorizing the customer as high-risk, or categorizing the authorized PEP signatory as high-risk are not necessarily required or sufficient steps, as they do not take into account the specific circumstances and risk factors of the customer and the PEP.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS

FATF Guidance: Politically Exposed Persons (Recommendations 12 and 22)

How Politically Exposed Persons Put Financial Institutions at Risk

A Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) is an agreement between two or more countries that allows for the exchange of information and evidence in the investigation and enforcement of criminal laws. MLATs provide a framework for countries to assist each other with investigations, prosecutions, and other legal matters, including the exchange of information, evidence, documents, and testimony. MLATs are commonly used in investigations related to money laundering, terrorism, and other transnational crimes.

According to the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Section 2.2.2 The EU Fourth AML Directive, the release of the EU’s Fourth AML Directive resulted in the threshold for reporting suspicious transactions decreasing from 15,000 EUR to 10,000 EUR (Answer A) and all financial institutions were required to identify and verify the beneficial owner of legal entities (Answer B). The directive also defined money laundering and terrorist financing as separate crimes, which expanded the directive's measures (Answer C). Answer D is incorrect as the scope of obliged entities was not enlarged from casinos to all providers of gambling services, but rather to all providers of payment services. Answer E is also incorrect as the directive does not provide that knowledge of criminal conduct can be inferred from objective factual circumstances. Reference: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Section 2.2.2 The EU Fourth AML Directive, p. 12.

 A financial institution located in a Financial Action Task Force (FATF) member country should address the following issues in its anti-money laundering program when dealing with customers located in countries/jurisdictions that are not members of FATF:

The requirement to identify the beneficial owners of accounts: Beneficial owners are the natural persons who ultimately own or control a customer or a legal entity. Identifying the beneficial owners of accounts is a key component of customer due diligence (CDD) and helps the financial institution to assess the risk profile of the customer, prevent the misuse of legal entities for money laundering or terrorist financing, and comply with the FATF Recommendations12.

The requirement for customer identification for the opening of new accounts: Customer identification is the process of verifying the identity of a customer using reliable and independent sources of information or documents. Customer identification is another essential element of CDD and helps the financial institution to establish a business relationship with the customer, prevent identity fraud, and comply with the FATF Recommendations13.

The financial institution’s obligation to report suspicious transactions: Suspicious transactions are transactions that have no apparent economic or lawful purpose, or are inconsistent with the customer’s known profile or business activities, or indicate involvement in money laundering or terrorist financing. Reporting suspicious transactions to the competent authorities is a core obligation of the financial institution under the FATF Recommendations14 and helps to detect and deter illicit activities and support law enforcement investigations.

The obligation to freeze funds involved in suspicious transactions is not an issue that should be addressed in the anti-money laundering program, as it is not a requirement under the FATF Recommendations. The FATF Recommendations require the financial institution to freeze funds or other assets of designated persons and entities that are subject to targeted financial sanctions related to terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, or other threats to the international financial system1 . However, the financial institution is not obliged to freeze funds involved in suspicious transactions, unless it receives a specific order from the competent authorities or the courts.

References:

The FATF Recommendations, as amended November 2023

Interpretive Note to Recommendation 10 (Customer Due Diligence), paragraphs 5(b) and 6

Recommendation 10 (Customer Due Diligence), paragraph 1

Recommendation 20 (Reporting of Suspicious Transactions)

Recommendation 6 (Targeted Financial Sanctions Related to Terrorism and Terrorist Financing), Recommendation 7 (Targeted Financial Sanctions Related to Proliferation), and Recommendation 8 (Non-Profit Organisations)

The correct answer is B. Questioning reporting requirements. When a prospective customer questions reporting requirements during the account opening process, it may raise concerns about their intentions or understanding of anti-money laundering (AML) regulations. Financial institutions should investigate further to ensure compliance and assess any potential risks associated with the customer’s behavior1.

References:

1. FDIC: Customer Identification Program

2. Financial Crime Academy: USA PATRIOT Act Customer Identification Program

3. BankersOnline: Lending and Customer Identification Programs

 According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a financial institution must take certain steps to fulfill its customer due diligence (CDD) obligations [1][2]. These steps include verifying the customer's identity, understanding the customer's business, and assessing the customer's risk profile. Additionally, the financial institution must verify that the customer is not on any sanction lists, such as the OFAC Specially Designated Nationals list. This step is important to ensure that the financial institution is not doing business with any individuals or entities that are subject to economic sanctions. Other steps include obtaining information on the intended nature of the banking relationship, securing a written declaration from the customer confirming the source of the funds, and identifying shareholders listed on the stock exchange of corporate entities holding fifty percent of the shares.

this situation requires enhanced due diligence actions according to the AML principles of the Wolfsberg group. The Wolfsberg group is an association of 13 global banks that aims to develop standards and best practices for AML and CFT in the private banking sector. The group has issued a set of principles and guidance on how to conduct due diligence on private banking customers, especially those who pose higher risks, such as politically exposed persons (PEPs), customers from high-risk countries, and customers with complex or opaque structures. According to the Wolfsberg group, private banks should apply a risk-based approach to customer due diligence and perform enhanced measures for high-risk customers, such as obtaining senior management approval, verifying the identity and source of wealth of the customer and the beneficial owner, understanding the purpose and nature of the relationship, and conducting ongoing monitoring and review.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.5, page 118: “The Wolfsberg Group”.

ExamTopics, Question 466: “Which private banking situation requires due diligence actions to be implemented according to the AML principles of the Wolfsberg group?”

 According to the USA PATRIOT Act, a shell bank is defined as “a bank that has no physical presence in any country” (Section 313(a)(1)). A physical presence means “a place of business that is maintained by a bank and is located at a fixed address, other than solely a post office box or an electronic address, in a country in which the bank is authorized to conduct banking activities, at which location the bank employs one or more individuals on a full-time basis and maintains operating records related to its banking activities” (Section 313(a)(2)). Therefore, option A is the correct answer, as it describes a bank that has no physical presence or employees in any country. Options B, C, and D are not correct, as they describe banks that have some form of physical presence or affiliation with another bank in a country.

References:

USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Section 313, Prohibition on United States Correspondent Accounts with Foreign Shell Banks, 1.

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Chapter 4: International Standards and Global Initiatives, page 103.

A subpoena is a legal order that requires a person or an entity to produce documents, information, or testimony related to a legal matter. A financial intelligence unit (FIU) is a specialized unit within a financial institution that is responsible for detecting, analyzing, and reporting suspicious activities and transactions. When a bank receives a subpoena regarding one of its clients, the FIU should review the subpoena and perform a transaction review to determine if there is any evidence of money laundering, terrorist financing, fraud, or other criminal activity involving the client. The FIU should also respond fully to the subpoena by providing the requested information and documents, unless there is a valid reason to object or seek a protective order. The FIU should not adjust the client’s risk score, file a SAR, or close the client’s account based solely on the receipt of the subpoena, as these actions may be premature, inappropriate, or illegal. Adjusting the client’s risk score may require further investigation and due diligence. Filing a SAR may be unnecessary or misleading if the subpoena does not indicate any suspicious activity. Closing the client’s account may violate the bank’s contractual obligations, customer service standards, or anti-discrimination laws. Moreover, these actions may alert the client or the subject of the investigation to the existence of the subpoena, which may interfere with the legal process or jeopardize the safety of the bank or its employees.

References:

Subpoena Responses for Financial Institutions

Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts

SUBPOENA COMPLIANCE UPDATE

[ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 140]

The most important risk factor in this scenario is the proposed offshore jurisdiction that is known for its strong privacy laws limiting access to customer information by law enforcement. This indicates that the customer may be trying to evade tax, hide the source or destination of funds, or engage in other illicit activities that could expose the bank to money laundering or terrorist financing risks. Offshore jurisdictions are often used by criminals to create complex corporate structures that obscure the beneficial ownership and control of the entities involved. The bank should conduct enhanced due diligence on the customer, the offshore company, and the nature and purpose of the transactions.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 35-36, 38-39

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 2.3, Offshore Financial Centers

1, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Offshore Financial Centers and Money Laundering

2, CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, CAMS Exam Outline, Domain 2, Task 2.3

When investigating an AML event, the following techniques would be used to investigate suspected mule accounts:

A. Determine if the suspected accounts are being accessed by a common person, telephone number, or device. This can help identify if the accounts are controlled by the same person or group, or if they are part of a larger network of mules. It can also help detect if the accounts are opened using synthetic identities or stolen credentials12.

B. Reconcile the stated purpose of the account with actual transaction history and compare with peer groups. This can help assess if the account activity is consistent with the customer profile, risk rating, and expected behavior. It can also help identify anomalies, such as sudden changes in transaction patterns, large or frequent transfers, or transactions with high-risk jurisdictions or entities12.

E. Establish the frequency with which the funds are moved in and out of the accounts. This can help measure the velocity and volume of the funds flowing through the accounts, which can indicate if the accounts are used for layering or integration of illicit funds. It can also help detect if the accounts are used for smurfing, which is a technique of breaking down large amounts of cash into smaller deposits to avoid detection or reporting thresholds13.

References:

CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), page 1841

Mule accounts: how to track them down - Linkurious2

Money Mules — FBI3

 Conducting small cash transactions at multiple locations during the same day is the strongest example of avoiding reporting thresholds. This is a common technique used by money launderers to evade the attention of financial institutions and regulators, who are required to report cash transactions above a certain amount (usually $10,000) to the authorities. By splitting the large sum of money into smaller amounts and depositing them at different branches or ATMs, the money launderer can avoid triggering the reporting requirement and conceal the source and destination of the funds. This practice is also known as smurfing or structuring12.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 36

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 2.2, Structuring and Smurfing

1, Smurfing Money Laundering: Mechanics, Detection, and Prevention

2, AML & eWallets - The Risks & How To Comply | ComplyAdvantage

The board of directors or designated specialized committee should be provided with statistical data regarding SARs/STRs filed during the reported period, such as the number, type, value, and geographic distribution of the reports, as well as any trends or patterns identified. This information helps the board or committee to oversee the effectiveness of the firm’s AML program, assess the level of compliance risk, and allocate appropriate resources and training. Providing all possible details, names of customers, or copies of SARs/STRs may compromise the confidentiality of the reports, violate data protection laws, or expose the firm to legal liability.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (6th Edition), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 223.

The Role of the Money Laundering Reporting Officer - ICAEW, page 14.

When a prosecutor instructs a bank to freeze the assets and bank accounts held by one of its clients, the bank must take the following actions:

Ensure the client and beneficiaries are unable to access any frozen assets during the freeze order. This means the bank must prevent any withdrawals, transfers, payments, or other transactions from the frozen accounts or assets. The bank must also notify the client and beneficiaries of the freeze order and the reason for it. The bank must comply with the freeze order until it is lifted by the court or the prosecutor12.

An affidavit must accompany the freeze order for the bank to comply with the request. An affidavit is a sworn statement that provides the legal basis and evidence for the freeze order. The affidavit must specify the name of the client, the amount and location of the assets to be frozen, the nature and source of the funds, the suspected criminal activity, and the legal authority for the freeze order3 .

The institution should obtain a copy of the court order to freeze the assets of the named individuals. A court order is a legal document that authorizes the bank to freeze the assets and accounts of the client. The court order must be signed by a judge or a magistrate and must include the same information as the affidavit. The bank should keep a copy of the court order for its records and to verify its validity .

References:

Frozen Bank Account: Here’s What You Need to Know

Why Is My Bank Account Frozen? - Investopedia

What Is a Frozen Account? What Causes It and How to Unfreeze It

[Freezing Orders - Practical Law]

[Freezing Orders - The Law Society]

[Freezing Orders - LexisNexis]

An auditor who performs an AML investigation should adhere to the principle that AML and Data Protection Privacy laws should not be mutually exclusive. This means that the auditor should respect and protect the personal data of the individuals involved in the investigation, while also complying with the AML obligations and requirements. The auditor should balance the legitimate interests of preventing and detecting money laundering and terrorist financing with the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects, and apply the data protection principles of lawfulness, fairness, transparency, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, storage limitation, integrity, and confidentiality.

The auditor should also take into account the relevant legal frameworks and guidance on data protection and AML, such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD), the Council of Europe Convention 108+ on data protection, and the Guidelines on data protection for the processing of personal data for AML/CFT purposes issued by the Consultative Committee of the Convention 108+. The auditor should also cooperate and consult with the data protection authorities and the AML authorities, as appropriate, to ensure compliance and consistency.

References:

Data protection and the EU’s anti-money laundering regulation

The EU’s anti-money laundering regulation and data protection: Part II

For Banks, Data Privacy and Anti-Money Laundering Don’t Have to Be Incompatible

Guidelines on data protection for the processing of personal data for AML/CFT purposes

Data Protection requirements must go hand in hand with the prevention of money laundering and terrorism financing

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide 6th Edition

The bank’s current anti-money laundering program is inadequate because it does not include a process for monitoring customer account activity, which is a key component of detecting and reporting suspicious transactions. The fact that the consultant and the bank have mutual clients does not affect the risk rating of those customers, nor does it justify a lower level of scrutiny. The bank should revise its procedures to ensure that it has a comprehensive and risk-based approach to customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and reporting.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), pp. 67-69.

FATF Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach: Legal Professionals, pp. 10-11, 19-20.

BSA/AML Internal Audit: PwC, pp. 1-2.

Reputational risk is the potential for negative publicity, public perception, or legal action to adversely affect a financial entity’s image, brand, or customer loyalty1. Violating AML laws can have significant reputational risks for financial entities, as they may be perceived as facilitating or enabling money laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities. This can result in a loss of trust, credibility, and revenue from existing and potential customers, especially those who are high-profile, sensitive, or socially responsible23. Moreover, violating AML laws can also attract negative media attention, regulatory scrutiny, and legal action, which can further damage the reputation of the financial entity and expose it to additional sanctions, fines, or penalties4.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 1, page 16

2: ComplyAdvantage, 5 AML Reputational Risk Considerations for 2023, link

3: Exam-Answer, Reputational Risk Consequences for Violating AML Laws, link

4: Unit21, 8 AML Penalties, Fines, and Sanctions + Examples You Should Avoid, link

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, one of the four pillars of an effective anti-money laundering compliance program is the training of appropriate employees on their responsibilities and the institution’s policies and procedures. Training is essential to ensure that employees are aware of the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing, the applicable laws and regulations, the red flags and indicators of suspicious activity, and the reporting and record-keeping requirements. Without proper training, employees may not be able to perform their duties effectively and efficiently, and may expose the institution to legal, regulatory, reputational, and operational risks.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, page 39.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 2.1.4.

A domestic business account receiving a wire transfer from an international business with no history of such activity or business needs should be escalated as potentially suspicious activity. This is because this scenario may indicate an attempt to launder money, evade taxes, or finance terrorism through cross-border transfers that have no apparent economic or lawful purpose. The lack of prior relationship or business justification for the wire transfer may also suggest that the transaction is not consistent with the customer’s profile or expected activity. Therefore, this scenario should be investigated further and reported if necessary.

References:

9 Financial & Bank Suspicious Activity Examples, Example 2.

CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, page 40-41.

C. FSRBs play an essential role in identifying and addressing AML technical assistance needs for their individual member countries. The FSRBs are responsible for promoting the effective implementation of the FATF Recommendations at the regional level, including by assisting member countries in identifying technical assistance needs and facilitating the provision of such assistance.

D. FATF and FSRBs are free-standing organizations that share the common goals of combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and proliferation. The FATF is an intergovernmental body that sets global standards for AML/CFT and promotes their effective implementation, while the FSRBs are regional organizations that work to promote the effective implementation of the FATF Recommendations at the regional level.

 The Head of Compliance is responsible for overseeing and managing the AML compliance program of the organization. When an external auditor identifies a finding that indicates a failure to comply with a regulatory requirement, the Head of Compliance should take prompt and appropriate action to address the issue and prevent recurrence. The best course of action is to submit a corrective action plan with a target timeline to the auditor and the relevant regulator, demonstrating the organization’s commitment to remediate the finding and improve its AML compliance program. The corrective action plan should include the root cause analysis of the finding, the specific actions to be taken, the responsible parties, the expected outcomes, and the deadlines for completion. The Head of Compliance should also monitor the progress of the corrective action plan and report any updates or challenges to the auditor and the regulator.

References: = Some of the references that support this answer are:

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Global Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program, page 2: “The Firm’s Global Head of Financial Crimes Compliance is responsible for overseeing the implementation and effectiveness of the AML Program and reports to the Firm’s Chief Compliance Officer. … The Global Head of Financial Crimes Compliance is also responsible for ensuring that the Firm responds appropriately to any regulatory inquiries, examinations, or investigations relating to AML matters, and that any identified issues or deficiencies are promptly remediated.”

The Board’s Role in AML Compliance, Section “Board Oversight of AML Compliance Program”: “The board should also ensure that the institution has a process in place to identify, report and correct any compliance deficiencies or violations in a timely manner. This includes ensuring that the institution responds to any regulatory inquiries, examinations or enforcement actions, and implements any required corrective actions.”

AML Compliance Officer: the Role, Skills, and Responsibilities, Section “AML Compliance Officer Responsibilities”: “The AML Compliance Officer is also responsible for: … Reporting to the regulators and auditors on the AML compliance program and its effectiveness; … Developing and implementing corrective action plans for resolution of problematic issues, and providing general guidance on how to avoid or deal with similar situations in the future.”

According to the CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), page 184, when an FI receives a formal law enforcement request to produce documents, such as a subpoena, a search warrant, or a court order, it should designate a person responsible for the internal investigation in preparation of documents for the request. This person should be familiar with the FI’s policies and procedures, the applicable laws and regulations, and the nature and scope of the request. The designated person should also coordinate with the FI’s legal counsel, compliance officer, and senior management, and ensure that the FI preserves the confidentiality and integrity of the documents and the investigation.

References:

CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), page 1841

CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4, Lesson 22

Ref This transaction should result in a SAR/STR filing because it indicates possible structuring, which is a form of money laundering that involves breaking down large amounts of cash into smaller deposits to avoid detection or reporting requirements. Structuring is often done to conceal the source or destination of illicit funds, or to evade taxes, regulations, or sanctions. A small business owner who deposits checks just below the $10,000 USD threshold on a daily basis without providing a legitimate purpose raises a red flag for suspicious activity and should be reported to the relevant Financial Intelligence Unit.

References:

Suspicious Transaction Report (STR) / Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)

What Is a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)? Triggers and Filing

How to decide if SAR filing is needed

erence: https://aml-cft.net/library/suspicious-transaction-report-str-suspicious-activity-report-sar/

Arms and related materials embargo is a type of sanction that prohibits the supply, sale, transfer, or export of arms and related materials to a targeted country, entity, or individual. This type of sanction is most likely to be used in order to avoid escalating violent conflicts and/or proliferation of weapons, as it aims to reduce the availability and access of weapons and ammunition that could fuel violence and instability. Arms and related materials embargo can also prevent the transfer of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems to non-state actors or rogue states. According to the UN, arms and related materials embargo is one of the most common and effective forms of sanctions that the Security Council imposes to address threats to international peace and security12.

References:

1: Different types of sanctions - Consilium1

2: UN Sanctions and the Prevention of Conflict - United Nations University2

The Egmont Group is a united body of 174 Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) that uniquely support national and international efforts to counter terrorist financing and share financial information per global anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) standards. Its primary objective is to enhance international cooperation in the investigation and prosecution of money laundering and financing of terrorism. The Egmont Group facilitates the exchange of expertise and financial intelligence among FIUs to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and associated predicate offenses. While it does not conduct financial investigations itself, it plays a crucial role in improving stakeholders’ understanding of ML/TF risks and informing policy considerations related to AML/CFT implementation and reforms12.

References: 1: About - Egmont Group 2: Decoding Global AML: The Role Of The Egmont Group - Financial Crime Academy

Compare customer and transaction records against periodically updated sanctions lists provided by governmental bodies. This is stated in the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) manual on page 595, which states: “Sanctions screening requirements include that a financial institution should compare customer and transaction records against periodically updated sanctions lists provided by governmental bodies.”

Economic sanctions are measures imposed by countries or international bodies to exert pressure on individuals, entities, or nations that engage in undesirable behavior or actions. Sanctions aim to restrict or prohibit certain economic activities with the targeted parties, such as trade, investments, or financial transactions. They serve various purposes, including achieving foreign policy and national security objectives and deterring undesired actions by countries or entities. Sanctions can be comprehensive (affecting an entire country) or targeted (specific businesses, groups, or individuals), with a recent trend toward minimizing harm to innocent civilians12.

References:

1. Council on Foreign Relations: What Are Economic Sanctions?

2. [Tookitaki: A Complete Guide to Sanctions](https://www.tookitaki.com/compliance-hub/what

this activity is unusual and inconsistent with the expected behavior of an accounting firm’s operational account. The account should normally receive fees from clients that are proportional to the services rendered and reflect the market rates. Receiving international payments that are substantially higher than other fees could indicate that the account is being used to launder money or finance terrorism by disguising illicit funds as legitimate income. This could trigger a red flag for the bank and prompt a comprehensive review of the account.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.6, page 24: “Methods to launder money used in banks and other deposit taking institutions”.

ExamTopics, Question 446: “An accounting firm opened an account at a bank that is intended to be used as the operational account for the business. After a few months, a comprehensive review of the account was triggered due to unusual activity on the account. Which most likely triggered the review?”

 Correspondent banking is the product type that is subject to US extra-jurisdictional reach over non-US banks and non-US persons under the USA PATRIOT Act. This is because correspondent banking involves the provision of banking services by one bank (the correspondent) to another bank (the respondent) or to the respondent’s customers. Correspondent banking enables cross-border transactions and access to foreign financial systems, but also poses significant money laundering and terrorist financing risks due to the lack of transparency and accountability of the parties involved. The USA PATRIOT Act requires US financial institutions to apply enhanced due diligence measures to correspondent accounts for certain foreign banks, such as those operating under offshore banking licenses, those owned or controlled by foreign governments, or those of primary money laundering concern. These measures include obtaining information about the ownership, management, and anti-money laundering controls of the foreign bank, as well as the identity and activity of the customers using the correspondent account. The USA PATRIOT Act also authorizes the US Treasury to prohibit or impose conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts for foreign banks that are involved in money laundering or terrorist financing activities.

References:

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, p. 1611

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Anti-Money Laundering Programs; Special Due Diligence Programs for Certain Foreign Accounts, 31 CFR Part 103, RIN 1506–AA292

U.S. Extra-Jurisdictional Reach under the USA PATRIOT Act - Exam-Answer3

 A financial institution should regularly update its AML risk assessment in order to ensure that the results of the assessment are accurate and reflect the current money laundering and other illicit financial activity risks that the institution may face. This helps to ensure the institution has a comprehensive understanding of the risks associated with its activities and can implement adequate controls and procedures as necessary.

 According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, one of the four pillars of an effective anti-money laundering compliance program is the training of appropriate employees on their responsibilities and the institution’s policies and procedures. Training is essential to ensure that employees are aware of the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing, the applicable laws and regulations, the red flags and indicators of suspicious activity, and the reporting and record-keeping requirements. Without proper training, employees may not be able to perform their duties effectively and efficiently, and may expose the institution to legal, regulatory, reputational, and operational risks.

The other options are less serious deficiencies, but still need to be addressed and corrected. The compliance officer should have regular meetings with upper management to inform them of the current money laundering trends and the status of the compliance program, but this is not as critical as providing training to the employees. The company’s anti-money laundering manual should be updated to reflect any changes in the internal controls, policies, or procedures, but this is not as urgent as ensuring that the employees are familiar with the existing ones. The company should download the most recent regulation from the Financial Intelligence Unit web site, but this is not as important as complying with the existing ones.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, page 39.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 2.1.4.

According to the ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Exam (6th edition), page 215, one of the best practices for banks to prevent and detect mortgage fraud is to conduct internal investigations when there are red flags or suspicions of fraud involving bank employees. The investigation should include reviewing the employee’s loan files, interviewing the employee and other relevant parties, verifying the information and documents provided by the employee, and documenting the findings and actions taken. Filing a suspicious activity report (SAR) may be appropriate after the investigation is completed and the bank has reasonable grounds to suspect fraud. Filing a police report or initiating civil litigation may also be options depending on the outcome of the investigation and the bank’s policies, but they are not the first steps to take when the bank suspects an employee of mortgage fraud.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Exam (6th edition), page 2151

Mortgage Fraud: Understanding and Avoiding It2

Mortgage Fraud: What You Need To Know3

 According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, the FATF mutual evaluation process is a peer review mechanism that assesses the level of compliance of a country with the FATF 40 recommendations and the effectiveness of its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing system. The mutual evaluation report identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the assessed country and provides recommendations for improvement. The assessed country needs to address the shortcomings identified in the report and agree to post-assessment monitoring by FATF, which involves regular follow-up reports and actions to remedy the deficiencies. The other options are not correct, as they do not reflect the FATF mutual evaluation process or the obligations of the assessed country.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Chapter 4: International Standards and Global Initiatives, page 97.

FATF, Methodology for Assessing Technical Compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the Effectiveness of AML/CFT Systems, February 2013, updated October 2019, 1.

FATF, Procedures for the FATF Fourth Round of AML/CFT Mutual Evaluations, October 2019, 2.

The two most relevant measures for a professional dealer in precious metals and stones to reduce the risk of being misused for money laundering purposes are:

B. Stop accepting payments from persons other than the beneficiary: This measure can help to ensure that the source of funds is legitimate and can be traced back to the customer.

D. Limit the acceptance of purchases without adequate customer identification information: Adequate customer identification information is necessary for the purpose of identifying and verifying the customer's identity and determining whether the customer is a politically exposed person (PEP) or has any other risk characteristics that may require enhanced due diligence measures.

 According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) 40 Recommendations, Recommendation 10 requires financial institutions to identify and verify the identity of their customers, including legal persons and arrangements, using reliable and independent sources. This includes verifying the legal existence and structure of the legal entity, such as by obtaining a certificate of incorporation, a partnership agreement, or a trust deed. Additionally, financial institutions should identify and verify the identity of the beneficial owners of the legal entity, such as by obtaining information on the natural persons who ultimately own or control the entity, or who exercise effective control over the entity.

The other options are not consistent with the FATF 40 Recommendations. Verifying the financial status of the legal entity, or the entity’s other banking relations, is not a requirement for identification purposes, although it may be relevant for risk assessment or due diligence purposes. Verifying a person purporting to act on behalf of the legal entity is also not sufficient, as the person may not be authorized or may not disclose the true identity or beneficial ownership of the entity. Verifying funds or trusts maintained by terrorists is not a specific identification requirement, but rather a general obligation to comply with targeted financial sanctions and freeze the assets of designated persons or entities.

References:

FATF 40 Recommendations, Recommendation 10, Interpretive Note to Recommendation 10, pages 14-18.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 77.

 This is a red flag of money laundering or terrorist financing that involves the use of non-profit organizations (NPOs) as conduits for illicit funds. NPOs may be vulnerable to abuse by criminals who exploit their legitimate activities, reputation, and access to funds and resources. A transaction monitoring process that would alert a bank for this red flag activity is to analyze the source, destination, frequency, and purpose of the funds transferred to and from the charity account, and to compare them with the expected profile and activity of the NPO. If the bank detects any inconsistency, discrepancy, or deviation from the norm, it should raise an alert and conduct further investigation.

References:

FATF Report: Risk of Terrorist Abuse in Non-Profit Organisations, page 9

Transaction Monitoring Processes for Red Flag Activity in Banking

AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators? - ComplyAdvantage, section “Red flags related to the nature of transactions”

The financial institution should freeze the funds or assets of designated persons and entities once this decision is approved by the Board. This is to comply with the obligation to implement targeted financial sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) or other relevant authorities. Freezing means preventing any access, use, transfer, or disposal of the funds or assets by the designated persons and entities or by any other person on their behalf. The financial institution should also report the freezing action to the competent authority and the relevant sanctions committee12.

Option A is not a sufficient step to comply with sanctions requirements, but rather a tool to facilitate compliance. Adopting automatic screening systems to detect designated persons and entities can help the financial institution to identify potential matches and flag them for further investigation. However, screening systems are not infallible and may generate false positives or false negatives. Therefore, the financial institution should also conduct manual checks and verification of the screening results13.

Option B is not a relevant step to comply with sanctions requirements, but rather a measure to mitigate money laundering and terrorist financing risks. Conducting enhanced due diligence for prohibited entities on the sanctions list may be useful to obtain more information about the nature and purpose of the business relationship, the source and destination of the funds, and the beneficial ownership and control structure of the entity. However, enhanced due diligence does not replace the obligation to freeze the funds or assets of the designated persons and entities14.

Option C is not an appropriate step to comply with sanctions requirements, but rather a violation of the obligation to freeze the funds or assets of the designated persons and entities. Changing the risk profile to “high-risk” if an existing customer becomes a sanctioned entity and continuing to monitor further transactions may expose the financial institution to legal and reputational risks, as well as potential sanctions evasion or circumvention. The financial institution should terminate the business relationship with the designated person or entity and freeze their funds or assets without delay1 .

References: 1: ACAMS (2020), Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, ACAMS, Miami, FL, USA, www.acams.org/en/cams-certification-package-6th-edition, pp. 47-49. 2: ACAMS (2020), CAMS Examination Preparation Video, 6th Edition, ACAMS, Miami, FL, USA, www.acams.org/en/cams-certification-package-6th-edition, Module 2, Section 2.4.1. 3: ACAMS (2020), CAMS Examination Preparation Video, 6th Edition, ACAMS, Miami, FL, USA, www.acams.org/en/cams-certification-package-6th-edition, Module 2, Section 2.4.2. 4: ACAMS (2020), CAMS Examination Preparation Video, 6th Edition, ACAMS, Miami, FL, USA, www.acams.org/en/cams-certification-package-6th-edition, Module 2, Section 2.4.3. : ACAMS (2020), CAMS Examination Preparation Video, 6th Edition, ACAMS, Miami, FL, USA, www.acams.org/en/cams-certification-package-6th-edition, Module 2, Section 2.4.4.

According to the ACAMS CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), FIUs are central agencies that receive, analyze, and disseminate financial intelligence to support the detection and prevention of money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes1. FIUs have different legal powers and functions depending on their type and jurisdiction, but generally they can use various investigative techniques, such as requesting additional information from reporting entities, accessing databases, conducting analysis, and issuing guidance12. FIUs also have access to a wide range of financial information, such as suspicious activity reports, currency transaction reports, cross-border cash declarations, and other relevant data sources, to identify and assess potential illicit activities13. Moreover, FIUs can cooperate and exchange information with domestic and foreign counterparts, subject to certain legal and operational safeguards, to facilitate cross-border investigations and prosecutions of financial crimes14.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide (the 6th edition), Chapter 5: The Role of the Financial Intelligence Unit in Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, pages 153-1631

What are Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs)? | Dow Jones

Financial Intelligence Units - Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering Measures and the Financing of Terrorism - MONEYVAL - Coe

The role of financial intelligence units in combating money laundering (Chapter 6) - Money Laundering

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) 40 Recommendations are the international standards for combating money laundering and terrorist financing, and they apply to all countries and financial institutions. The Customer Due Diligence for Banks issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision provides guidance on how banks should conduct CDD and KYC procedures, and how they should manage the risks of correspondent banking and wire transfers. The Egmont Group Statement of Purpose outlines the objectives and functions of the Egmont Group, which is an international network of financial intelligence units (FIUs) that exchange information and cooperate in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. These three materials are relevant and useful for the bank’s expansion plans, as they cover the main aspects of AML/CFT compliance in different jurisdictions and sectors.

The USA PATRIOT Act is a US-specific legislation that enhances the powers and obligations of US authorities and financial institutions in relation to AML/CFT, but it may not be applicable or appropriate for other countries where the bank intends to operate. Therefore, it is not a necessary reference material for the bank’s international department.

References:

FATF 40 Recommendations

Customer Due Diligence for Banks

Egmont Group Statement of Purpose

 Money laundering has severe social and economic impacts, including increased crime rates, corruption and erosion of public trust. Money laundering fuels criminal activities by providing the necessary financial resources for criminals to continue their operations. As illicit funds circulate within the financial system, they enable the growth of criminal organizations and contribute to an increase in crime rates, including organized crime1. Money laundering also facilitates corruption and undermines public trust in financial institutions and the wider economy. This erosion of public trust is exacerbated by trade-based money laundering, which involves the manipulation of international trade transactions to disguise the origins of illicit funds2. Money laundering also weakens financial institutions by exposing them to reputational, operational, legal and regulatory risks. Money launderers exploit the vulnerabilities of financial systems and compromise their integrity and stability. Money laundering can also distort the allocation of resources, create inflationary pressures, and undermine the effectiveness of monetary policy3.

References:

1: Consequences Of Money Laundering Are: Understanding The Social, Economic, and Penalties Impacts1

2: Consequences of Money Laundering and Financial Crime2

3: Money laundering, its impact and consequences3

When considering sharing information across the institution or within the same jurisdiction, the key legal issue that poses challenges to sharing customer-related information is data protection and privacy laws. Data protection and privacy laws exist in most countries and can vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. These laws place restrictions on how customer data can be used, shared, and stored, and can limit the ability of financial institutions to share customer-related information with each other. Additionally, these laws may also require financial institutions to take additional steps to ensure the protection of customer data.

Non-compliance with AML regulatory obligations can have severe consequences for financial institutions. Among these, the most severe consequence is the loss of license. When a financial institution fails to meet AML requirements, regulators may revoke its license to operate. Losing the license effectively shuts down the institution’s ability to conduct business, impacting its existence and operations significantly12.

References:

1. Unit21 AML: 8 AML Penalties, Fines, and Sanctions + Examples You Should Avoid

2. Financial Crime Academy: Ensuring Compliance: The Power Of AML Regulatory Reporting

The main objective when a financial institution (FI) conducts an investigation is to track the movement of the money. Money laundering is a process of disguising the proceeds of criminal activity to make them appear legitimate. The movement of money is an essential element in the process of money laundering. Therefore, tracking the movement of funds is a crucial step in identifying and preventing money laundering. A financial institution must be able to recognize suspicious transactions and report them to the relevant authorities. An investigation is conducted to gather evidence and establish a clear understanding of the transaction flow, the parties involved, and the nature of the activity. This information is used to determine if the transaction is suspicious and if it violates any laws or regulations.

While keeping policies and procedures updated, keeping documentation, and knowing the customer are essential components of a comprehensive anti-money laundering (AML) program, these activities are not the primary objective of an investigation. Policies and procedures need to be updated to reflect changes in regulatory requirements and emerging money laundering risks. Documentation must be retained to provide evidence of the investigation process and outcomes. Knowing the customer is essential to identify and verify the customer’s identity and assess the risk associated with the relationship.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 3: AML Programs, Section 3.2: AML Program Components, Subsection 3.2.4: Transaction Monitoring and Investigation, pp. 87-88

Main Objective of Conducting Investigations - exam-answer.com

Company ownership is held in bearer share form. Bearer share ownership can make it difficult to identify the actual owners of a company and is therefore considered a high risk for money laundering or terrorist financing. Enhanced due diligence measures may include obtaining additional identification and ownership information, conducting more frequent reviews of the account, and monitoring transactions more closely.

The Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) Study Guide states that financial institutions should address all requests from law enforcement agencies completely and in a timely manner (Page 83). Disregarding requests when there is a justifiable reason for doing so is not recommended, as this could impede the investigation. Sharing information about the investigation with analysts is not recommended, as this could compromise the investigation. Delaying responses by informing senior management of requests is also not recommended, as this could result in a delay in the investigation.

The USA PATRIOT Act is a comprehensive legislation that was enacted in 2001 to enhance the powers and tools of the US authorities to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other threats to the national security and the integrity of the financial system. The USA PATRIOT Act contains several provisions that affect the relationship between US banks and foreign banks that maintain correspondent accounts in the US.

One of these provisions is Section 319, which allows the US authorities to seize the funds of a foreign bank held with a US bank, if the foreign bank refuses to comply with a subpoena or a request for records related to the correspondent account. This provision is intended to prevent foreign banks from using their correspondent accounts in the US to facilitate transactions involving tainted funds, such as proceeds of crime, funds intended to support terrorism, or funds subject to sanctions or asset freezing orders. Section 319 also requires US banks to maintain records of the owners and agents of foreign banks that have correspondent accounts with them, and to terminate such accounts if requested by the US authorities.

Therefore, if a foreign bank maintains a correspondent account in the US, and the US authorities find out that the account has been used to facilitate a transaction involving tainted funds, the US authorities can seize the funds of the foreign bank held with the US bank, under the authority of the USA PATRIOT Act.

References:

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2, page 10

USA PATRIOT Act, Section 319, page 55-57

The USA PATRIOT Act: A Legal Analysis, Section III, page 9-10

[The USA PATRI

"Transaction Monitoring Systems and Ongoing Monitoring: Since the transactional monitoring system is key to mitigating ML risk within the bank, the Committee recognizes that AML risks require more than just appropriate policies and procedures; banks must have adequate and appropriate monitoring systems. For most banks, this will involve an IT monitoring system. If the bank does not believe it needs an IT monitoring system, it should document the rationale for why it does not need one.

This potential action is authorized by Section 319 of the USA PATRIOT ACT, which allows the U.S. government to seize funds from a foreign bank’s correspondent account in the U.S. if the foreign bank refuses to cooperate with a request for records relating to an investigation of money laundering or terrorist financing. The U.S. government can seize an amount equal to the funds in the account of the target of the investigation, regardless of whether those funds are actually in the correspondent account. In this case, the U.S. government can seize $1 million from Bank A’s correspondent account in the U.S. because Bank A holds $1 million in the account of the WTS, which is the target of the forfeiture action.

The other potential actions are not authorized by the USA PATRIOT ACT or other U.S. laws. The U.S. government cannot seize Bank A’s entire $5 million correspondent account in the U.S. because that would exceed the amount in the WTS’s account and would violate the principle of proportionality. The U.S. government cannot seize the WTS’s $1 million account at the non-U.S. branch of Bank A because that would require the cooperation of the foreign jurisdiction where the branch is located, which may not be forthcoming. The U.S. government cannot seize $5 million from the non-U.S. branch of Bank A where the WTS’s account is located because that would also require the cooperation of the foreign jurisdiction and would exceed the amount in the WTS’s account.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 3: International Standards and Global Initiatives, pp. 67-68

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, pp. 54-55

How Does the Patriot Act Affect Criminal Investigations? | Nolo, Section 319: Forfeiture of Funds in United States Interbank Accounts

The USA PATRIOT Act at 20: Sneak and Peek Searches - CRS Reports, Section 319: Forfeiture of Funds in United States Interbank Accounts

 A startup virtual currency exchange that operates as a money services business (MSB) must comply with the anti-money laundering (AML) regulations and standards applicable to MSBs, such as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) in the United States. One of the key requirements for MSBs is to develop and implement an effective AML compliance program that covers the following four pillars: internal controls, independent testing, designated compliance officer, and training12.

Before launching its operations, the startup should consider the following two AML responsibilities that are essential for its compliance program:

A customer onboarding process: The startup should establish a customer identification program (CIP) that verifies the identity of its customers and collects relevant information, such as name, address, date of birth, and identification number12. The startup should also perform customer due diligence (CDD) and enhanced due diligence (EDD) for higher-risk customers, such as those who engage in large or frequent transactions, use anonymous or pseudonymous digital wallets, or originate from high-risk jurisdictions34. The startup should also screen its customers against sanctions lists and other watchlists to prevent dealing with prohibited or suspicious entities12.

Transaction limits consistent with risk appetite: The startup should set appropriate transaction limits for its customers based on its risk assessment and risk appetite. Transaction limits can help mitigate the exposure to money laundering and terrorist financing risks, as well as comply with the reporting and recordkeeping obligations under the BSA. For example, the startup should report any cash transactions over $10,000 or any suspicious transactions over $2,000 to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)12. The startup should also monitor its customers’ transactions for any unusual or inconsistent patterns or behaviors that may indicate money laundering or other illicit activities34.

References:

1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 6: AML Compliance Program, pp. 139-1461

2: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 6: AML Compliance Program, Lesson 6.1: The Four Pillars of an AML Compliance Program3

3: ACAMS CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 4: Customer Due Diligence, pp. 87-1061

4: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4: Customer Due Diligence, Lesson 4.1: Customer Identification Program and Lesson 4.3: Enhanced Due Diligence3

According to the Basel Committee’s Customer Due Diligence for Banks paper, one of the essential elements of a sound KYC programme is customer identification. This includes obtaining sufficient information to understand the nature and purpose of the customer relationship, the source of funds, and the beneficial ownership and control structure of the customer1. For corporate business entities, this means that a bank needs to have an understanding of the structure of the company, such as its legal form, its ownership, its directors, its line of business, and its geographical locations2. This will help the bank to assess the risk profile of the customer, to verify its identity and legitimacy, and to monitor its transactions for any suspicious activities.

References:

1: Customer due diligence for banks, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, October 2001, Section III.2 2: General Guide to Account Opening and Customer Identification, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, February 2003, Section 2.2.1

A qualified independent party/auditor is the most effective resource to evaluate the effectiveness of an anti-money laundering program. This is because an independent auditor can provide an objective and unbiased assessment of the program, identify any weaknesses or gaps, and make recommendations for improvement. An independent auditor can also verify the compliance of the program with the relevant regulations and best practices, and test the adequacy and functionality of the internal controls, customer due diligence processes, and transaction monitoring systems. An independent auditor can also help an organization prepare for regulatory examinations and audits, and avoid potential penalties or sanctions.

References: = The main references for this question are the following sources:

The document titled “Frequently Asked Questions Conducting Independent Reviews of Money Services Business Anti-Money Laundering Programs” published by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) in July 2010. You can access it by clicking here.

The document titled “AML Audit: How to Effectively Assess Your Compliance Program” published by Alessa in May 2023. You can access it by clicking here.

The document titled “Mutual Evaluations” published by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). You can access it by clicking here.

an employee who avoids taking periodic vacations despite having accrued vacation time may be trying to conceal fraudulent or illegal activities that would be exposed in their absence. This is a common red flag for internal fraud and money laundering, as it indicates a lack of segregation of duties, internal controls, and oversight. Employees who engage in such behavior may also exhibit other signs of stress, defensiveness, or secrecy.

References:

Learn about red flags for internal fraud, section “An employee may be a higher internal fraud risk when a combination of the following red flags are present”, bullet point 1: “Unwilling to share duties or take leave.”

Money Laundering Red Flags | Key Behaviours and Indicators, section “Employee Red Flags”, bullet point 1: “Avoiding taking holidays or time off work.”

Top 10 AML Red Flags: Warning Signs and Financial Risks, section “AML Red Flags Categories”, sub-section “Employee Red Flags”, bullet point 1: “Avoiding taking vacations or sick leaves.”

The compliance officer should perform the first step of reviewing the institution’s risk assessment before implementing any changes to the customer onboarding program. The risk assessment is a key component of the AML compliance program, as it identifies and measures the institution’s exposure to money laundering and terrorist financing risks. The risk assessment should be updated regularly and reflect the institution’s products, services, customers, geographic locations, and delivery channels. By reviewing the risk assessment, the compliance officer can determine the adequacy and effectiveness of the current customer onboarding program and identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. The compliance officer can also benchmark the institution’s risk assessment against the regulatory expectations and best practices in the industry.

The other steps are also important, but they should be performed after the risk assessment review. Revising training materials for frontline staff, conducting enhanced due diligence on high risk customers, and resolving substantive discrepancies in customer verification are all part of the customer onboarding program, but they depend on the risk assessment to provide the appropriate level of controls and procedures. For example, the training materials should reflect the risk assessment results and the revised customer onboarding policies. The enhanced due diligence should be applied to customers who pose a higher risk according to the risk assessment criteria. The customer verification should be consistent with the risk assessment and the customer identification program.

References:

AML KYC Onboarding Lifecycle Process Flow | Guide – AdvisoryHQ

New EBA AML Guidelines on the use of Remote Customer Onboarding Solutions - Bird & Bird

KYC Onboarding Process 2023 - AML requirements - Sumsub

Review of any AML/CFT program begins with the Risk Based Approached. It should first check the internal system to identify risk factors and design program accordingly.

A customer visiting multiple branches of the MSB on the same day in order to transfer funds internationally is a potential indicator of structuring, which is a technique used by money launderers to avoid reporting thresholds or detection by authorities. A customer attempting to buy money orders under $3,000 USD in cash multiple times a day is also a possible sign of structuring, as well as an attempt to evade the identification and recordkeeping requirements for MSBs. Both scenarios should be included in the procedures for further review by the AML Officer.

References:

BSA/AML Risk Assessment for Money Services Businesses (MSBs), section “Risk Factors”, sub-section “Structuring”: “Structuring is the practice of conducting financial transactions in a specific pattern calculated to avoid the creation of certain records and reports required by the BSA and/or 31 CFR Chapter X. Structuring is illegal and is often indicative of money laundering or other illicit activity.”

Money Services Business (MSB) — AML Compliance Guide, section “AML Compliance Requirements for MSBs”, sub-section “Identification and Recordkeeping”: “MSBs must verify the identity of any person who conducts a transaction of $3,000 or more. They must also keep records of the transaction, including the name, address, date of birth, and identification number of the customer, as well as the amount, date, and method of payment.”

Economic sanctions are a tool that governments and multi-national bodies can use to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) by imposing restrictions on trade, financial transactions, travel, or other activities with targeted countries, entities, or individuals that are involved or suspected of being involved in WMD programs. Economic sanctions aim to disrupt the supply chains, funding sources, and incentives for developing or acquiring WMDs, as well as to deter and punish any violations of international norms and obligations regarding WMDs. Economic sanctions can be imposed unilaterally by a country or multilaterally by a group of countries or an international organization, such as the United Nations, the European Union, or the Financial Action Task Force.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4: Preventing the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Lesson 4.2: Sanctions1

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4: Preventing the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Section 4.2: Sanctions2

The first line training program is the training that is provided to the employees who are directly involved in the day-to-day operations of the business, such as sales, customer service, or compliance staff1. The first line training program should cover the essential knowledge and skills that are required for the employees to perform their roles effectively and in compliance with the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) policies and procedures of the organization2. The first line training program should also be updated regularly to reflect any changes in the business environment, the regulatory framework, the customer base, the products and services, or the risk assessment of the organization2.

Among the four activities listed, the one that would require an update to the first line training program is the expansion to customer segments that will utilize newly established products. This is because the new customer segments and products may pose different or higher AML/CFT risks than the existing ones, and the employees need to be aware of these risks and how to mitigate them. For example, the new customer segments may include politically exposed persons, non-resident customers, or high-net-worth individuals, who may have higher exposure to corruption, tax evasion, or fraud risks3. The new products may include prepaid cards, mobile payments, or cryptocurrencies, which may have higher vulnerability to money laundering, terrorist financing, or cybercrime risks. Therefore, the first line training program should be updated to include the relevant information and guidance on how to identify, verify, monitor, and report these new customer segments and products, and how to apply the appropriate customer due diligence and transaction monitoring measures2.

The other three activities do not necessarily require an update to the first line training program, unless they involve significant changes in the AML/CFT policies and procedures of the organization. The implementation of a new system that provides information for monitoring customer accounts may improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the existing AML/CFT processes, but it does not change the nature or level of the AML/CFT risks. The maintenance of regulatory requirements for onboarding documentation collections of a customer base is a routine and ongoing task that should already be covered by the existing first line training program. The onboarding of a new customer type which was previously reviewed and risk rated does not introduce any new AML/CFT risks, as long as the risk rating and the corresponding controls are consistent with the organization’s risk appetite and policy.

References:

1: What is First Line of Defense? | Definition and Overview

2: Training and Awareness | FATF

3: Politically Exposed Persons (Recommendations 12 and 22) | FATF

: Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers | FATF

Based on the USA PATRIOT Act, one action that the US might take to demonstrate extraterritorial reach is to send requests for information to a non-US based financial institution (FI). The USA PATRIOT Act expanded the authority of the US government to issue subpoenas and other legal orders to foreign banks that maintain a correspondent account in the US, requiring them to produce records relating to such account or any account at the foreign bank, including records maintained outside the US12. This provision was intended to enhance the ability of the US to investigate and prosecute money laundering and terrorist financing activities that involve foreign FIs3.

References:

1: USA PATRIOT Act, Section 319(b)

2: Britannica, USA PATRIOT Act, History & Society

3: Princeton Legal Journal, FISA and the USA PATRIOT Act: Reforms and Legal Implications

Wash trading is the term for trading through multiple accounts, where an individual generates offsetting profits and losses and transfers of positions through accounts that do not appear to be commonly controlled. Wash trading is a form of market manipulation that creates artificial trading activity and volume, and may be used to evade taxes, inflate prices, or launder money. Wash trading can also involve the use of third parties or intermediaries to conceal the true identity and source of funds of the trader.

References: = The main references for this question are the following sources:

The document titled “Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Typologies and Trends in Canadian Securities Dealers” published by the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) in December 2019. You can access it by clicking here. This document states that “Wash trading is a form of market manipulation where an individual simultaneously sells and buys the same financial instruments to create misleading, artificial activity in the marketplace. Wash trading is illegal under securities law because it misleads investors and regulators about the true supply and demand of the securities involved. Wash trading can also be used to evade taxes, inflate prices, or launder money.”

The document titled “Market Manipulation” published by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). You can access it by clicking here. This document states that “Wash sales are a form of market manipulation in which an investor simultaneously sells and buys the same security to create misleading, artificial activity in the marketplace. Wash sales are illegal under Section 9(a)(1)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Wash sales can be used to manipulate the price of a security, evade taxes, or launder money.”

 the bank teller should not provide any information to the police officer without consulting the compliance officer first. The compliance officer is responsible for ensuring that the bank follows the applicable laws and regulations regarding customer privacy, data protection, and anti-money laundering. The compliance officer can verify the authenticity and validity of the request, determine the appropriate response, and obtain any necessary approvals or authorizations before releasing any information. The bank teller should not reject the request outright, as this could be seen as uncooperative or obstructive. The bank teller should also not provide the information after management approval, as this could bypass the compliance officer’s role and expose the bank to legal or regulatory risks.

References:

Bank Records and Financial Privacy Laws - FindLaw1

Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Risk Assessment | ACAMS2

What is the Difference Between Smurfing and Structuring?3

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) by ACAMS, the independent testing of an institution’s anti-money laundering program should be conducted by a person who reports directly to the Board of Directors or a Board Committee. This ensures that the person conducting the testing has the necessary authority, independence, and objectivity to evaluate the program’s adequacy and effectiveness, and to report any findings or recommendations to the senior management1. The person conducting the testing should also have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience in the anti-money laundering field, and should be familiar with the institution’s products, services, customers, and risks2.

The other options are not necessarily suitable or qualified to perform the independent testing of an institution’s anti-money laundering program. For example:

A certified specialist in the anti-money laundering field may have the relevant expertise and credentials, but may not have the required independence or reporting line to conduct the testing. For instance, if the certified specialist is an employee of the institution who is involved in the implementation or operation of the anti-money laundering program, then there may be a conflict of interest or a lack of objectivity in the testing process1.

A former anti-money laundering officer from a similar institution may have the relevant experience and background, but may not have the current knowledge or familiarity with the institution’s anti-money laundering program, policies, procedures, or systems. Moreover, the former anti-money laundering officer may have a personal or professional relationship with the institution or its staff, which may compromise the independence or integrity of the testing process1.

A retired government regulator or federal law enforcement officer may have the relevant authority and credibility, but may not have the specific skills or qualifications to conduct the testing. For instance, the retired regulator or law enforcement officer may not be well-versed in the latest anti-money laundering standards, regulations, or best practices, or may not be able to apply them to the institution’s unique risk profile, products, services, or customers1.

References:

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) by ACAMS

What Is An AML Compliance Program? | ComplyAdvantage

According to the Third European Union Money Laundering Directive (3rd AMLD), a politically exposed person (PEP) is an individual who is or has been entrusted with prominent public functions, such as heads of state, government ministers, judges, senior military officers, or members of parliament1. The 3rd AMLD requires institutions and persons covered by the Directive to apply enhanced customer due diligence measures when dealing with PEPs residing in another Member State or in a third country, in order to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing risks1. The 3rd AMLD also specifies that a person who is no longer entrusted with a prominent public function shall not be considered a PEP after a period of at least one year has elapsed since that person left office, unless the institution or person covered by the Directive has knowledge or reason to believe that the person is still exposed to specific risks2. However, the Commission Directive 2006/70/EC, which lays down implementing measures for the 3rd AMLD, extends this period to at least two years, and allows Member States to extend it further, depending on the level of risk and the type of prominent public function involved3.

References:

1: Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing

2: Article 3(8) of Directive 2005/60/EC

3: Article 2 of Commission Directive 2006/70/EC of 1 August 2006 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition of ‘politically exposed person’ and the technical criteria for simplified customer due diligence procedures and for exemption on grounds of a financial activity conducted on an occasional or very limited basis

According to the Wolfsberg Group, a correspondent bank should evaluate the distribution of downstream correspondents and identify any direct or indirect issues when it permits “nested” relationships, which are arrangements where a respondent bank provides correspondent banking services to other banks that are not customers of the correspondent bank. This step is important to understand the types of financial institutions to whom the services are being offered and the potential risks they pose. The correspondent bank should also obtain information on the nature and extent of the nested activity, the due diligence performed by the respondent bank on the nested banks, and the controls and monitoring in place to prevent financial crime.

References:

Wolfsberg Correspondent Banking Principles 20221, Section 4.5: Nested Relationships

Guidance on Correspondent Banking Services2, Section 3.2.2: Nested Correspondent Banking Relationships

According to the ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, one of the common methods of money laundering and terrorist financing is to structure transactions to avoid reporting or record keeping requirements. Structuring involves breaking down a large amount of cash into smaller transactions that fall below a specified threshold, or using different accounts, agents, locations, or days to conduct the transactions. Therefore, the fact that the two customers remit the same amount of funds, $2,500, each week to the same recipient in a high-risk country is a red flag for possible money laundering or terrorist financing activity, as it suggests that they are trying to evade the record keeping threshold of $3,000 for money transmitters in the United States12.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 27

FFIEC BSA/AML Appendices - Appendix F – Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags1

AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators? - ComplyAdvantage2

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an inter-governmental body that sets the global standards for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF). The FATF also monitors the compliance and implementation of its recommendations by its members and other jurisdictions. To enhance its global reach and effectiveness, the FATF works with nine FATF-style regional bodies (FSRBs) that cover different regions of the world. These FSRBs have similar objectives and functions as the FATF, but they also take into account the specific characteristics and challenges of their regions. Two ways that FSRBs influence AML/CTF standards within their respective regions are:

They issue typologies specific to their geographical region. Typologies are reports or studies that analyze the methods, trends, and patterns of money laundering and terrorist financing in a particular sector, industry, or region. FSRBs produce typologies that reflect the regional context and risks of their members and provide guidance and best practices to address them. For example, the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) has issued typologies on trade-based money laundering, wildlife trafficking, and virtual assets in the Asia-Pacific region12.

They administer mutual evaluations of participating members. Mutual evaluations are peer reviews that assess the level of compliance and effectiveness of a country’s AML/CTF system against the FATF standards. FSRBs conduct mutual evaluations of their members and publish the results and recommendations in detailed reports. These reports help identify the strengths and weaknesses of each country’s AML/CTF regime and provide a basis for follow-up actions and technical assistance. For example, the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) has conducted mutual evaluations of its members such as Barbados, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago34.

References:

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, page 27

APG website, section on Typologies

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, page 28

CFATF website, section on Mutual Evaluations

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, the situation that is the highest risk for money laundering and terrorist financing activity is A. A customer purchases casino chips, using small denomination bank notes, but does not engage in game play before redeeming the chips for a casino check. This is because this situation may indicate some red flags of money laundering, such as:

Using small denomination bank notes, which may be an attempt to avoid detection or reporting by the casino or the authorities, as large amounts of cash are usually associated with criminal activity1.

Not engaging in game play, which may indicate a lack of interest in gambling and a sole purpose of exchanging cash for a casino check, which is a more legitimate and less traceable form of payment2.

Redeeming the chips for a casino check, which may be a way of laundering the cash through the casino, as the check can be deposited into a bank account or cashed at another location, without revealing the source of the funds3.

The other three options are less risky because:

B. A customer purchases casino chips and engages in significant game play before requesting a casino check for the remainder is less risky, as it may indicate a genuine interest in gambling and a legitimate source of funds. However, this situation may still require further investigation and verification, as some money launderers may use gambling as a cover for their illicit activities, or may use the casino check as a way of transferring funds to another jurisdiction or person4.

C. A customer purchases casino chips using a credit card and engages in minimal game play before redeeming the chips for a casino check is less risky, as it may indicate a low level of funds involved and a traceable source of funds. However, this situation may still require further investigation and verification, as some money launderers may use credit cards to obtain cash advances from the casino, or may use the casino check as a way of repaying their credit card debt or transferring funds to another jurisdiction or person.

D. A customer purchases casino chips using credit from an account at an affiliated casino and engages in significant game play before redeeming the chips for a casino check is less risky, as it may indicate a regular and loyal customer of the casino and a legitimate source of funds. However, this situation may still require further investigation and verification, as some money launderers may use credit from an affiliated casino to avoid carrying cash or using credit cards, or may use the casino check as a way of transferring funds to another jurisdiction or person.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 106 2: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 110 3: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 110 4: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 110 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 110 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 110

payments received on the account that reference unknown companies in the instructions indicate a possible attempt to obscure the source or purpose of the funds. This could be a sign of money laundering, tax evasion, fraud, or other illicit activities. Such payments should be referred to AML Investigations for further review and verification of the identity and legitimacy of the companies involved.

References:

FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones, page 18, paragraph 57: “The dealer should also pay attention to the information provided by the customer on the source and origin of the funds or assets, and verify it where possible. For example, the dealer should be alert to situations where the customer provides vague, incomplete or inconsistent information about the source and origin of the funds or assets, or where the information provided does not match with the customer’s profile or business activity.”

Risk-Based Approach For Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones (DPMS), section “Business-based risk approach”, sub-section “2- Geographical location”: “You must also assess the geographical location of your business and the countries you deal with. You must be aware of the countries that are high-risk or non-cooperative jurisdictions as per the FATF recommendations. You must also consider the countries that are subject to sanctions, embargoes, or similar measures issued by the United Nations, the European Union, or any other relevant organization. You must also be careful of the countries that are known to have significant levels of corruption, organized crime, or terrorist activity.”

What are the Risks of Money Laundering for Precious Metals Dealers?, section “Money Laundering Red Flags for DPMS”, bullet point 4: “The customer provides vague, incomplete, or inconsistent information about the source and origin of the funds or assets.”

In many jurisdictions, it is a requirement to report certain information regarding STRs to senior management and/or the board of directors. This information may be limited to the number of reports filed, the dollar amounts involved and significant trends as observed by compliance personnel. In some cases, if the activity presents a significant or potentially ongoing risk to the institution, the leaders of the institution should be made aware so that high-level decisions can be made regarding potential changes to systems, staffing, products, services or particular relationships maintained by the institution.

Banks are required by the SAR regulations of their federal banking agency to notify the board of directors or an appropriate board committee that SARs have been filed. However, the regulations do not mandate a particular notification format and banks should have flexibility in structuring their format. Therefore, banks may, but are not required to, provide actual copies of SARs to the board of directors or a board committee. Alternatively, banks may opt to provide summaries, tables of SARs filed for specific violation types, or other forms of notification. Regardless of the notification format used by the bank, management should provide sufficient information on its SAR filings to the board of directors or an appropriate committee in order to fulfill its fiduciary duties, while being mindful of the confidential nature of the SAR. https://bsaaml.ffiec.gov/manual/AssessingComplianceWithBSARegulatoryRequirem ents/0

One of the key components of an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program is to implement adequate customer due diligence (CDD) measures for new accounts. This includes verifying the identity of the party opening the account, determining the beneficial owner(s) of the account, and seeking to determine the source of deposited funds. These measures help the financial institution (FI) to understand the nature and purpose of the customer relationship, assess the risk profile of the customer, and detect and report any suspicious or unusual activity. Documenting the identity of the party opening the account and the beneficial owner(s) of the account also helps the FI to comply with the record-keeping and reporting requirements of the AML laws and regulations, and to cooperate with the authorities in case of investigations or inquiries. Seeking to determine the source of deposited funds helps the FI to prevent the introduction of illicit funds into the financial system, and to identify any discrepancies or inconsistencies between the customer’s profile and activity.

References:

1: FATF Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach for the Banking Sector1

2: OCC Bulletin 2020-10: Customer Due Diligence and Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Examination Procedures2

3: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination3

One of the key components of an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program is customer due diligence (CDD), which involves verifying the identity of the customer, understanding the nature and purpose of the customer’s relationship with the financial institution (FI), and assessing the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing that the customer poses. CDD is essential for preventing and detecting the misuse of the FI’s services by criminals, and for complying with the relevant laws and regulations.

However, CDD can be challenging for FIs that offer online services to customers, as there is a greater difficulty in matching the customer with the provided identification documentation. Unlike face-to-face interactions, online services rely on electronic or remote methods of identification and verification, such as scanned copies of documents, biometric data, digital signatures, or third-party verification services. These methods may not be as reliable or secure as physical verification, and may expose the FI to the risk of identity fraud, document forgery, or impersonation. Moreover, online services may attract customers from different jurisdictions, which may have different standards and requirements for identification and verification, and may pose different levels of risk.

Therefore, FIs that offer online services to customers should implement enhanced due diligence (EDD) measures to mitigate the risk of money laundering, such as obtaining additional information or documentation from the customer, applying more stringent verification procedures, conducting more frequent and intensive monitoring of the customer’s transactions and behavior, and restricting or limiting the types or amounts of transactions that the customer can perform online.

References:

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4, page 82

Anti-Money Laundering in a Nutshell, Chapter 4, Section 4.2, page 63

Guidance on Digital Identity, Section 2, page 8

Anti-Money Laundering, The Basics: Installment 1, Section 3.2, page 5

shell banks are banks that have no physical presence in any country and are not affiliated with any regulated financial institution. They are often used by money launderers and terrorist financiers to hide their illicit activities and evade regulatory oversight. The USA PATRIOT Act prohibits US financial institutions from opening or maintaining correspondent accounts with shell banks, and requires them to take reasonable steps to ensure that their foreign correspondent banks do not provide services to shell banks12. Therefore, the US does not have jurisdiction over shell banks operating in foreign jurisdictions, unless they are involved in transactions that violate US laws or sanctions.

References:

USA PATRIOT Act Section 313: Prohibition on U.S. Correspondent Accounts with Foreign Shell Banks1

Fact Sheet Regarding the Treasury Department’s Use of Sanctions Authorities to Combat Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing3

The Egmont Group is a global network of Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) that aims to enhance the capabilities and cooperation of its members in combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. The Egmont Group supports its FIU members by helping them to expand and systematize the exchange of financial intelligence and information, improve expertise and capabilities of personnel, and enable secure communication with one another12. The Egmont Group does not issue due diligence models for financial institutions, as this is the responsibility of national regulators and standard-setting bodies. The Egmont Group does not issue strategic products for law enforcement agencies and FIUs, as this is the role of other international organizations such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The Egmont Group does not expand the ability of FIUs to enforce laws and exchange information globally, as this depends on the legal and operational frameworks of each FIU and the bilateral or multilateral agreements they have with other FIUs.

References:

Egmont Group

Working Groups - Egmont Group

Overview of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units

The Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units | FinCEN.gov

Egmont Group - Qatar Financial Information Unit

 Bearer shares are unregistered equity securities owned by the possessor of the physical share documents. The issuing company does not record the identity or ownership of the shareholders, nor does it track the transfers of ownership. This means that the holder of the bearer share can claim ownership and exercise the rights associated with the share, such as voting and receiving dividends, by simply presenting the physical certificate. This also makes the transfer of ownership very easy, as it only requires the delivery of the physical document, without any formalities or intermediaries. Bearer shares are therefore attractive for those who seek anonymity, privacy, and flexibility in their corporate structures.

References:

Investopedia: Bearer Share

SuperMoney: Bearer Shares: Definition, Examples, and Implications

ACAMS: Bearer Shares

 The key goal of EU Directives on money laundering is to establish a consistent regulatory environment across the EU to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, and to align EU policy with international standards and best practices. EU Directives are legal acts that set out the objectives and principles that member states must achieve, but leave the choice of methods and measures to the national authorities. EU Directives on money laundering aim to harmonize the rules and obligations for FIs and other obliged entities in the areas of customer due diligence, record-keeping, reporting, supervision, and sanctions. They also aim to address the emerging threats and vulnerabilities of the financial system, such as the use of virtual assets, prepaid cards, high-risk third countries, and beneficial ownership. By creating a consistent regulatory environment across the EU, the Directives seek to enhance the effectiveness and cooperation of the AML/CFT regime, and to protect the integrity and stability of the internal market and the financial system.

References:

1: Guide to EU Anti Money Laundering Directives (AMLD) - ComplyAdvantage1

2: Directive - 2015/849 - EN - Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive - EUR-Lex2

3: EU context of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism3

According to the CAMS Study Guide, page 173, “If an independent investigation provides grounds to interview the employee, the employee can be interviewed and, if necessary, terminated, but not advised that he or she is under investigation by law enforcement.” This is because informing the employee of the law enforcement investigation could compromise the integrity of the case and potentially expose the institution to legal liability. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

References:

CAMS Study Guide, page 1731

CAMS Exam Questions and Free Practice Test, Question 2872

A financial intelligence unit (FIU) is a national body or government agency that collects, analyzes, and disseminates financial information related to potential financial crimes, such as money laundering and terrorist financing. One of the core functions of an FIU is to receive disclosures filed by reporting entities, such as banks, money service businesses, casinos, and other obliged entities, that are required to report suspicious or unusual financial activity. These disclosures, also known as suspicious activity reports (SARs) or suspicious transaction reports (STRs), provide valuable intelligence for the FIU and other competent authorities to identify and investigate financial crimes and trace illicit funds. The other statements do not describe the duties of an FIU, but rather the roles of other agencies or bodies, such as the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) in the US, which administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions, or the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which sets international standards for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) supervision and regulation.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, Lesson 1: The Financial Intelligence Unit

The Financial Intelligence Unit: Role of the FIU and International Cooperation, Financial Crime Academy

What We Do, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

Wire stripping is the process of removing or altering the identifying information associated with a wire transfer to make it difficult to trace the origin or destination of the funds. This technique is commonly used in money laundering schemes to conceal the illicit source of funds and avoid detection by authorities or sanctions screening systems. In this case, the bank’s operations team deliberately removed the reference to the sanctioned company from the wire transfer message, thus violating the FinCEN “Travel Rule” and facilitating the evasion of sanctions.

References:

Wire Stripping in Anti Money Laundering Parlance

Wire Transfer Red Flags: Understanding Money Laundering and Fraud Risks

Wire Stripping

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, electronic funds transfers (EFTs) are transactions that involve the movement of funds electronically from one account to another, either within the same financial institution or across different institutions, domestically or internationally1. EFTs can be used for legitimate purposes, such as facilitating trade, commerce, and remittances, but they can also be exploited by money launderers to conceal the origin, ownership, and destination of illicit funds2. Some of the indicators of money laundering associated with using EFTs are:

Funds transfers to or from a financial secrecy haven without an apparent business reason. Financial secrecy havens are jurisdictions that offer a high degree of banking secrecy, low or no taxes, lax regulation and supervision, and weak or non-existent anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) measures3. Money launderers may use these havens to hide their illicit funds, evade taxes, and avoid scrutiny from authorities. Funds transfers to or from these havens without a clear or plausible explanation may indicate an attempt to launder money or finance terrorism.

Funds transfers are received or sent from the same person to or from different accounts. This may indicate a layering technique, which is the process of moving funds through multiple accounts, institutions, or jurisdictions to obscure the audit trail and the source and ownership of the funds4. Money launderers may use this technique to avoid detection, reporting, or freezing of their funds by authorities or financial institutions.

Payment or receipts with no apparent link to legitimate contracts, goods or services. This may indicate a trade-based money laundering technique, which is the process of using trade transactions to disguise the movement of illicit funds, either by over- or under-invoicing, misrepresenting the quantity or quality of goods, or falsifying documents. Money launderers may use this technique to transfer value across borders, evade taxes or customs duties, or justify the movement of funds that have no legitimate origin or purpose.

The other option is incorrect because:

Regular and frequent transfers from the account of a large company said to be payment for goods bought on credit is not necessarily an indicator of money laundering associated with using EFTs. This may be a normal business practice for some companies that have a high volume of transactions or a long-term relationship with their suppliers or customers. However, this may also be a red flag if the company is not well-known, has no physical presence, has no apparent business activity, or is located in a high-risk jurisdiction. Therefore, this option requires further investigation and verification before concluding that it is an indicator of money laundering.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 104 2: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 105 3: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 107 4: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 106 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 108

According to the FATF Guidance on Private Sector Information Sharing, FIs should establish sufficient safeguards concerning the confidentiality of information shared for AML purposes, both within the same financial group and between FIs not belonging to the same group. These safeguards include ensuring that the information is shared only with authorized personnel who have a need to know, that the information is used only for the intended AML purpose, and that the information is protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, or misuse. FIs should also comply with the applicable legal and regulatory requirements on data protection and privacy, and respect the rights and interests of the customers whose information is shared1.

References:

1: FATF Guidance on Private Sector Information Sharing1

When implementing a risk-based approach related to casinos, the risks related to the customer as an individual are mainly based on the customer’s profile, behaviour, source of funds, and geographic location. Among the options given, B and D are the most relevant factors that could indicate a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Casual customers are those who do not have a regular or established relationship with the casino, and who may visit the casino only once or occasionally. They may not provide sufficient or reliable identification information, or may use false or stolen identities. They may also engage in suspicious transactions, such as large cash purchases of chips, minimal or no gaming activity, or frequent transfers of chips between customers. Casual customers pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing because they are harder to verify, monitor, and trace by the casino operators.

Customer from a high-risk country is a customer who resides in, or has links to, a country that is subject to sanctions, embargoes, or similar measures, or that is identified by credible sources as having significant levels of corruption, or as being a source, transit, or destination of illicit funds. Such customers pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing because they may be involved in, or connected to, criminal or terrorist activities, or may be using funds that are derived from or intended for such activities.

References: = The main reference for this question is the document titled “FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Casinos” published by the FATF in October 2008. You can access it by clicking here. You can also find more information about the risk-based approach and the customer risks for casinos on the Gambling Commission website and the Exam Answer website.

According to the third European Directive on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing1, Member States may allow the identity verification of the beneficiary under the policy to be carried out at or before the time of payout or before the beneficiary intends to exercise rights vested under the policy, provided that the following conditions are met:

the beneficiary is identified as a natural or legal person or a legal arrangement, and the verification of the identity is not possible earlier, due to the nature of the product or the transaction;

there is a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, taking into account the type of policy, the product features, the premium amount, and the distribution channel;

the Member States adopt appropriate risk-sensitive measures to prevent the misuse of the policy during the life of the relationship.

This provision is intended to accommodate the specificities of the life insurance sector, where the beneficiary may not be known at the time of the conclusion of the contract, or may change during the life of the policy. However, the Directive also requires that the identity verification of the beneficiary is carried out as soon as possible after the establishment of the business relationship, and that the insurance undertaking applies enhanced customer due diligence measures when the beneficiary is a politically exposed person.

References:

1: Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L 309, 25.11.2005, p. 15) 2

Results of related audits and examinations are the most useful report for an anti-money laundering specialist to inform senior management about the status of the anti-money laundering program across the organization. This is because audits and examinations provide an independent and objective assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency, and compliance of the anti-money laundering program, as well as identify any gaps, weaknesses, or areas for improvement. Audits and examinations can also help senior management to monitor the performance of the anti-money laundering program, ensure accountability and oversight, and demonstrate commitment to regulatory expectations and best practices.

References:

Anti-Money Laundering Preparedness Survey Report 2020 - Deloitte US, page 4.

CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, page 39.

The USA PATRIOT Act is a comprehensive legislation that was enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and aimed to strengthen the US government’s ability to prevent, detect, and prosecute money laundering and terrorist financing. Among its many provisions, the USA PATRIOT Act contains several sections that have extraterritorial reach, meaning that they apply to foreign entities or activities that have a nexus with the US. Three of these sections are:

Section 319(b), which allows for the US Attorney General or the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a subpoena or other legal order to any foreign bank that maintains a correspondent account in the US, requiring the production of records relating to such account or any account at the foreign bank, including records maintained outside the US12. This section also allows foreign banks to voluntarily designate a registered agent in the US to accept service of such subpoenas or orders12.

Section 313, which prohibits US financial institutions from establishing, maintaining, administering, or managing correspondent accounts for foreign shell banks, which are banks that have no physical presence in any country and are not affiliated with a regulated financial group34. This section also requires US financial institutions to take reasonable steps to ensure that their correspondent accounts with foreign banks are not being used to provide banking services indirectly to foreign shell banks34.

Section 311, which authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to designate foreign jurisdictions, financial institutions, classes of transactions, or types of accounts as being of “primary money laundering concern” and to impose special measures to address such concerns . These special measures may include requiring US financial institutions to obtain and retain information on the beneficial owners of foreign accounts, prohibiting or imposing conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts for foreign financial institutions, or requiring US financial institutions to identify the customers of their foreign correspondent account holders . The Secretary of the Treasury may also order a US financial institution to terminate a correspondent account within 10 days if the foreign bank fails to comply with a subpoena or other request for information under Section 319(b) .

References:

1: USA PATRIOT Act, Section 319(b)

2: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 121

3: USA PATRIOT Act, Section 313

4: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 120

: USA PATRIOT Act, Section 311

: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 119

one of the key roles of FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) is to support the system of mutual evaluation, which is a peer review process that assesses the level of compliance and effectiveness of each member country’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) regime12. FSRBs conduct mutual evaluations in accordance with the FATF’s methodology and standards, and share the results and recommendations with the FATF and other FSRBs3. Mutual evaluations help identify the strengths and weaknesses of each country’s AML/CFT system, and provide a basis for technical assistance and follow-up actions4.

References:

What are the 9 FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs)? - Sygna1

FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) - Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering2

The Role of FATF Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) in Combating … - IDMerit3

9 FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) - fineksus.com4

According to the ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 184, “The decision to close an account should be made in consultation with the institution’s legal counsel and AML compliance officer, and in accordance with the institution’s policies and procedures.” Closing an account may not always be the best option, as it may trigger the customer’s suspicion, interfere with law enforcement investigations, or expose the institution to legal risks. Therefore, the institution should carefully weigh the pros and cons of closing an account, and follow its own internal guidelines.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 184

What steps should the institution take? - Exam4Training

Suspicious Transaction Report (STR) / Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) | AML-CFT

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, one of the best practices for conducting an internal investigation is to request formal company authorization to conduct the investigation. Such authorization should be granted, if possible, by the board of directors or audit committee, as this will help to establish the independence and legitimacy of the investigation, as well as the protection of the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine1. The other options are incorrect because:

B. Refusing to provide any records or documents to law enforcement may be seen as obstructing justice or violating regulatory obligations, and may also result in the loss of the privilege or the imposition of sanctions or penalties23.

C. Letting the bank hire any and all contract investigators may compromise the quality and integrity of the investigation, as well as the protection of the privilege or the work product doctrine, as the investigators may not be properly supervised or instructed by legal counsel, or may not be covered by the Kovel doctrine45.

D. Not marking files or documents with privileged and confidential: attorney-client privilege and/or work-product may undermine the claim of the privilege or the work product doctrine, as it may indicate that the materials were not prepared for the purpose of seeking or providing legal advice or in anticipation of litigation, or that they were not intended to be kept confidential67.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 150

2: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 151

3: Perkins Coie, Protecting Internal Investigation Materials From Disclosure, Updates, August 10, 2020

4: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 150

5: Eversheds Sutherland, Legal privilege of corporate internal investigations under US law - 2019 caselaw update, JDSupra, December 20, 2019

6: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 150

7: Norton Rose Fulbright, Internal investigations: when does privilege apply?, Global law firm, September 11, 2018

 MLROs are responsible for implementing and enforcing an appropriate risk-based approach for their firm, ensuring compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, and reporting any suspicious activities to the authorities. If they fail to discharge their duties, they may face personal liability and civil or criminal sanctions. MLROs are not the only individuals that can be held responsible for AML program deficiencies, as other senior managers, directors, or partners may also be liable depending on their role and involvement. However, MLROs are often the primary focus of enforcement actions due to their specific responsibilities and obligations. MLROs cannot avoid liability by agreeing to a civil penalty, as this does not absolve them from their legal duties or potential criminal prosecution. Banks can also be found liable for AML program deficiencies and face fines, penalties, or other sanctions.

References:

Technical factsheet The role of the money laundering reporting officer

Consequences of not complying | AUSTRAC

Money Laundering Reporting Officer: The Role Of MLRO

FinCEN Penalizes U.S. Bank Official for Corporate Anti-Money Laundering Failures

 The compliance officer should provide a high level summary of the activity and the interactions with law enforcement to the board of directors, as this would be the most appropriate way to escalate the information without compromising the confidentiality of the STR or the ongoing investigation. Providing a copy of the STR or the letter from law enforcement could expose the bank to legal risks or jeopardize the investigation. Informing the regulator to bring it up with the board would not be sufficient, as the compliance officer has the responsibility to report directly to the board on significant compliance issues.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 5: Risk Management, Lesson 5.3: Reporting to Senior Management and the Board1

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5: Risk Management, Section 5.3: Reporting to Senior Management and the Board2

 According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, FSRBs are regional organizations that help the FATF implement its global AML/CFT policy and standards in over 200 affiliated countries1. FSRBs have their own high-level principles and objectives that govern their relationship with the FATF and their members2. Among these principles and objectives, two that should be included in a FSRB update are:

Issue country-specific Mutual Evaluation reports. This is the process by which FSRBs assess the compliance and effectiveness of their members’ AML/CFT systems, based on the FATF standards and methodology3. Mutual Evaluation reports provide an in-depth analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each jurisdiction, as well as recommendations for improvement4.

Identify jurisdictions with weak AML/CFT regimes. This is the process by which FSRBs, in coordination with the FATF, monitor and publicly list the countries that pose a risk to the international financial system due to their strategic deficiencies in AML/CFT. This process aims to encourage and assist these jurisdictions to address their gaps and enhance their cooperation with the global network.

The other three options are incorrect because:

Address AML/CFT technical assistance of individual members is not a principle that should be included in a FSRB update, as it is not a core function of FSRBs. FSRBs may facilitate or coordinate technical assistance, but they are not the primary providers or funders of such assistance.

Establish AML/CFT standards and typologies is not a principle that should be included in a FSRB update, as it is not a role of FSRBs. FSRBs are expected to adopt and implement the FATF standards, not to create their own. Typologies are the methods and trends of money laundering and terrorist financing, which are identified and analyzed by the FATF and FSRBs through research and workshops.

Protect the reputation and standing of FATF is not a principle that should be included in a FSRB update, as it is not a responsibility of FSRBs. FSRBs are autonomous and independent organizations that have their own governance and accountability mechanisms. FSRBs are expected to cooperate and coordinate with the FATF, but not to act as its agents or representatives.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 64 2: FATF, High-Level Principles for the Relationship between the FATF and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, February 2019, 3 3: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 65 4: FATF, FATF Methodology for Assessing Technical Compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the Effectiveness of AML/CFT Systems, February 2013 (updated October 2019), [12] : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 66 : FATF, High-Risk and Other Monitored Jurisdictions, 4 : FATF, High-Level Principles for the Relationship between the FATF and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, February 2019, 3, p. 4 : FATF, High-Level Principles for the Relationship between the FATF and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, February 2019, 3, p. 2 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 67 : FATF, High-Level Principles for the Relationship between the FATF and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, February 2019, 3, p. 3 : FATF, High-Level Principles for the Relationship between the FATF and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, February 2019, 3, p. 5 : FATF, FATF Methodology for Assessing Technical Compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the Effectiveness of AML/CFT Systems, February 2013 (updated October 2019), [12], p. 9 : FATF, High-Risk and Other Monitored Jurisdictions, 4, p. 1

A money laundering risk assessment is a crucial component of an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program. It involves identifying, assessing, and understanding the specific risks related to money laundering and terrorist financing that the institution may face. A risk assessment helps the institution to design and implement appropriate controls, policies, procedures, and training to mitigate the risks. A risk assessment should be updated regularly and whenever there are significant changes in the institution’s business activities, products, services, customers, or geographic locations. In this scenario, the financial institution has experienced significant deficiencies in its AML program during a recent regulatory examination. The deficiencies were primarily attributed to the lack of oversight by the institution’s leadership in implementing adequate controls over the new products and services that were added as part of the institution’s aggressive growth strategy. To correct these weaknesses in the AML program, the leadership should first address the area of international control known as “Money laundering risk assessment” (Option C). By conducting a new and comprehensive risk assessment, the leadership can identify the potential vulnerabilities and gaps in the AML program that may arise from the new products and services. The risk assessment can also help the leadership to prioritize the actions and resources needed to address the deficiencies and enhance the AML program. Once the risk assessment is completed, the leadership can then work on updating the AML policy, providing adequate training, and ensuring sufficient compliance staff to implement and monitor the controls.

References:

1, Chapter 2: Risk Assessments

2, Section 2: Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program

3, Question 145

The Patriot Act, enacted in 2001, introduced several provisions to enhance the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) measures for U.S. banks and their foreign correspondent relationships. Some of the potential issues for foreign financial institutions (FFIs) maintaining correspondent accounts with U.S. banks under the Patriot Act are:

Cancellation of correspondent banking relationships: The Patriot Act requires U.S. banks to conduct due diligence and enhanced due diligence on their foreign correspondent accounts, and to terminate any account that poses a significant risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. This may result in the cancellation of correspondent banking relationships with FFIs that do not meet the U.S. standards or cooperate with the U.S. authorities. The loss of correspondent banking relationships may affect the FFIs’ ability to access the U.S. financial system and provide services to their customers.

Forfeiture of funds in a U.S. interbank account: The Patriot Act authorizes the U.S. government to seize and forfeit any funds in a U.S. interbank account that are involved in or traceable to money laundering or terrorist financing activities. This means that FFIs may face the risk of losing their funds in a U.S. interbank account if they or their customers are suspected or accused of engaging in illicit activities. The forfeiture of funds may have significant financial and reputational consequences for the FFIs and their customers.

Prohibition of correspondent accounts for shell banks: The Patriot Act prohibits U.S. banks from establishing or maintaining correspondent accounts for shell banks, which are banks that have no physical presence in any country and are not affiliated with a regulated financial group. This means that FFIs that are shell banks or have relationships with shell banks cannot access the U.S. financial system through correspondent accounts. The prohibition of correspondent accounts for shell banks aims to prevent the use of shell banks as vehicles for money laundering and terrorist financing.

References:

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), pp. 81-841

USA PATRIOT Act, Title III: International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 2001, Sections 312, 319, and 3132

Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Correspondent Banking, October 2014, pp. 3-43

According to the FATF 40 recommendations, the focus of AML efforts has been expanded beyond financial institutions to include other businesses and professions that are vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financing risks. These include:

Casinos, when customers engage in financial transactions equal to or above a designated threshold. Casinos are required to identify and verify the identity of their customers, keep records of transactions, report suspicious transactions, and implement internal controls and compliance programs to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. The designated threshold is USD/EUR 3,000 or more1.

Real estate agents, when they are involved in transactions for clients concerning buying and selling properties. Real estate agents are required to identify and verify the identity of their customers and beneficial owners, keep records of transactions, report suspicious transactions, and implement internal controls and compliance programs to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Real estate transactions can involve large amounts of money and complex legal arrangements that can be used to conceal the source or destination of illicit funds2.

Trust and company service providers, when they prepare for or carry out transactions for a client concerning the creation, operation or management of legal persons or arrangements. Trust and company service providers are required to identify and verify the identity of their customers and beneficial owners, keep records of transactions, report suspicious transactions, and implement internal controls and compliance programs to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Trust and company service providers can facilitate the misuse of legal persons or arrangements, such as shell companies or trusts, to hide the true ownership and control of assets or funds3.

The other option, dealers in art, when they engage in any cash transaction with a customer at or above a designated threshold, is not covered by the FATF 40 recommendations. However, dealers in precious metals and stones are covered when they engage in any cash transaction with a customer at or above a designated threshold of USD/EUR 15,000 or more. Dealers in art may be subject to national or regional regulations that impose AML obligations on them, depending on the jurisdiction.

References:

FATF Recommendation 22: Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions: Customer Due Diligence

FATF Recommendation 23: Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions: Other Measures

FATF Recommendation 24: Transparency and Beneficial Ownership of Legal Persons

[FATF Recommendation 25: Transparency and Beneficial Ownership of Legal Arrangements]

An effective anti-money laundering training program should include real-life money laundering examples to illustrate the concepts and strategies for detecting and preventing money-laundering activity. Real-life examples can help employees to understand the risks, methods, indicators, and impacts of money laundering, as well as the roles and responsibilities of different staff members in combating it. Real-life examples can also enhance the engagement, retention, and application of the knowledge gained from the training program.

References: = The main references for this question are the following sources:

The document titled “Anti-Money Laundering Awareness Training” published by ACAMS. You can access it by clicking here. This document states that “ACAMS AML General Awareness Training equips employees with knowledge of basic anti-money laundering (AML) principles” and that it is “based on real-life industry scenarios with interactive content to help learning stick”.

The document titled “Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Training” published by LIMRA. You can access it by clicking here. This document states that “LIMRA’s AML training program provides training for insurance and securities producers and home office employees” and that it “uses real-life scenarios to help learners understand how to apply AML principles to their everyday work”.

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, the Egmont Group is an international network of FIUs that facilitates and prompts the exchange of information, knowledge, and cooperation among its members to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and associated predicate offences1. The Egmont Group suggests that one of the core objectives that would lead to an effective national FIU is to have absolute trust amongst national and international stakeholders before sensitive information will be exchanged with confidence2. This means that the FIU should establish and maintain a high level of credibility, professionalism, and integrity in its operations, and ensure that the information it receives and disseminates is protected and used appropriately. The FIU should also comply with the Egmont Group’s principles and standards for information exchange, and foster a culture of mutual trust and cooperation with other FIUs and relevant authorities3.

The other three options are incorrect because:

The FIU must operate from physically separated premises from other law enforcement agencies and government offices is not a core objective that the Egmont Group suggests for an effective national FIU. While the FIU should have operational independence and autonomy, and be free from undue influence or interference, it does not necessarily have to be physically separated from other agencies or offices. The FIU may be located within the judicial, law enforcement, administrative, or hybrid model, depending on the country’s legal and institutional framework4.

The FIU meets the Egmont Group assessment criteria is not a core objective that the Egmont Group suggests for an effective national FIU. While meeting the Egmont Group assessment criteria is a requirement for becoming and remaining a member of the Egmont Group, it is not an objective in itself. The assessment criteria are based on the FATF recommendations and the Egmont Group’s own documents, and they serve as a benchmark for evaluating the FIU’s compliance and effectiveness5.

The FIU must be able to promote the value of the government’s commitment to embed a corruption free society within the country is not a core objective that the Egmont Group suggests for an effective national FIU. While the FIU may contribute to the prevention and detection of corruption, as well as the recovery of illicit assets, by analyzing and sharing financial intelligence, it is not the sole or primary responsibility of the FIU to promote the value of the government’s commitment to embed a corruption free society within the country. This is a broader and more complex goal that involves multiple actors and factors, such as political will, legal framework, institutional capacity, civil society, media, and international cooperation.

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 64 2: Egmont Group, Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units Principles for Information Exchange Between Financial Intelligence Units, June 2013, 3, p. 2 3: Egmont Group, Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units Principles for Information Exchange Between Financial Intelligence Units, June 2013, 3, p. 3-4 4: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, p. 67 5: Egmont Group, Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units Support and Compliance Process, June 2013, [6], p. 3-4 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, p. 91-92

According to the Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Principles for Correspondent Banking, one of the key aspects of establishing and maintaining a correspondent relationship is to conduct a risk-based due diligence on the respondent bank, which includes obtaining approval from at least one person other than the person sponsoring the relationship12. This is to ensure that the correspondent bank has a clear understanding of the nature, purpose, and expected activity of the relationship, as well as the respondent bank’s ownership, governance, AML policies, and customer base12.

Another aspect of the Wolfsberg AML Principles is to recognize and assess the factors that may increase the risk inherent in a correspondent relationship, such as the involvement of politically exposed persons (PEPs), the presence of downstream (nested) correspondents, the geographic location of the respondent bank and its customers, and the types of products and services offered by the respondent bank12. These factors may require enhanced due diligence, monitoring, and reporting of suspicious activities by the correspondent bank, as well as the application of appropriate risk mitigation measures12.

References:

1: Wolfsberg Correspondent Banking Principles 20221

2: Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Correspondent Banking2

According to Section 319(b) of the USA PATRIOT Act, U.S. financial institutions that provide correspondent accounts to foreign banks must maintain records of the owners of the foreign banks and the name and address of a U.S. resident authorized to accept service of legal process for records regarding the correspondent accounts. This requirement is intended to prevent foreign shell banks from accessing the U.S. financial system and to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of money laundering and terrorist financing activities involving foreign banks.

References:

US PATRIOT ACT | State Street

Foreign Correspondent Banking Fact Sheet - U.S. Department of the Treasury

FACT SHEET for Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act Final Regulation and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking | FinCEN.gov

A fundraising organization is a type of non-profit organization that may be vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financing risks, as they often operate in high-risk areas, deal with large amounts of cash, and have complex and opaque structures. Therefore, a fundraising organization warrants enhanced due diligence, which is a higher level of customer verification and monitoring that goes beyond the standard customer due diligence measures. Enhanced due diligence may include obtaining additional information on the source of funds, the purpose of the relationship, the beneficiaries, and the governance of the organization.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Section 2.2: Customer Due Diligence, p. 33-34

Anti-money laundering – a guide to customer due diligence

Customer due diligence | The Law Society

According to the risk-based approach, financial institutions should apply enhanced due diligence and ongoing monitoring to higher-risk clients, and take appropriate measures to mitigate the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing. If the client exceeds the criteria of an acceptable risk model created by the institution, the institution should communicate the issues to the client and request remedial actions, such as providing additional information, documentation, or evidence of compliance. If the client does not cooperate or comply with the institution’s requirements, the institution should consider terminating the relationship with the client, as the risk may outweigh the benefits of continuing the business relationship.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Assessments, pp. 51-521

ACAMS CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 4: Customer Due Diligence, pp. 97-981

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2: Risk Assessments, Lesson 2.3: Risk-Based Approach2

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4: Customer Due Diligence, Lesson 4.3: Enhanced Due Diligence

A compliance officer should consider the following three factors as part of the approach to implement an enterprise-wide anti-money laundering program for a bank that operates in multiple countries:

The types of customers serviced by the bank: Different types of customers may pose different levels of money laundering risk, depending on their nature, source of funds, geographic location, transaction patterns, and other factors. A compliance officer should identify and assess the money laundering risk associated with each customer type and segment, and apply appropriate due diligence measures, monitoring systems, and risk mitigation strategies accordingly12.

The extent of anti-money laundering regulations in the various countries: A compliance officer should be aware of the legal and regulatory requirements and expectations for anti-money laundering compliance in each country where the bank operates, and ensure that the bank’s policies and procedures are consistent with them. A compliance officer should also monitor any changes or updates in the anti-money laundering laws and regulations in the various countries, and adjust the bank’s program accordingly34.

The anti-money laundering risk posed by the products and services offered by the bank: Different products and services may have different features and functionalities that could be exploited by money launderers, such as anonymity, cross-border transfers, cash transactions, complex structures, or new technologies. A compliance officer should evaluate the money laundering risk associated with each product and service offered by the bank, and implement appropriate controls, safeguards, and oversight mechanisms to prevent and detect money laundering activities5 .

References:

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Assessments

2: FATF, Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach: The Banking Sector

3: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT)

4: Deloitte, AML Program Effectiveness Reform

5: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4: AML Program Design

[6]: OCC, Money Laundering: A Banker’s Guide to Avoiding Problems

A commission rogatory, also known as a letter rogatory or a letter of request, is a formal request from a court in one country to a court in another country for some type of judicial assistance, such as service of process, taking of evidence, or enforcement of judgments1. A commission rogatory would be used in the context of a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) request, which is a bilateral or multilateral agreement that enables countries to cooperate and provide legal assistance to each other in criminal matters2. MLATs are one of the main gateways for obtaining information from another country, especially when the information is not available through other means, such as financial intelligence units (FIUs), supervisory authorities, or international organizations3. FIUs are national agencies that collect, analyze, and disseminate financial information related to money laundering and terrorist financing, and they can exchange information with their counterparts in other countries under the Egmont principles. Supervisory authorities are regulators that oversee the compliance of financial institutions and other entities with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) obligations, and they can share information with their peers in other jurisdictions through supervisory channels, such as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an inter-governmental body that sets standards and monitors the implementation of AML/CFT measures, and it can provide information and guidance to its members and other jurisdictions, but it does not have the authority to request or compel information from them.

References:

1: Letters rogatory - Wikipedia

2: Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties and Letters Rogatory: A Guide for Judges | Federal Judicial Center

3: How US Authorities Obtain Foreign Evidence in Cross-Border Investigations | Global Investigations Review

: What is an FIU? | Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units

: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision | Bank for International Settlements

: What is the FATF? | FATF

Sanctions screening and transaction monitoring rules are two of the most common controls that FIs use to identify suspicious money-laundering activity. Sanctions screening is the process of checking customers, transactions, and counterparties against various lists of sanctioned individuals, entities, and countries issued by national and international authorities. Sanctions screening helps FIs to avoid doing business with or facilitating the activities of those who are involved in terrorism, proliferation, human rights violations, or other criminal activities. Transaction monitoring rules are the criteria or scenarios that FIs use to detect unusual or potentially suspicious patterns of transactions or behaviors of customers or accounts. Transaction monitoring rules help FIs to identify transactions that deviate from the expected norms, such as large cash deposits, frequent wire transfers, or transactions with high-risk jurisdictions. Transaction monitoring rules also help FIs to comply with their reporting obligations, such as filing Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) or Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs).

References: = ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Chapter 4: Developing an Effective Anti-Money Laundering Program, Section 4.2: Customer Identification Program (CIP) and Customer Due Diligence (CDD); Money laundering and terrorist financing, Section: Anti Money Laundering (AML) regulations; The Three Stages Of Money Laundering And How Money Laundering Works, Section: How to Prevent Money Laundering.

a qualified compliance officer is a mandatory element of all anti-money laundering programs, regardless of the type or size of the financial institution. The compliance officer is responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing the anti-money laundering program, ensuring its compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, and reporting any suspicious activity to the appropriate authorities12. The compliance officer should have sufficient authority, resources, and expertise to perform these duties effectively.

References:

Anti-Money Laundering (AML) | FINRA.org1

Anti-Money Laundering Program and Suspicious Activity Reporting Requirements For Insurance Companies Frequently Asked Questions | FinCEN.gov2

The company regularly understating the value of goods exported is an indicator of possible money laundering because it may suggest that the company is involved in trade-based money laundering (TBML), which is the process of disguising the proceeds of crime and moving value through the use of trade transactions in an attempt to legitimise their illicit origins or finance their activities. One of the common TBML techniques is over-invoicing or under-invoicing, which involves manipulating the price, quantity or quality of goods or services in order to transfer value between the importer and exporter. By understating the value of goods exported, the company may be transferring funds to a foreign counterpart who is either a co-conspirator or a third-party money launderer, who will then pay the company the difference in cash or through other means. This way, the company can avoid currency reporting requirements, evade taxes, conceal the source and destination of funds, and integrate the illicit proceeds into the formal economy.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, page 381

Trade-Based Money Laundering: Trends and Developments, FATF-Egmont Group, December 2020, page 282

Trade-Based Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, Global Investigations Review, September 20233

these are the main factors that determine the inherent money laundering risk of a financial institution. The customer base, location, products and services of a financial institution affect the type, volume, and complexity of transactions that it processes, as well as the exposure to high-risk customers, jurisdictions, and activities12. A financial institution should review these factors regularly and conduct a comprehensive risk assessment to identify, measure, and mitigate its money laundering risk34.

References:

Anti Money Laundering Risk Assessment - Financial Crime Academy1

Anti-Money-Laundering (AML) Risk Approach Explained | Okta2

Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Risk Assessment | ACAMS4

2024 National Money Laundering Risk Assessment (NMLRA)5

 According to the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units, which is a global network of FIUs that promotes information exchange and cooperation, FIUs making requests to another FIU should disclose the reason and purpose for the request, and provide feedback on how the information was used12. These actions are intended to enhance mutual trust, transparency, and accountability between FIUs, and to facilitate the effective use of financial intelligence and information for combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes12. FIUs making requests should also respect the confidentiality and data protection requirements of the FIU receiving the request, and avoid imposing unreasonable or unduly restrictive conditions12.

FIUs making requests should not send the same request to all FIUs, as this would be inefficient, unnecessary, and potentially harmful. FIUs should only send requests to FIUs that are relevant and competent to provide the information they need, based on the nature and scope of the case12. Sending the same request to all FIUs could overload the system, create duplication, and compromise the security and confidentiality of the information12. FIUs making requests should also make best efforts to provide complete and factual information, but this is not an action they should take when submitting a request, but rather when responding to a request from another FIU12.

References:

Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units Operational Guidance for FIU Activities and the Exchange of Information

Principles for Information Exchange Between Financial Intelligence Units

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is a department of the U.S. Treasury that administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security goals1. OFAC regulations cover all persons and entities within the U.S., all U.S.-domiciled entities and their foreign branches, and all U.S. citizens, wherever located or employed2. These include U.S. banks, U.S. corporations, U.S. subsidiaries of foreign corporations, U.S. residents, and U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad3. OFAC regulations do not cover foreign-based entities that have U.S. customers, unless they are owned or controlled by U.S. persons or entities4.

References: 1: Home | Office of Foreign Assets Control 2: eCFR :: 31 CFR Chapter V – Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury 3: FFIEC BSA/AML Office of Foreign Assets Control - Office of Foreign Assets Control 4: Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC): Definition, Sanctions

purchasing a low volume of chips with cash and turning them in for a casino check is a common technique of money laundering in casinos. This method allows the launderer to convert “dirty” money into physical casino chips, which are then played with for a short while, and then cashed out as “clean” money in the form of a check. This way, the launderer can avoid the reporting requirements and the traceability of cash transactions.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs1

Understanding Money Laundering in Casinos | ComplyAdvantage2

Casino Money Laundering: Red Flag Indicators - Alessa3

This customer action indicates possible money laundering because it could be a sign of layering, which is the second stage of the money laundering process. Layering involves moving the illicit funds around to create distance and confusion between the source and the destination of the money. Transferring all funds to another bank on the same day of large cash deposits could be an attempt to avoid detection by the bank’s transaction monitoring system or by the authorities. It could also be a way to break the audit trail and obscure the origin of the funds.

The other customer actions are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, although they could raise some red flags depending on the context and the customer profile. Continually making weekly small cash deposits could be a sign of structuring, which is a technique to avoid reporting requirements by depositing amounts below the threshold. However, this could also be a legitimate behavior for a tutor who receives cash payments from students. Periodically initiating wire transfers to another account owned by a relative could be a sign of funneling, which is a technique to move funds between accounts that are not related to the business or personal activities of the customer. However, this could also be a legitimate behavior for a tutor who supports their family members financially. Opening a savings account and making frequent transfers from the checking account could be a sign of commingling, which is a technique to mix illicit funds with legitimate funds from a legal source. However, this could also be a legitimate behavior for a tutor who wants to save money for future expenses.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, pp. 35-40

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, pp. 28-32

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Module 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Video 2.2: The Three Stages of Money Laundering

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 311, Answer C

The three statements from the procedure that are in line with Wolfsberg are:

B. The responsible private banker must establish the identity of a holder of general powers over an account (e.g. a signatory for the account) and, as appropriate, verify that identity. This is consistent with the Wolfsberg Principle 1.2.1, which states that the bank will establish the identity of its clients and beneficial owners prior to establishing business relationships with such persons1.

D. The responsible private banker must obtain the necessary documentation establishing the authorized signer’s authority to act on behalf of the account holder or beneficial owner (e.g. a Power of Attorney). This is consistent with the Wolfsberg Principle 1.2.3, which states that the bank will obtain the necessary documentation establishing the authority of the authorized signatory to act on behalf of the client or beneficial owner1.

E. If an individual has signing authority over an account but does not act on a professional basis as a manager of funds, the responsible private banker must understand and document the relationship between that authorized signer, the account holder, and, if different, the beneficial owner of the account. This is consistent with the Wolfsberg Principle 1.2.4, which states that the bank will understand and document the relationship between the authorized signatory, the client and, if different, the beneficial owner of the account1.

References:

1: Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking (2012)

When an FI is being investigated for possible money laundering, it is important that it cooperates with the law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in a professional and transparent manner. This means that the FI should take the following steps:

Maintain centralized control over all requests and responses to ensure completeness and timely responses. This will help the FI to avoid duplication, inconsistency, or omission of information, as well as to track the status and progress of the requests and responses. It will also facilitate the communication and coordination between the FI and the LEAs, and demonstrate the FI’s willingness to cooperate12.

Review subpoenas and other information requests by senior management and an investigations group or counsel. This will help the FI to assess the scope, relevance, and legality of the requests, as well as to identify any potential risks, conflicts, or sensitivities. It will also enable the FI to prepare and provide the requested information in an accurate and timely manner, and to seek clarification or negotiation if necessary13.

The other options are not advisable, as they may indicate a lack of cooperation, obstruct the investigation, or damage the FI’s reputation. For example:

Making employees, including corporate officers, unavailable for interviews and refusing documents upon receipt of a subpoena may be considered as non-compliance, evasion, or contempt of court, and may result in legal sanctions or penalties4.

Addressing the document destruction policy to ensure the relevant documents are destroyed may be seen as tampering with evidence, destroying records, or concealing information, and may constitute a criminal offence or a breach of regulatory obligations5.

Not answering inquiries from the media directly, but rather replying, “No comment” may create a negative impression, fuel speculation, or invite criticism, and may harm the FI’s image, credibility, or trustworthiness.

References:

Cooperation between FIUs, Law Enforcement Authorities, and Prosecutors

AML and Financial crimes investigation

Mechanisms for interaction of law enforcement agencies in the field of counteracting and combating money laundering

Recommendation 30: Responsibilities of law enforcement and investigative authorities

Money laundering and illicit finance

 the internal investigation did not examine the brokerage account, which could be a potential source of money laundering. According to the CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, one of the common methods of money laundering is to use securities brokers to move funds through the purchase and sale of stocks, bonds, or other instruments1. The customer’s frequent transfers from the business account to the brokerage account, and the increased volume of activity in the business account, could indicate that the customer is trying to disguise the origin or ownership of illicit funds by investing them in money market securities. Therefore, the anti-money laundering specialist should recommend the internal investigator to concentrate on the trades made in the brokerage account, and to look for any signs of market manipulation, insider trading, or unusual patterns of transactions1.

References:

1: CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, page 55-56.

According to the ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 37, one of the red flags of money laundering or terrorist financing is the use of nominees, trusts, or third parties to hide the identity, ownership, or control of the funds or assets involved in the transaction. Nominees are individuals or entities that act on behalf of the actual or beneficial owners of a company, trust, or account, and may be used to conceal the source, destination, or purpose of the funds or assets. Nominees may also be used to evade taxes, sanctions, or regulatory requirements.

In this case, the compliance officer is unable to verify the identity of the beneficial owners of the company, and only information on the nominee owners was provided. This raises the suspicion that the company may be involved in money laundering or terrorist financing activities, and that the nominee owners may be acting as fronts or intermediaries for the actual or beneficial owners. The compliance officer should conduct further due diligence on the company, the nominee owners, and the beneficial owners, and report any suspicious or unusual activity to the relevant authorities.

References:

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 37

Beneficial Ownership Meaning and Regulation - Investopedia

What is a nominee shareholder? | LawBite

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), senior management and the Board of Directors have the ultimate responsibility for the effectiveness of the AML program and the compliance with the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, they should be informed of all significant STRs and the numbers and trends of the filings, as this would help them to assess the level of risk exposure and the adequacy of the controls and resources. The other options are either too restrictive or too burdensome for senior management and the Board of Directors, and may interfere with the timely and confidential filing of STRs.

References: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 361; ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2, Lesson 12

The Black Market Peso Exchange (BMPE) is a trade-based money laundering technique commonly used by narcotics traffickers in Colombia and Mexico. The central feature uses a money trader to ensure that US drug sales revenue doesn’t cross any borders. Instead, those dollars are used to purchase any number of legitimate commodities from unsuspecting businesses on behalf of legitimate South American businesspersons, whose legitimate imports are used to obtain pesos for the drug cartels. This method is closely associated with international trade because it involves the exchange of goods and currencies across different countries, and it exploits the discrepancies between the official and unofficial exchange rates.

References:

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, page 35

Black Market Peso Exchange in Money Laundering - Financial Crime Academy

What is BMPE ? - Sanction Scanner

Overview - FinCEN.gov

it describes a reason why trusts established in certain offshore jurisdictions make good vehicles to layer money, which is names of the settlor and beneficiaries are not publicly available. This means that the true owners and controllers of the funds or assets held by the trust are hidden from the public and the authorities, and can only be accessed by the trustee or the protector, who may be complicit or unaware of the money laundering scheme. This creates a high level of anonymity and secrecy for the money launderers, who can use the trust to move, disguise, or conceal the origin and destination of their illicit funds.

The other options are not necessarily reasons why trusts established in certain offshore jurisdictions make good vehicles to layer money, although they may have some advantages or disadvantages depending on the circumstances and the risk profile of the customers and countries involved. Option B describes a possible motive for setting up a trust in an offshore jurisdiction, which is to minimize taxes, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be legitimate tax planning or optimization purposes. Option C describes a possible challenge or obstacle for setting up a trust in an offshore jurisdiction, which is offshore jurisdictions are unfamiliar with trust, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be other legal or financial vehicles available in those jurisdictions. Option D describes a possible characteristic or feature of a trust, which is trusts may hold assets of significant size, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be valid reasons or sources for the large assets.

References:

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - 6th Edition1

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition)2

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, pages 86-87

https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf

 According to the FATF Recommendation 12, financial institutions should take reasonable measures to determine whether the beneficiaries of a life insurance policy and/or, where required, the beneficial owner of the beneficiary are politically exposed persons. This should occur at the latest at the time of the payout1. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent the abuse of life insurance products for money laundering or terrorist financing by PEPs or their associates. Therefore, the best way to mitigate the risk of adding a beneficiary to a life insurance policy for a foreign PEP is to perform due diligence on the beneficiary, such as verifying their identity, relationship with the PEP, and source of funds2.

The other options are not correct because they either do not comply with the FATF standards, or do not adequately address the risk of adding a beneficiary to a life insurance policy for a foreign PEP. Determining the source of wealth and source of funds is a measure that should be applied to the PEP as the customer, not the beneficiary, as part of the enhanced due diligence process2. Declining the request if the beneficiary is a foreign PEP may not be feasible or proportional, as not all foreign PEPs are involved in money laundering or terrorist financing, and some may have legitimate reasons to add a beneficiary to their life insurance policy. Declining the request to add a beneficiary due to increased risk may also not be feasible or proportional, as it may violate the contractual rights of the PEP as the customer, and may not be necessary if the due diligence on the beneficiary does not reveal any red flags or suspicions.

References: https://complyadvantage.com/insights/peps-life-insurance/

https://www.cfatf-gafic.org/index.php/documents/fatf-40r/378-fatf-recommendation-12-politically-exposed-persons

According to the guidance issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the federal banking agencies, a financial institution is legally permitted to discuss any aspects of the reported activity with the law enforcement officer who contacts them about the suspicious transaction report (SAR), as long as the officer provides appropriate credentials and a written request for the information. The financial institution is also legally permitted to send the deposit documents referenced in the SAR, as they are part of the supporting documentation that may be requested by law enforcement1

However, the financial institution is not legally permitted to provide copies of the customer’s loan documents or explain the customer’s loan payment history, as they are not directly related to the reported activity and may contain confidential information that is protected by privacy laws or contractual agreements. The financial institution should only disclose the minimum amount of information necessary to respond to the law enforcement request and should not volunteer any information that is not relevant or requested12

References:

1: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations, FinCEN and Federal Banking Agencies, 2021, Question 1

2: The best practices for effective Suspicious Activity Reporting, The Payments Association, 2020

The customer purchased property insurance that is twice the value of the business indicates potential money laundering. This could be a sign of insurance fraud, which is one of the predicate offenses for money laundering. Insurance fraud involves making false or exaggerated claims to obtain illegitimate financial benefits from an insurance company. The customer may have purchased an excessive amount of insurance to cover the value of the property and then intentionally damage or destroy it to claim the insurance payout. The customer may then use the insurance money to launder the proceeds of other criminal activities.

References:

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.21

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.21

ACAMS Chapter 1 Exam Questions, Question 682

6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (6AMLD): Biggest Changes, Section 23

Accountants can be involved in money laundering schemes in various ways, either knowingly or unknowingly. Some of the common methods that accountants can use to launder money are:

Overstating income to hide excess cash: This method involves inflating the revenues or profits of a business to conceal the origin of illicit funds. For example, an accountant can create fake invoices or receipts to justify the deposit of cash from illegal sources into the business account. This can make the cash appear as legitimate income from the business operations.

Acting as a conduit for transferring cash between accounts: This method involves using the accountant’s own account or a third-party account to move funds around and obscure the audit trail. For example, an accountant can receive cash from a client and deposit it into their own account, then transfer it to another account or withdraw it in a different location. This can make it difficult to trace the source and destination of the funds.

Acting as a designee for someone who wishes to hide their identity: This method involves using the accountant’s name or credentials to open accounts or conduct transactions on behalf of a client who wants to remain anonymous. For example, an accountant can act as a nominee director or shareholder for a shell company that is used to launder money. This can make it appear as if the accountant is the owner or beneficiary of the funds, while the actual owner or beneficiary is hidden.

References:

Money Laundering: What It Is and How to Prevent It - Investopedia, The Process of Laundering Money

Revealed: accountants aiding money laundering - Accountancy Age, Accountants’ methods

Accountants in the anti-money laundering front line, Accountants’ obligations

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/119840NCJRS.pdf

An internal investigation log is primarily intended to track the status of investigations into unusual activity. This is to ensure that the investigations are conducted in a timely, thorough, and consistent manner, and that the results and recommendations are documented and communicated to the relevant parties12. An internal investigation log can also help the organization to identify any trends, patterns, or gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) compliance program, and to measure its effectiveness and efficiency3.

An internal investigation log is not intended to provide training on investigations to the anti-money laundering officer and Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), report status of investigations to the Board of Directors, or detect and monitor possible suspicious activity. These are separate functions that may involve the use of the internal investigation log, but are not its primary purpose.

References:

1: How to Conduct Effective AML Investigations - Blog | Unit211 2: BSA/AML Internal Audit: PwC2 3: Anti-Money Laundering: 5 Steps to Conduct an Audit3

One of the methods that FATF-style regional bodies (FSRBs) use to understand the inherent money laundering and terrorist financing risks in their regions is to conduct regional-level research and analysis of the methods and trends used by criminals and terrorists to exploit the vulnerabilities of the financial system. This research and analysis is done using the standards and templates developed by the FATF for its typologies reports, which are documents that describe the common features, techniques, and patterns of money laundering and terrorist financing activities. By producing their own typologies reports, FSRBs can identify the specific risks and challenges faced by their member countries and jurisdictions, and provide guidance and recommendations on how to mitigate them.

References:

What are the 9 FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs)? - Sygna, What are FATF and FSRB typologies?

FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) - Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering, What are the main duties of FSRBs?

Financial Action Task Force - Wikipedia, Typologies.

According to the Basel Committee’s paper on Customer Due Diligence for Banks1, banks should review their existing customer relationships on a regular basis, especially for higher risk categories of customers or business relationships. This includes identifying whether the customer or the beneficial owner is a PEP, either at the account opening stage or later, as a result of a change in the customer’s circumstances or profile. The paper also states that banks should apply a risk-based approach to determine the appropriate level and type of due diligence depending on the risk profile of the customer or the beneficial owner.

References:

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 20011

FATF Guidance: Politically Exposed Persons (Recommendations 12 and 22), June 20132

ACAMS, CAMS Examination Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4