Wealth & Risk Management Blog

William Byrnes (Texas A&M) tax & compliance articles

Posts Tagged ‘Money Laundering’

Commerzbank Admits to Sanctions and Money Laundering Violations, Will Pay $1.45 Billion Penalties! 

Posted by William Byrnes on March 17, 2015


“If for whatever reason CB New York inquires why our turnover has increase[d] so dramatically, under no circumstances may anyone mention that there is a connection to the clearing of Iranian banks!!!!!!!!!!!!!.”  Why did Commerzbank get off with only $1.45 billion in penalties when BNP paid nearly $9 billion for very similar conduct?  See International Financial Law Prof Blog

 

 

 

Posted in Compliance, Financial Crimes | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Federal Government After Decades Tries To Stop Local Authorities From Profiting on Asset Seizure Abuse Justified by Federal Law (But What About State Abuse)?

Posted by William Byrnes on January 19, 2015


Read the Notice sent to State Enforcement today, and links of previous coverage of this issue – at http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intfinlaw/2015/01/federal-government-after-decades-tries-to-stop-local-authorities-from-profiting-on-asset-seizure-abu.html

 

01701_11_1_coverUse your Lexis subscription to access LexisNexis’ Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance: A Global Guide – This treatise by William Byrnes with commentary and analysis of hundreds of AML experts from over 100 countries,  is designed to provide the compliance officer accurate analyses of the AML/CTF Financial and Legal Intelligence, law and practice in the nations of the world with the most current references and resources. This multi-volume treatise is organized around five main themes: 1. Money Laundering Risk and Compliance; 2. The Law of Anti-Money Laundering and Compliance; 3. Criminal and Civil Forfeiture; 4. Compliance and 5. International Cooperation.  As these unlawful activities can occur in any given country, it is important to identify the international participants who are cooperating to develop methods to obstruct these criminal activities.

Posted in Money Laundering | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Mafia Takes Over FirstPlus Financial, Drains it Into Bankruptcy

Posted by William Byrnes on September 21, 2014


International Financial Law Prof Blog.

According to court documents and evidence introduced at the trial of his coconspirators, Scarfo is a made member of the Lucchese organized crime family.  In April 2007, Scarfo, Salvatore Pelullo and others devised a scheme to take over FirstPlus.  Scarfo and Pelullo used threats of economic harm to intimidate and remove the prior management and board of directors and replaced those officers with individuals beholden to Scarfo and Pelullo.   

Posted in Financial Crimes, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Will Delaware Give Up Its Status as the #1 Corporate Tax Haven?

Posted by William Byrnes on September 6, 2014


International Financial Law Prof Blog.

The tiny state is perennially at the top of the list of global tax havens and has gained a reputation as place where those with something to hide – embezzlers, arms merchants, money launders, drug dealers and the like – can set up shop, no questions asked. This is thanks to Delaware laws that allow the true owners of a corporate entity to remain a secret.

Posted in Money Laundering, OECD | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

FinCEN Proposes New Customer ID Rules

Posted by William Byrnes on August 29, 2014


International Financial Law Prof Blog – According to a Treasury press release and ThinkAdvisor, “The Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), recently issued proposed rules under the Bank Secrecy Act to clarify and strengthen customer due diligence requirements — including anti-money laundering rules — for banks, brokers or dealers in securities, mutual funds, and futures commission merchants as well as introducing brokers in commodities.” … read on at International Financial Law Prof Blog

Posted in Compliance, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

more Guns & Money, Bribery, Money Laundering, Major Insolvencies, Drug Dealing … and the week is just half way over

Posted by William Byrnes on July 31, 2014


Wednesday’s articles

the secret language of LIBOR traders exposed

DOJ wants more time to examine Barclays

Morgan Stanley pays $275 million fine & disgorgement for $2.5 billion of sub-prime backed securities sales

Analysis of the 88,000 Financial Firms on the IRS’ GIIN List for FATCA

FATCA Expanded Affiliated Group (EAG) by Country – the FFI List

FACTA in Swiss Finance Transactions

FATCA Compliance Guide Download

MOnday and Tuesday articles

Guns & Money – Smith & Wesson pays $2 million for bribery

Banco Espírito Santo’s former CEO arrested for Money Laundering & Tax Evasion as bank reports Portugal’s largest loss, Espirito Santo Financial Group seeks creditor protection

Guinea mining FCPA bribery investigation nets first jail sentence

Substantial money laundering penalties but not tax collection from OVDI disclosures

4th guilty plea in Indonesia bribery FCPA case

BOA settles alleged narco kingpin violations for $16 million

SunTrust Admits Issuing Mass Denials After Throwing Away Thousand of Customers Unopened Files

Lloyds Banking Group Will Pay $370 Million, Admits Criminal Wrongdoing

FTC seizes law firm assets, alleges $35 million fees bilked from distressed homeowners

Is FedEx a drug dealer? The $2.4 billion question

Tax Inversions: The Basics

Lionel Messi to be Prosecuted for Alleged Tax Evasion of $5.4 million

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Guns & Money, Bribery, Money Laundering, Major Insolvencies, Drug Dealing … and the week has just begun

Posted by William Byrnes on July 30, 2014


Links to Articles –

Guns & Money – Smith & Wesson pays $2 million for bribery

Banco Espírito Santo’s former CEO arrested for Money Laundering & Tax Evasion as bank reports Portugal’s largest loss, Espirito Santo Financial Group seeks creditor protection

Guinea mining FCPA bribery investigation nets first jail sentence

Substantial money laundering penalties but not tax collection from OVDI disclosures

4th guilty plea in Indonesia bribery FCPA case

BOA settles alleged narco kingpin violations for $16 million

SunTrust Admits Issuing Mass Denials After Throwing Away Thousand of Customers Unopened Files

Lloyds Banking Group Will Pay $370 Million, Admits Criminal Wrongdoing

FTC seizes law firm assets, alleges $35 million fees bilked from distressed homeowners

Is FedEx a drug dealer? The $2.4 billion question

Analysis of the 88,000 Financial Firms on the IRS’ GIIN List for FATCA

Tax Inversions: The Basics

Lionel Messi to be Prosecuted for Alleged Tax Evasion of $5.4 million

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Former Senior Executive of Qualcomm Pleads Guilty to Insider Trading and Money Laundering

Posted by William Byrnes on July 22, 2014


DOJ-U-S-ATTORNEYS-OFFICEJing Wang, 51, the former Executive Vice President and President of Global Business Operations for Qualcomm Inc., today pleaded guilty to insider trading in shares of Qualcomm and Atheros Communications Inc. Wang also pleaded guilty to laundering the proceeds of his insider trading using an offshore shell company.

According to court documents, … read the entire story at http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intfinlaw/2014/07/former-senior-executive-of-qualcomm-pleads-guilty-to-insider-trading-and-money-laundering.html

 

Posted in Money Laundering | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

BNP Paribas Pays $8.9 Billion for Sanction Violations With Iran, Sudan & Cuba

Posted by William Byrnes on June 30, 2014


$8.9 Billion Settlement of $19 Billion Possible Penalty

On June 30th, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), as part of a combined $8.9 billion settlement (settlement agreement here) with federal and state government agencies, today announced a $963 million agreement with BNP Paribas (BNPP) to settle its potential liability for apparent violations of U.S. sanctions regulations.  The $8.9 billion is the largest OFAC settlement to date.  However, the statutory maximum and base civil monetary penalties in this case were $19,272,380,006.

What Did BNP Paribas Do Exactly?

For a number of years, up to and including 2012, BNPP processed thousands of transactions to or through U.S. financial institutions that involved countries, entities, and/or individuals subject to the sanctions programs listed above.  BNPP appears to have engaged in a systematic practice, spanning many years and involving multiple BNPP branches and business lines, that concealed, removed, omitted, or obscured references to, or the interest or involvement of, sanctioned parties in U.S. Dollar Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication payment messages sent to U.S. financial institutions.

The specific payment practices the bank utilized in order to process sanctions-related payments to or through the United States included omitting references to sanctioned parties; replacing the names of sanctioned parties with BNPP’s name or a code word; and structuring payments in a manner that did not identify the involvement of sanctioned parties in payments sent to U.S. financial institutions.  While these payment practices occurred throughout multiple branches and subsidiaries of the bank, BNPP’s subsidiary in Geneva and branch in Paris facilitated or conducted the overwhelming majority of the apparent violations.

How Bad Was BNP Paribas Conduct?

OFAC determined that BNPP did not voluntarily self-disclose its violations (it was a whistleblower), and that the apparent violations constitute an egregious case: BNPP’s systemic practice of concealing, removing, omitting, or obscuring references to information about U.S.-sanctioned parties in 3,897 financial and trade transactions routed to or through banks in the United States between 2005 and 2012, including:

$8 Billion with Sudan

BNPP officials have described Darfur as a “humanitarian catastrophe” and, while discussing the Sudanese business, noted that certain Sudanese banks “play a pivotal part in the support of the Sudanese government which…has hosted Osama Bin Laden and refuses the United Nations intervention in Darfur.”  BNPP’s senior compliance personnel agreed to continue the Sudanese business and rationalized the decision by stating that “the relationship with this body of counterparties is a historical one and the commercial stakes are significant. For these reasons, Compliance does not want to stand in the way.”

BNPP processed 2,663 wire transfers totaling approximately $8,370,372,624 between September , 2005, and July 24, 2009, involving Sudan.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $16,826,707,625.  $8 billion in four years – approximately $2 billion a year.

$1 Billion with Iran

BNPP processed 318 wire transfers totaling approximately $1,182,075,543 between July 15, 2005, and November 27, 2012, involving Iran.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $2,382,634,677.

$700 Million With Cuba

BNPP processed 909 wire transfers totaling approximately $689,237,183 between July 18, 2005, and September 10, 2012.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $59,085,000.

$1.5 Million with Burma

BNPP processed seven wire transfers totaling approximately $1,478,371 between November 3, 2005, and approximately May 2009, involving Burma.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $3,952,704.

Who Was Involved?

Benjamin M. Lawsky, New York’s Superintendent of Financial Services, said, “BNPP employees – with the knowledge of multiple senior executives – engaged in a long-standing scheme that illegally funneled money to countries involved in terrorism and genocide. As a civil regulator, we are taking action today not only to penalize the bank, but also expose and sanction individual BNPP employees for wrongdoing. In order to deter future offenses, it is important to remember that banks do not commit misconduct – bankers do.”

– COO Signed Off on Continuing Illicit Transactions at Meeting Where He Asked Minutes Not to be Taken”;

– North American Head of Ethics/Compliance wrote: “The Dirty Little Secret Isn’t So Secret Anymore, Oui?”

Did Anyone Go to Prison?

No.  No charges have been brought.

If Not Prison, Then What Was the Discipline?

Some executives were merely ‘separated’.  What does separated mean?  Asked to resign?  Awarded severance?  Kept the high salaries and bonuses derived from the illicit business – yes.  What of the COO who “signed off on continuing illicit transactions at a meeting where he asked minutes not to be taken“?  He was allowed to retire.  He keeps his pension, retirement funds, bonuses …

What BNP states: “As a result of BNP Paribas’ internal review, a number of managers and employees from relevant business areas have been sanctioned, a number of whom have left the Group.”

But what the Department of Financial Services states: At DFS’s direction, 13 individuals were terminated by or separated from the Bank as a result of the investigation, including the following senior executives:

  • George Chodron de Courcel, Group Chief Operating Officer
  • Vivien Levy-Garboua, Current Senior Advisor to the BNPP Executive Committee and Former Group Head of Compliance
  • Christopher Marks, Group Head of Debt Capital Markets
  • Dominique Remy, Group Head of Structured Finance for the Corporate Investment Bank (CIB)
  • Stephen Strombelline, Head of Ethics and Compliance for North America

In total, including those terminated, the Department of Financial Services reports that the Bank disciplined 45 employees, with levels of discipline ranging from dismissals, to cuts in compensation, demotion, and other sanctions, while 27 additional BNPP employees who would have been subject to potential disciplinary action during the investigation had already resigned.

Who Is Paying the Fine?

BNP Paribas shareholders inevitably.  No fines have been levied against the employees involved.  BNP shareholders include:

Belgian State (through SFPI (1)) 10.3%
Grand Duché de Luxembourg 1.0%
Employees 5.5%
Retail shareholders 4.9%
European institutional Investors 46.1%
Non-European institutional investors 30.0%
Other and unidentified 2.2%
Total 100%

How Will BNP Minimize the Risk of Its Doing It Again?  

Under the settlement agreement, BNPP is required to put in place and maintain policies and procedures to minimize the risk of the recurrence of such conduct in the future.  BNPP is also required to provide OFAC with copies of submissions to the Board of Governors relating to the OFAC compliance review that it will be conducting as part of its settlement with the Board of Governors.

BNP states that it has designed new robust compliance and control procedures:

  • a new department called Group Financial Security US, part of the Group Compliance function, will be headquartered in New York and will ensure that BNP Paribas complies globally with US regulation related to international sanctions and embargoes.
  • all USD flows for the entire BNP Paribas Group will be ultimately processed and controlled via the branch in New York.

Read my previous analysis warning to financial institutions about lack of education

Is AML Training Effective or Whitewashing?

Is AML Training Effective or Whitewashing? Part II

Are Financial Service Firms Serving High Net Wealth Suffering As a Result of Compliance Costs?

book cover

LexisNexis’ Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance: A Global Guide – This eBook with commentary and analysis by hundreds of AML experts from over 100 countries,  is designed to provide the compliance officer accurate analyses of the AML/CTF Financial and Legal Intelligence, law and practice in the nations of the world with the most current references and resources. The eBook is organized around five main themes: 1. Money Laundering Risk and Compliance; 2. The Law of Anti-Money Laundering and Compliance; 3. Criminal and Civil Forfeiture; 4. Compliance and 5. International Cooperation.  As these unlawful activities can occur in any given country, it is important to identify the international participants who are cooperating to develop methods to obstruct these criminal activities.

Selected Settlement Agreements:

2014 Information

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and BNP Paribas SA

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Clearstream Banking, S.A.

2013 Information

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control has issued a Finding of Violation to VISA International Service Association

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Royal Bank of Scotland plc.

2012 Information

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and HSBC Holdings plc

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Standard Chartered Bank

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and ING Bank, N.V.

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Online Micro, LLC

2011 Information

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Sunrise Technologies and Trading Corporation

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.

2010 Information

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Barclays Bank PLC.

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Innospec, Inc

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Aviation Services International, B.V.

2009 Information

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Lloyds TSB Bank, plc.

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Credit Suisse AG.

Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Ltd.

Posted in Compliance, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

FINCEN Director speaks out on BITCOIN and other virtual currencies

Posted by William Byrnes on March 22, 2014


The director of FINCEN, Jennifer Shasky Calvery, spoke about virtual currencies, specifically naming BITCOIN, in her remarks on March 18, 2014 to a conference on anti money laundering.  I excerpt pertinent remarks related to virtual currency.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) published earlier this year two administrative rulings, providing additional information on whether a person’s conduct related to convertible virtual currency brings them within the Bank Secrecy Act’s (BSA) definition of a money transmitter. The first ruling stated that, to the extent a user creates or “mines” a convertible virtual currency solely for a user’s own purposes, the user is not a money transmitter under the BSA. The second ruling stated that a company purchasing and selling convertible virtual currency as an investment exclusively for the company’s benefit is not a money transmitter.

The rulings further interpret FinCEN’s March 18, 2013 Guidance Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Persons Administering, Exchanging, or Using Virtual Currencies to address these business models. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) issued the March 18, 2013 interpretive guidance to clarify the applicability of the regulations implementing the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) to persons creating, obtaining, distributing, exchanging, accepting, or transmitting virtual currencies.

Definition of Currency and Virtual Currency

FinCEN’s regulations define currency (also referred to as “real” currency) as “the coin and paper money of the United States or of any other country that [i] is designated as legal tender and that [ii] circulates and [iii] is customarily used and accepted as a medium of exchange in the country of issuance.” In contrast to real currency, “virtual” currency is a medium of exchange that operates like a currency in some environments, but does not have all the attributes of real currency. In particular, virtual currency does not have legal tender status in any jurisdiction. This guidance addresses “convertible” virtual currency. This type of virtual currency either has an equivalent value in real currency, or acts as a substitute for real currency.

Excerpts of Remarks

“In the case of Bitcoin, it has been publicly reported that its users processed transactions worth approximately $8 billion over the twelve-month period preceding October 2013; however, this measure may be artificially high due to the extensive use of automated layering in many Bitcoin transactions.”

“By way of comparison, according to information reported publicly, in 2012 Western Union made remittances totaling approximately $81 billion; PayPal processed approximately $145 billion in online payments; the Automated Clearing House Network processed $36.9 trillion in transactions; and Bank of America processed $244.4 trillion in wire transfers.”

“This relative volume of transactions becomes important when you consider that, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the best estimate for the amount of all global criminal proceeds available for laundering through the financial system in 2009 was $1.6 trillion.”

“Exactly one year ago today, FinCEN issued interpretive guidance to bring clarity and regulatory certainty for businesses and individuals engaged in money transmitting services and offering virtual currencies.”

“In the simplest of terms, FinCEN’s guidance explains that administrators or exchangers of virtual currencies must register with FinCEN, and institute certain recordkeeping, reporting, and AML program control measures, unless an exception to these requirements applies. The guidance also explains that those who use virtual currencies exclusively for common personal transactions – like buying goods or services online – are users, and not subject to regulatory requirements under the BSA.”

“In all cases, FinCEN employs an activity-based test to determine when someone dealing with virtual currency qualifies as a money transmitter. The guidance clarifies definitions and expectations to ensure that businesses engaged in such activities are aware of their regulatory responsibilities, including registering appropriately.”

“Furthermore, FinCEN closely coordinates with its state regulatory counterparts to encourage appropriate application of FinCEN guidance as part of the states’ separate AML compliance oversight of financial institutions.”

“Earlier this year, FinCEN expanded upon this guidance, issuing two administrative rulings. The rulings provide additional information on our regulatory coverage of certain activities related to convertible virtual currency. In both rulings, the convertible virtual currency at issue was the crypto-currency, Bitcoin, and we were clarifying how users who obtain virtual currency only for their own use or investment are not money transmitters.”

“I am also pleased to report that since FinCEN issued its guidance, dozens of virtual currency exchangers have registered with FinCEN, and some virtual currency exchangers are beginning to comply with reporting requirements and are filing SARs. They appear to be appreciative of the need to develop controls to make themselves resilient to abuse by bad actors.”

And they are also coming to terms with the fact that as administrators and exchangers they must obtain, verify, and store key information about the senders and recipients of virtual currency and, under certain circumstances, pass that information on to other administrators or exchangers involved in the transaction.

“This last issue is key. Simply put, these exchangers and administrators, like other money transmitters, are subject to the so-called Travel Rule. Thus, they have to incorporate into their business models the same transparency with respect to funds transfers as other money transmitters.”

“While we are encouraged by these industry efforts to increase transparency in this space, I do, however, remain concerned that there appear to be many domestic virtual currency exchangers that are not fulfilling their recordkeeping and reporting requirements.  Those who do not comply with these rules should understand that their actions will have  consequences. Not only are they subject to civil monetary penalties, but the knowing failure to register a money transmitting business with FinCEN – or with state authorities where there is a state licensing requirement – is a federal criminal offense.”

book cover

LexisNexis’ Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance: A Global Guide – This eBook is designed to provide the compliance officer accurate analyses of the AML/CTF Financial and Legal Intelligence, law and practice in the nations of the world with the most current references and resources. The eBook is organized around five main themes: 1. Money Laundering Risk and Compliance; 2. The Law of Anti-Money Laundering and Compliance; 3. Criminal and Civil Forfeiture; 4. Compliance and 5. International Cooperation.

Each chapter is made up of five parts. Part I, “Introduction,” begins with the analysis of money laundering risks and compliance with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and then concludes with the country’s rating based on the International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) of the U.S. State Department.  Part II, “Anti-Money Laundering and Combating Terrorist Financing (AML/CTF)” and Part III, “Criminal and Civil Forfeiture,” evaluate the judicial and legislative structures of the country. Given the increasing global dimension of AML/CTF activities, these sections give special attention to how a country has created statutes, decisions, policies and the judicial enforcement procedures needed to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Part IV, “Compliance,” examines the most critical processes for the prevention and detection of money laundering and terrorist financing. This section reflects on the practical elements that should be in place so that financial institutions can comply with AML/CTF requirements; these are categorized into the development and implementation of internal controls, policies and procedures. Part V, “International Cooperation,” reviews the compilation of international laws and treaties between countries working together to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.  As these unlawful activities can occur in any given country, it is important to identify the international participants who are cooperating to develop methods to obstruct these criminal activities. 

Posted in Financial Crimes, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

LexisNexis releases next edition of Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery Global Guide

Posted by William Byrnes on March 6, 2014


book cover

Graduating Thomas Jefferson juris doctor candidate Emmanuel Rayes co-authored with Dr. David Utzke the chapter “Virtual-Currency Regulatory Developments” for LexisNexis new release of Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance — A Global Guide (LexisNexis).  Ashley Paulson, currently working in a DEA internship position and also about to graduate from Thomas Jefferson, leveraged her professional network and work expertise to create three new compliance oriented chapters for banks, including one on politically exposed persons (‘PEPs’).

Emmanuel Rayes reported “Associate Dean William Byrnes provided many great resources in helping me prepare Emmanuel Rayesthis publication. He has valuable connections in the legal and business fields not only in the United States but all over the World. Dean Byrnes introduced me to Dr. Utzke who is the lead IRS agent for virtual currencies and offshore compliance. Dr. Utzke’s guidance and insight was pivotal in completing this publication.”

professionalpicture_Medium“At the DEA one of my supervisors was impressed that I was working with Associate Dean William Byrnes,” related Ashley Paulson. “With the experience gained from my government work and from consulting other expert attorneys in this area, I was able to analyze three areas of chief concern for financial institutions: suspicious activity reporting (‘SAR’), currency transaction reporting (‘CTR’) and PEPS.  My interest in PEP compliance grew after the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists exposed thousands of instance of major banks thwarting PEP guidelines, leading to corresponding allegations of corruption by those PEPs and their families.” 

“Virtual currencies are changing the perception of what money is and what money can do,” Emmanuel Rayes described.  “The amount of excitement and interest surrounding this topic is comparable to the introduction of the Internet or the Smartphone.”

 “After passing the Bar, I plan to stay involved with this publishing as a Thomas Jefferson alumni,” declared Ashley Paulson.  “I encourage students to attend William Byrnes’ lectures and learn about these unique opportunities for his students to engage with experts to assist them in authoring articles on current topics.”  

Mr. Rayes added, “I think that being a featured author in a major LexisNexis publication that so many lawyers and banks rely upon is a career game changer.  It’s already opening doors.”

“I agree”, said Ms. Paulson, “Having been an author for chapters that banks are referencing, and my experience with the DEA, has distinguished me from other graduates for career opportunities.”

“I match my Thomas Jefferson students with co-authorship opportunities in my graduate publication seminar that they may connect with professionals and begin to build a network,” explained William Byrnes.  “I am hosting a Tax Society lunch on March 25th featuring renown European Court of Justice expert and author Dr. Dennis Weber and will discuss the next set of networking opportunities with those attending.”

Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance — A Global Guide

William H. Byrnes, IV,

Posted in book | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Application of Anti Money Laundering Regulations to Virtual Currencies like BITCOIN

Posted by William Byrnes on February 1, 2014


The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) on Thursday published two administrative rulings, providing additional information on whether a person’s conduct related to convertible virtual currency brings them within the Bank Secrecy Act’s (BSA) definition of a money transmitter. The first ruling states that, to the extent a user creates or “mines” a convertible virtual currency solely for a user’s own purposes, the user is not a money transmitter under the BSA. The second states that a company purchasing and selling convertible virtual currency as an investment exclusively for the company’s benefit is not a money transmitter.

The rulings further interpret FinCEN’s March 18, 2013 Guidance Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Persons Administering, Exchanging, or Using Virtual Currencies to address these business models. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) issued the March 18, 2013 interpretive guidance to clarify the applicability of the regulations implementing the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) to persons creating, obtaining, distributing, exchanging, accepting, or transmitting virtual currencies.

Currency vs. Virtual Currency

FinCEN’s regulations define currency (also referred to as “real” currency) as “the coin and paper money of the United States or of any other country that [i] is designated as legal tender and that [ii] circulates and [iii] is customarily used and accepted as a medium of exchange in the country of issuance.” In contrast to real currency, “virtual” currency is a medium of exchange that operates like a currency in some environments, but does not have all the attributes of real currency. In particular, virtual currency does not have legal tender status in any jurisdiction. This guidance addresses “convertible” virtual currency. This type of virtual currency either has an equivalent value in real currency, or acts as a substitute for real currency.

FIN-2014-R001: Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations (http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/pdf/FIN-2014-R001.pdf)

FIN-2014-R002: Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Software Development and Certain Investment Activity (http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/pdf/FIN-2014-R002.pdf)

book cover

LexisNexis’ Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery and Compliance: A Global Guide – This eBook is designed to provide the reader with accurate analyses of the AML/CTF Financial and Legal Intelligence, law and practice in the nations of the world with the most current references and resources. The eBook is organized around five main themes: 1. Money Laundering Risk and Compliance; 2. The Law of Anti-Money Laundering and Compliance; 3. Criminal and Civil Forfeiture; 4. Compliance and 5. International Cooperation.

Each chapter is made up of five parts. Part I, “Introduction,” begins with the analysis of money laundering risks and compliance with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and then concludes with the country’s rating based on the International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) of the U.S. State Department.  Part II, “Anti-Money Laundering and Combating Terrorist Financing (AML/CTF)” and Part III, “Criminal and Civil Forfeiture,” evaluate the judicial and legislative structures of the country. Given the increasing global dimension of AML/CTF activities, these sections give special attention to how a country has created statutes, decisions, policies and the judicial enforcement procedures needed to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Part IV, “Compliance,” examines the most critical processes for the prevention and detection of money laundering and terrorist financing. This section reflects on the practical elements that should be in place so that financial institutions can comply with AML/CTF requirements; these are categorized into the development and implementation of internal controls, policies and procedures. Part V, “International Cooperation,” reviews the compilation of international laws and treaties between countries working together to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.

As these unlawful activities can occur in any given country, it is important to identify the international participants who are cooperating to develop methods to obstruct these criminal activities. – See more at: http://www.lexisnexis.com/store/catalog/booktemplate/productdetail.jsp;jsessionid=0AE5A4DFFE9101B2B8254B9E9191D6C7.psc1706_lnstore_001?pageName=relatedProducts&catId=&prodId=prod-us-ebook-01701-epub#sthash.prR4HmVX.dpuf

Posted in Compliance, Financial Crimes, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery … New LexisNexis Matthew Bender Title

Posted by William Byrnes on June 27, 2012


LexisNexis Matthew Bender has launched a online-only international title: Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance – A Global Guide.

Written by two California law professors (Professors William Byrnes & Robert Munro, Thomas Jefferson School of Law),

English: Logo of Group of working out of finan...

English: Logo of Group of working out of financial measures of struggle against money-laundering (FATF) Русский: Логотип Группы разработки финансовых мер борьбы с отмыванием денег (ФАТФ) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Each nation has its own chapter with sections covering:

  • Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing;
  • Criminal and civil forfeiture;
  • Compliance & risk; and
  • International cooperation.

The remaining nations of the world will be covered in quarterly updates scheduled to go live in 2012 and 2013.

Because the new product spans so many practice areas, it appears on seven area-of-law pages (Accounting, Banking, Criminal, Foreign Law, International Law, International Trade, and Taxation), plus Lexis Tax Center. Just look under “Search Analysis, Law Reviews & Journals”.

This title is also available as an ebook.

Link to the Book’s Introduction: 1 Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Compliance INTRODUCTION

Posted in Compliance | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance: A Global Guide

Posted by William Byrnes on December 2, 2011


Register now to access Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance: A Global Guide, and receive a complimentary chapter in PDF! Order before December 15, 2011 and save 20%!*

View more information here

Written by Professors William Byrnes & Robert Munro of Thomas Jefferson School of Law, the new publication contains in-depth coverage of the laws and government actions in 47 nations to combat money laundering, terrorist funding and similar practices. Each nation has its own chapter with sections covering:

  • Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing;
  • Criminal and civil forfeiture;
  • Compliance & risk; and
  • International cooperation.

The remaining nations of the world will be covered in quarterly updates scheduled to go live in 2012 and 2013.

Because the new product spans so many practice areas, it appears on seven area-of-law pages (Accounting, Banking, Criminal, Foreign Law, International Law, International Trade, and Taxation), plus Lexis Tax Center.  Just look under “Search Analysis, Law Reviews & Journals”.

This title is also available as an ebook and mobile-book.

Posted in Financial Crimes, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

LexisNexis® Tax Law Community Podcast: The Authors of “Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance–A Global Guide”

Posted by William Byrnes on November 21, 2011


click here for PodCast LexisNexis® Tax Law Community Podcast: The Authors of “Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance–A Global Guide”.

Posted in Compliance, Courses, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Posted by William Byrnes on November 10, 2011


Receive free chapter from new LexisNexis Anti-Money Laundering Electronic Book

http://www.lexisnexis.com/connectthedots 

Register now to access Money Laundering, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery, and Compliance: A Global Guide complimentary chapter in PDF!

 Order before November 30, 2011 and save 20%!*


				

Posted in Compliance, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Domestic and International Reporting Compliance

Posted by William Byrnes on November 26, 2010


Seal of the United States Financial Crimes Enf...

Image via Wikipedia

This week’s blogticles discussed compliance reporting generally regarding foreign transactions and activities.  Today, we will continue to explore some of the common reporting requirements that are filed based on domestic and international activity.

Suspicious Activity Reports

Congress has enacted legislation to the affect that the Secretary of the Treasury requires financial institutions to report any suspicious transaction relevant to “a possible violation of law or regulation.” [1] The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) maintains theses “reports in a central database and makes the information available electronically to state and federal law enforcement and regulatory agencies to assist in combating financial crime.” [2]

Currency Transaction Reports

Under Federal Statute the Department of the Treasury requires “banks, securities broker-dealers, money services businesses, casinos, and other financial institutions”, to file a “report for each transaction involving the payment, receipt, or transfer of U.S. coins or currency (or other monetary instruments as Treasury may prescribe)” in excess of $10,000. [3]

Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments

Read the entire article at AdvisorFYI.

Posted in Compliance, Reporting | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Immigration, Tax Planning, & AML Compliance for High Net Wealth Families & Executives

Posted by William Byrnes on June 6, 2010


The course instructors will “bridge the gap” between the often complex and quite intricate realm of international tax, estate planning, and immigration law. There is an obvious “nexus” between working professional immigrants, “high net worth immigrants,” and their financial dealings as to taxation and estate planning.  The course will first provide a survey of the foundational principles of U.S. international tax and estate planning.  The course will then provide a survey of relevant immigration visa categories, their status requirements, and “triggers” that have international tax and/or estate planning consequences.  Then the course will apply the legal principles with US case scenarios in order to establish a greater understanding between the “nexus” of international tax and immigration laws.

Next the instructors will lecture on the international movement of high net wealth executives and families: tax and immigration issues and strategies.  Finally the instructors will analyze the often overlooked overlap amongst financial reporting requirements, with a particular emphasis on the Patriot Act and related requirements.

Instructors: Prof. Fred Ongcapin is an Adjudications Officer (Policy) for the Policy and Regulation Management Division, Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Headquarters Office, Washington D.C. In his current position he has authored and led to the publishing of numerous national policy guidance memos and formal regulations as to immigration law for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He also provides regular statutory and policy guidance concerning immigration policy for Citizenship and Immigration Services field offices throughout the country due to his subject matter expertise in immigration law. On several occasions, Fred has represented Citizenship and Immigration Services before senior policy level liaison meetings with the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Justice, and certain Congressional Committees on Immigration.

Prof. Marshall Langer, the globally renown international tax author, lecturer and practitioner. Famed for Langer’s Practical International Tax Planning and for Rhoades & Langer U.S. International Tax and Treaties. Prof. Langer retired Of Counsel at the firm of Shutts & Bowen, London, England, and Miami, Florida.

Prof. William Byrnes has been an author and editor of 10 books and treatises and 17 chapters for Lexis-Nexis, Wolters Kluwer, Thomson-Reuters, Oxford University Press, Edward Elgar, and Wilmington. He is currently working on several Concept Maps for Lexis-Nexis Tax Law Center. This year he takes over as the author of National Underwriters’ Advanced Underwriting Service – the dominant information service in the insurance/financial planning industry with tens of thousands of subscribers.

In professional practice William Byrnes was a senior manager, then associate director of international tax for Coopers and Lybrand which subsequently amalgamated into PricewaterhouseCoopers, practicing in Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Caribbean. He has been commissioned and consulted by a number of governments on their tax and fiscal policy from policy formation to regime impact.

Delivery: 14 hours of live lecture and case studies via WIMBA web-conferencing – requires no download and works on PC/Mac.

Dates:  June 8, 15, 22 (Tues) 9pm-10pm (Eastern); June 29 (Tues) 9pm – midnight (Eastern); July 22 & 29 (Thurs) 10am-11am (Eastern); Aug. 5, 12, 19, 26 (Thurs) 9pm – 10pm (Eastern); Sept. 2 (Thurs) 9pm – 11pm (Eastern)

Recordings: all lectures are made available within 1 hour after class – on-demand video streaming and MP4 download until September 5th.

Contact: Prof. William Byrnes, Associate Dean – wbyrnes@tjsl.edu +1 (619) 297-9700 x 6955 for a registration form. Payments are only made by credit card to Thomas Jefferson School of Law. The fee is $49 per lecture hour ($686 for 14 hours) and includes electronic course materials.

Posted in Courses, Teaching Opportunities, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Chartered Anti Money Laundering Consultant™ (CAMC)

Posted by William Byrnes on December 8, 2009


Lecture Period: January 19th – April 9th 2010

Lectures: 42 lecture hours over 12 weeks using webcams / headsets (www.wimba.com) with sharing of applications – also recorded for later on-demand viewing.

Online Databases & Library: full access included

Course book: online

Professional Designation: by the American Academy® (www.aafm.us)

Contact: Assoc. Dean William Byrnes wbyrnes@tjsl.edu (619) 374-6955

Posted in Courses, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Certified Risk Manager™ (CRM)

Posted by William Byrnes on December 7, 2009


Course date: January 18th – April 9th 2010

Lectures: 42 lecture hours using webcams / headsets (see www.wimba.com) with sharing of applications – also recorded for later on-demand viewing

Online Databases & Library: full access included

Course book: online

Professional Designation: by the American Academy® (www.aafm.us)

Contact: Assoc. Dean William Byrnes  wbyrnes@tjsl.edu  (619) 374-6955

Posted in Courses, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Are Financial Service Firms Serving High Net Wealth Suffering As a Result of Compliance Costs?

Posted by William Byrnes on August 19, 2009


Over the past blogticles, we have been examining a number of financial crimes issues including several for anti money laundering.  Now we turn to compliance costs and the dis-connect?  Feel free to comment or email me with any burning questions, Professor William Byrnes (www.llmprogram.org), as well as join one of our weekly webcasts.

Are Financial Service Firms Serving High Net Wealth Suffering As a Result of Compliance Costs?

In my 900-page economic report on the international financial services industry, I examined and calculated the economic size and impact of the sector on local jurisdictions.[1]  But for periods of global financial crisis, the sector had experienced double-digit annual growth and contributed robustly to the local economy and society.  Since 1998, the international financial services sector client base has expanded nearly 10% on average. 

In the past decade, the number of global high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) served by practitioners, such as my able graduates, has doubled to more than 10 million by 2008 (though the global financial crisis has caused a decline to less than 9 million) —and their assets have more than doubled from $17 trillion to $40 trillion though currently just under $33 trillion due to the last twelve month’s financial crisis.[2] 

Is The Future For Clients Dim?

Dim? On the contrary!  In just four years, the pool of HNWI clients’ assets is projected to grow to nearly $50 trillion.  Though the global re-calibrating of asset values may impact the nominal wealth value for HNWIs in the short term, historically, based upon both the recessions coined after the Asian Financial Crisis and the Tech-Bust, the wealth value will likely return to projected levels with a two-year lag. 

The average HNWI, excluding the value of primary residences and collectables, is worth approximately $4 million!  HNWI’s continue to leverage offshore skill sets, growing their assets from $5.8 trillion from 1998 to $11 trillion today.[3]  That $11 trillion under management represents, at combined fees of just 1%, at least $100 billion to private bank firms offshore, and six times that taking all HNWI assets into account.

Some Financial Centers Spend More on Compliance than Others

39% of Florida banks surveyed reported that private banking accounted for more than 50% of their operating revenues.  Florida’s international private banking and wealth management customers predominantly reside, as one would expect, in Latin America and the Caribbean, with 1/3 residing in Europe.  South American residents account for 44% of private banking and wealth management customers of Florida’s international banks.  Approximately 19% of international private wealth management clients reside in Mexico or Central America, while 4% reside in the Caribbean.

Even though the market has been growing in terms of the available pool of HNW clients, the international banking industry in Florida has been characterized by consolidation and contraction since 2000.  The number of foreign bank agencies operating in Florida fell from 38 in 2000 to 31 in 2005.[4]  There were 10 Edge Act banks operating in Florida in 2000, but only 7 in 2005.  The number of international banking employees (in foreign agencies, Edge Acts and the international divisions of domestic banks chartered in Florida) declined from 4,660 in 2000 to 3,027 in 2005.

Based on a survey of banks significantly engaged in international banking in South Florida, the economics firm based on direct surveys estimated Miami’s international bankers staffing cost for 271 full-time employees of anti-terrorism/anti-money laundering compliance at nearly $25 million in 2005. [5]  The average survey respondents indicated that it devoted 2.9 FTE employment positions to BSA/AML compliance in 2002 versus 6.8 FTE positions in 2005. The number of full-time employees devoted to compliance represented 9% of the workforce in 2005.  Staff resources devoted to compliance increased by 160% between 2002 and 2005.

So Where is the Dis-Connect?

So if enough money is being spent by some banks, by example in Miami, and this expenditure is even potentially impacting earnings in some regions such as Miami, (as an industry – small institutions are being clobbered compared to their larger brethren), then why are some banks and other financial service providers employees failing in their implementation of AML programs in light of the expenditure?   Where is the dis-connect between expenditure and results?  Might the expenditure be more about white-washing than about achieving an educated work force?  Might throwing money at the problem not be the answer?  Or is not enough money flowing to training?

As the Miami marketplace apparently illustrates, in general the compliance and training budgets have reached the deal-breaker point at some banks and in some regions.  Thus, rather than it being a quantitative issue of bigger budgets, it is more likely a qualitatively issue, that is, spending either on poorly designed products or on good products but with poor instruction, follow-up, and support.  It may be that purchasing decisions are based not on price, but rather are based on how to spend as little labor time as possible to meet a minimum level of information and training sufficient for an employee to appear to be able to implement AML policy.  That is, institutions may be spending more to obtain less quality products because the product requires less labor activity time.

By example, some institutions send the high level AML staff for a one or two day workshop at between one and three thousand dollars and now call that staff member an expert.  A time-saving approach certainly.  But is this a reasonable approach in light of the likely outcomes of such minimal education consisting of little to no follow up, guidance, and academic support?  Can a board member, much less a regulator, feel confident that such a staff member is able to exercise the necessary skills gained from the one or two day session to protect the financial institution and public from an money laundering/financial crime incident?

By another example, some financial service provider compliance officers and their advisors will establish a library budget, purchasing a variety of publications.  Yet the staff is not trained in knowledge management for the library, that is how to interact with and study such information. Thus, the library collects dust.

White-Washing

Is a two day course sufficient to qualify someone as a certified expert?  A one week course even?  How long will the regulators allow such white washing to continue, or is it merely an issue of fines when holes are found in the dikes?


[1] Report on the Economic, Socio-Economic, and Regulatory Impact of the Tax Savings Directive and EU Code of Conduct for Business Taxation upon Selected Offshore Financial Centers as well as a Competitiveness Report for Selected Offshore Financial Centers (Foreign Commonwealth Office 2004).

[2] Cap Gemini Merrill Lynch World Wealth Report 2003 through 2008.

[3] Tax Haven Abuses: The Enablers, The Tools and Secrecy” (Sen. Rep., Perm. Sub-Comm. On Investigations, August 1, 2006) and World Wealth Report 2008.

[4] In 2005, however, 7 of the 31 international banks had no deposits booked in Florida, while in 2000 only 2 of the 38 had zero deposits.

[5] It is important to note that these cost estimates only include manpower or staffing costs, and do not include costs such as transaction monitoring software, possible IT investments and services, legal counsel and similar support.  The Washington Economics Group, The Economic Impacts of International Banking in Florida and Industry Survey: 2005.

Posted in Compliance, Money Laundering, Wealth Management | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Is AML Training Effective or Whitewashing? Part II

Posted by William Byrnes on August 15, 2009


In my previous blogticle I presented a few of the very many examples of regulatory fines for financial institutions failing to meet minimum money laundering training for staff, in many cases leading to failures of their money laundering risk management system.  Hereunder I turn to expenditures on money laundering training.

Consider that the above regulatory enforcement actions, and those referred to by the GAO report, were issued at least three years after the US financial institutions were put on initial notice of the hawkish nature of enforcement of AML programs.  Certainly, neither management nor staff wanted to, by example, be responsible for over 2,000 filing errors for only 1,639 SARs.  Riggs divestiture of its international banking operations certainly provided a resounding warning for boards to take their AML compliance responsibilities seriously.  Enforcement actions generally lead to management and staff level firing holding persons accountable for their errors.

In a global review of money laundering legislation throughout financial centers, none of the legislation provides specific benchmarks or at least an assessable minimum standard for a level of training of the staff or the MLRO.  Further, the regulator guidance, where available, is scant to the issue of quality assurance of training.  The US Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s (“FFIEC”) Bank Secrecy Act/Anti Money Laundering Manual (“Manual”) states that a bank must –

        “[T]rain employees to be aware of their responsibilities under the BSA regulations and internal policy guidelines”

 whereas the UK FSA Handbook states that a firm’s should ensure that its –

         “systems and controls include (1) appropriate training for its employees in relation to money laundering …”.[1] 

The FFIEC Manual’s most specific example of what should be contained within a training program is “…training for tellers should focus on examples involving large currency transactions or other suspicious activities; training for the loan department should provide examples involving money laundering through lending arrangements.”

Aren’t Expenditures on Training Going up, uP, UP?

Thus, to avoid enforcement actions and thus being fired, in some markets the training budgets and the compliance cost per-dollar-of-deposit have more than doubled.  By example, from 2002 – 2005, banks offering international financial services in Miami reported a 160% increase both in the total costs of staff resources devoted to AML compliance and in the compliance costs of staff resources per dollar of deposit.[2] 

Senior banking management perceives rising and unpredictable compliance costs that undermine global competitiveness as the most significant threats to the future growth of banking.[3]  The cost of AML compliance increased around 58% globally and 71% in North America between 2004 and 2007.[4]

A 2005 survey of Florida banks engaged in international banking estimated the staffing cost of AML compliance at nearly $25 million. The study concluded that compliance costs are not uniform across institutions, even after making adjustment for size.[5] Banks estimate that training costs and transaction monitoring will require the largest investment of all AML activities. All North American banks provide AML training for nearly all of their employees. See KPMG’s Figure in its AML Survey.

Larger institutions (measured in terms of deposits) typically devote more resources and spend more on compliance than smaller ones, of course, but the compliance burden does not rise proportionately with size.  That is, survey data indicates that economies of scale in compliance are present, and that compliance costs per dollar of deposits is greater for smaller institutions than for larger ones.[6] Even after the dramatic increases in compliance costs and regulatory complexity since 2001, the regulatory environment is likely to become increasingly challenging in coming years.

In a 2006 Economist Intelligence Unit survey, international senior bank executives were asked about the costs of compliance with government regulation. When asked what changes they expected in the regulatory environment over the coming three to five year, over 91% stated that they expected regulations affecting their institution to grow in complexity and breadth, 88% stated that compliance with industry regulations will become more onerous, and 81% reported that they expect penalties for non-compliance to increase in severity.[7]


[1] http://www.ffiec.gov/pdf/bsa_aml_examination_manual2007.pdf and http://fsahandbook.info/FSA/html/handbook/SYSC/6/3#D78.

[2] The Washington Economics Group, The Economic Impacts of International Banking in Florida and Industry Survey: 2005.

[3] The Washington Economics Group, The Economic Impacts of International Banking in Florida and Industry Survey: 2005.

[4] KPMG’s Global Anti-Money Laundering Survey 2007.

[5] The Washington Economics Group, The Economic Impacts of International Banking in Florida and Industry Survey: 2005.

[6] The Washington Economics Group, The Economic Impacts of International Banking in Florida and Industry Survey: 2005.

[7] Economist Intelligence Unit, Bank Compliance: Controlling Risk and Improving Effectiveness (2006).

Posted in Compliance, Financial Crimes, Money Laundering | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: