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

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is a global standard-setting body for the prudential regulation of banks. It does not have any formal authority to enforce its standards, but relies on its members’ commitment and peer pressure to implement them. The BCBS’s principles on customer due diligence (CDD) are part of its guidelineson anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), which aim to enhance the soundness and integrity of banking systems. The BCBS’s principles on CDD provide guidance to banks and bank supervisors on the essential elements of a CDD programme, such as customer acceptance, identification, verification, risk assessment, monitoring, and record-keeping. The BCBS’s principles on CDD are not legally binding, but are intended to be a benchmark for national practices and for banks to design their own policies and procedures. The BCBS’s principles on CDD are consistent with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global standard-setter for AML/CFT.

Customer due diligence for banks 1, BCBS, October 2001.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision report on customer due diligence 2, Journal of Banking Regulation, 2002.

According to the Wolfsberg Financial Crime Principles for Correspondent Banking1, a shell bank is defined as a bank that has no physical presence in the jurisdiction in which it is incorporated and licensed, and which is unaffiliated with a regulated financial group that is subject to effective consolidated supervision. Physical presence means meaningful mind and management located within a country. The existence simply of a local agent or low level staff does not constitute physical presence. Therefore, a shell bank meets the criteria A, B, and D, as it does not conduct business at a fixed address, does not employ one or more individuals or maintain operating records at that address, and is not subject to inspection by the banking authority that licensed it. Criterion C is not specific to shell banks, as any bank, whether shell or not, may or may not be subject to AML laws that require it to implement an AML program, depending on the jurisdiction.

Wolfsberg Financial Crime Principles for Correspondent Banking1, Section: Definitions, pp. 3-4.

The best course of action for the FI in this scenario is to consider retaining qualified, experienced legal counsel. This is because the investigation request from the local law enforcement agency may involve complex legal issues, such as confidentiality, privacy, data protection, and cooperation obligations. The FI may need to balance the interests of the customer, the law enforcement agency, and the FI itself, and ensure that it complies with the applicable laws and regulations in responding to the request. The legal counsel can advise the FI on the scope, validity, and implications of the request, and help the FI to prepare and submit the required information in a timely and appropriate manner. The legal counsel can also protect the FI from any potential liability or litigation arising from the investigation.

1: Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts and/or Conduct Transactions1

2: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations2

3: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination3

In the context ofgambling and gaming sectors, a well-known money laundering typology is the use of platforms tointroduce illicit funds and withdraw them as "winnings". When a customerdeposits large cash amounts and quickly withdraws themwithout engaging in actual gambling, it indicates"placement and layering"techniques.

This behavior is indicative of attempts todisguise the origin of illicit funds, converting them into legitimate-looking financial flows. It is considered a classic red flag in AML programs related to casinos and online gaming.

The USA PATRIOT Act, enacted in 2001, is a comprehensive legislation that aims to enhance the US government’s ability to combat terrorism, money laundering, and other criminal activities. One of the aspects of the Act that has extraterritorial reach is the requirement for US financial institutions (FIs) to apply certain due diligence and reporting obligations to their correspondent accounts and private banking accounts for foreign FIs and non-US persons, respectively12. These obligations are intended to prevent foreign FIs and individuals from using the US financial system to facilitate money laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities. The Act also authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to impose special measures, such as recordkeeping, reporting, or prohibitions, on certain foreign jurisdictions, FIs, or transactions that are found to be of primary money laundering concern34. These special measures can have significant impact on the access and operations of foreign FIs and persons in the US financial market.

1: USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Section 3121

2: 31 CFR 1010.610 - Due diligence programs for correspondent accounts for foreign financial institutions2

3: USA PATRIOT Act, Title III, Subtitle A, Section 3113

4: 31 CFR 1010.651 - Imposition of special measure against foreign jurisdictions, foreign financial institutions, classes of international transactions, or types of accounts of primary money laundering concern4