CAMS Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) Questions and Answers

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, individuals who violate anti-money laundering laws can face severe consequences, such as imprisonment, fines, asset forfeiture, and sanctions. These penalties can apply not only to the perpetrators of money laundering, but also to the employees, managers, directors, and officers of financial institutions or other entities that fail to comply with their anti-money laundering obligations. Therefore, violations of anti-money laundering laws can pose a significant risk to individuals, both personally and professionally.

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, page 9

ACAMS website, section on CAMS certification

Money Laundering website, article on “The Consequences of Non-Compliance with Anti-Money Laundering Laws”

This information can be found in the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (CAMS) study guide, 6th edition, under the section on Unusual Customer Identification Scenarios. The guide explains that two indicators that should be included in awareness training for unusual customer identification scenarios are:

A. The customer opens the account in the name of a family member who begins making large deposits.

This is an indicator of potential structuring, where a customer may be attempting to avoid triggering reporting thresholds by depositing funds in smaller amounts over time. It is important for staff to be aware of this scenario and to monitor accounts for potential suspicious activity.

B. The customer's name and home address cannot be verified.

This is an indicator of potential identity theft or other fraudulent activity. If a customer's identifying information cannot be verified, it is important for staff to conduct additional due diligence to ensure that the customer is legitimate and that the account is not being used for illicit purposes.

 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.

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

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.

 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.

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 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision identified four risks to banking institutions as a result of an inadequate KYC program: legal, reputational, operational, and concentration. Legal risks include the potential for fines or sanctions for non-compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Reputational risks include the loss of customer confidence due to the institution's involvement in illicit activities. Operational risks include the potential for fraudulent or suspicious activity to go undetected. Finally, concentration risks involve the potential for a single customer or group of related customers to dominate the institution's operations.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a regulation issued by the European Union (EU) that sets out requirements for the processing and protection of personal data. It applies to any company that processes personal data of individuals in the EU, and requires organizations to take appropriate measures to protect the personal data of individuals, such as implementing appropriate security measures, limiting the amount of data collected and stored, and providing clear explanations of how the data will be used. In the context of financial crime investigations, the GDPR requires organizations to ensure the security and confidentiality of personal data that they collect and process, and to take measures to ensure that the data is used only for the purpose of the investigation and not for any other purpose.

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 beexploited 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 ofthe 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.

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

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.

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

The Wolfsberg Principles for Private Banking are a set of guidelines for private banking relationships that aim to prevent and detect money laundering and terrorist financing risks. The Principles state that the bank should conduct additional due diligence on clients and beneficial owners in certain circumstances that may indicate a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Among the options given, A, B, and C are the correct choices that reflect the circumstances listed in the Principles.

Foreign jurisdictions are countries or territories other than the one where the bank operates or where the client or beneficial owner resides. The Principles state that the bank should conduct additional due diligence on clients and beneficial owners who are connected to foreign jurisdictions, especially those that have weak or inadequate anti-money laundering standards, or that are subject to sanctions, embargoes, or similar measures.

High Risk Countries are countries or territories that are identified by credible sources, such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), as having inadequate anti-money laundering standards, or as being a source, transit, or destination of illicit funds. The Principles state that the bank should conduct additional due diligence on clients and beneficial owners who are connected to high risk countries, and apply enhanced measures to mitigate the risks.

High Risk activities are activities that involve clients and beneficial owners whose source of wealth or funds originates from sectors or industries that are known to be vulnerable to money laundering, such as cash-intensive businesses, gambling, arms trade, precious metals and stones, or art and antiquities. The Principles state that the bank should conduct additional due diligence on clients and beneficial owners who are engaged in high risk activities, and verify the legitimacy and origin of their wealth and funds.

= The main reference for this question is the document titled “Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking (2012)” published by the Wolfsberg Group. You can access it by clicking here. You can also find more information about the Wolfsberg Principles and their application on the Wolfsberg Group website and the Lexology website.

The FATF is an inter-governmental body that sets standards and promotes effective implementation of legal, regulatory, and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other related threats to the integrity of the internationalfinancial system. The FATF conducts mutual evaluations of its members and other jurisdictions to assess their compliance with the FATF Recommendations and the effectiveness of their AML/CFT regimes1.

The FATF defines effectiveness as "the extent to which a country’s AML/CFT regime is achieving the defined outcomes of an effective regime that allows them to mitigate their risks and threats of ML/TF"2. The FATF assesses effectiveness based on 11 immediate outcomes, which are grouped into three thematic goals: financial system integrity, legal system and operational issues, and international cooperation2.

One of the immediate outcomes under the financial system integrity goal is that “FIs adequately apply preventive measures commensurate with their risks, and report suspicious transactions” (IO.4)2. This outcome measures how well FIs implement the FATF Recommendations on customer due diligence, record-keeping, internal controls, risk assessment, and suspicious transaction reporting. These preventive measures are essential for FIs to identify and mitigate the risks of being misused for money laundering or terrorist financing, and to provide useful information to the authorities for investigation and prosecution2.

Therefore, the correct answer is D. FIs adequately apply preventive measures, as this is one of the FATF characteristics used to assess a country’s effectiveness of its AML regime.

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

An effective system to combat money laundering and terrorist financing

The Egmont Group is an international body of Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) from around the world. Its primary purpose is to serve as a forum for FIUs to exchange information, and it also sets international standards for AML/CFT measures. Additionally, the Egmont Group does not serve as a prudential regulator for global financial institutions or as an authoritative body in the field of anti-corruption.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) administers and enforces economic sanctions programs [1][2], which are designed to protect US national security, foreign policy, and economic interests. Transactions that would otherwise be prohibited can be allowed through an OFAC licensing process, in which the OFAC evaluates the request to determine that the transaction does not undermine US policy objectives.

According to the FATF Recommendation 10, financial institutions should conduct ongoing due diligence on the business relationship and scrutiny of transactions undertaken throughout the course of that relationship to ensure that the transactions being conducted are consistent with the institution’s knowledge of the customer, their business and risk profile, including, where necessary, the source of funds. This is one of the core measures of customer due diligence (CDD) that aim to prevent and detect money laundering and terrorist financing risks.

= The main reference for this question is the document titled “International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation - The FATF Recommendations” published by the FATF in February 2018. You can access it by clicking here. You can also find more information about the CDD measures and the risk-based approach on the FATF website, the CFATF website, the Central Bank of Ireland website, and the Medium blog.

The Wolfsberg Group is an association of 13 global banks that aims to develop frameworks and guidance for the management of financial crime risks. The group started as a meeting of banks in 1999 to address anti-money laundering (AML) in private banking, which carries an increased degree of risk from a money laundering perspective. In the course of discussions, they articulated principles that reflected uniformly high standards for this client segment. These principles became the first guidance published by the group under the name Wolfsberg Principles.

The Wolfsberg Group - Institute on Governance

Wolfsberg Group - Wikipedia

The Group first came together in 2000 at the Wolfsberg castle in Switzerland, accompanied by representatives of Transparency International, to draft anti-money laundering guidelines for private banking

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 .

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

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.

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

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, keeprecords 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.

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]

According to the Basel guidelines on customer due diligence for banks, a trust is a legal arrangement whereby a person (the settlor or grantor) transfers the legal ownership of specific assets to another person or entity (the trustee) to hold for the benefit of a third person or persons (the beneficiaries)1. The Basel guidelines recommend that banks should identify and verify the identity of the following parties to determine the true nature of the trust relationship:

The trustee, who is the person or entity that has the legal authority and duty to manage the trust assets and distribute them to the beneficiaries according to the trust deed2. The trustee may also be the settlor, the beneficiary, or both, depending on the type and structure of the trust3.

The beneficiaries, who are the persons or entities that have a beneficial interest in the trust assets or income, either presently or in the future4. The beneficiaries may be named individuals, classes of persons, or charitable causes.

The settlor or grantor, who is the person or entity that creates the trust and transfers the legal ownership of the assets to the trustee. The settlor or grantor may also retain some rights or powers over the trust, such as the ability to appoint or remove trustees, beneficiaries, or protectors.

The other three options are incorrect because:

Respondents are not trust parties, but rather financial institutions that maintain correspondent banking relationships with other financial institutions. Respondents are not relevant for the identification of the trust relationship, but rather for the due diligence of the correspondent banking relationship.

Payees are not trust parties, but rather persons or entities that receive payments from the trust or other sources. Payees are not relevant for the identification of the trust relationship, but rather for the monitoring of the transactions and activities of the trust.

Trust administrators are not trust parties, but rather persons or entities that provide administrative services to the trust, such as accounting, record-keeping, or tax compliance. Trust administrators are not relevant for the identification of the trust relationship, but rather for the assessment of the risk and complexity of the trust.

1: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, 4, p. 17 2: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, 4, p. 17 3: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5,p. 111 4: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, 4, p. 17 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 111 : Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, 4, p. 17 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 111 : Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, 4, p. 10 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 112 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 112

 According to the AML Directive of the EU, obliged entities, such as banks and other financial institutions, are required to apply enhanced vigilance in business relationships and transactions involving high-risk third countries, which are those identified by the Commission as having strategic deficiencies in their anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism regimes1. The types of enhanced vigilance requirements are basically extra checks and control measures which are defined in article 18a of the Directive1. However, these requirements are not exhaustive, and obliged entities should also implement additional mitigating measures that are complementary to the enhanced customer due diligence procedures, in accordance with a risk based approach1. This means that obliged entities should assess the level of risk posed by each customer, product, service, transaction, or delivery channel, and apply appropriate measures to mitigate those risks2. The additional mitigating measures may include, for example, obtaining additional information on the customer and the beneficial owner, applying additional elements of enhanced monitoring, increasing the frequency and intensity of transaction testing, or requiring the first payment to be carried out through an account in the customer’s name with a bank subject to similar customer due diligence standards1.

1: Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, and amending Directives 2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU (Text with EEA relevance)

2: Guidance on Risk Factors, EBA, 2021

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, when a financial institution receives a law enforcement request to keep an account open that may be associated with suspicious or criminal activity, it should take the following two steps:

Maintain account records for at least five years after the request expires. This is to ensure that the financial institution can provide evidence of its compliance with the law enforcement request and the applicable anti-money laundering regulations. The five-year retention period isbased on the international standard set by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and adopted by many jurisdictions12.

Ask for a written request from the law enforcement agency that defines the duration. This is to protect the financial institution from potential liability and to clarify the scope and purpose of the law enforcement request. The written request should specify the time period for which the account should remain open, the reason for the request, the contact information of the law enforcement officer, and the legal authority for the request34.

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, page 57

FATF Recommendation 11, paragraph 2

Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, page 58

Money Laundering website, article on “Law Enforcement Requests to Keep Accounts Open”

https://www.fincen.gov/resources/statutes-regulations/guidance/requests-law-enforcement-financial-institutions-maintain

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.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs1

Understanding Money Laundering in Casinos | ComplyAdvantage2

Casino Money Laundering: Red Flag Indicators - Alessa3

Trade-based money laundering (TBML) is a method to finance terrorism that involves falsifying transaction-related documents, such as invoices, contracts, bills of lading, or customs declarations, to conceal the origin, destination, value, or purpose of illicit funds. TBML can be used to move money, goods, or services to or from sanctioned orhigh-risk jurisdictions, to evade taxes, duties, or currency controls, to launder proceeds of crime, or to support terrorist activities. TBML can involve over- or under-invoicing, over- or under-shipping, multiple-invoicing, or falsely describing goods or services. TBML can also be linked to other methods of money laundering or terrorist financing, such as bribery, black market peso exchange, or informal value transfer systems.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Lesson 4: Trade-Based Money Laundering

Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Related to Counterfeiting of Currency, Financial Action Task Force (FATF), page 28

Tracing terrorist finances, INTERPOL

By delivering the same annual refresher training to all employees, the compliance officer could miss the opportunity to update the staff on any new trends, developments, or risks that have emerged in the anti-money laundering field. For example, new typologies, indicators, technologies, or best practices could be relevant for the staff to be aware of and apply in their daily work. Moreover, the compliance officer could also miss the chance to share any links to enforcement actions identifying violations in other financial institutions that could serve as lessons learned or case studies for the staff to avoid similar mistakes or gaps in their compliance program.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 5: Risk Management, Lesson 5.4: Training1

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5: Risk Management, Section 5.4: Training2

 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.

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 free-look provision is a period of time, typically 10 to 30 days, in which a new life insurance policy owner can terminate the policy and have their premium refunded1. This can help criminals to launder money by purchasing a policy with illicit funds and then cancelling it within the free-look period to receive a clean check from the insurance company2. This way, they can disguise the source and origin of their funds and avoid any penalties or charges that would otherwise apply to early termination of the policy.

1: Investopedia, What Is a Free Look Period and How Does It Work?

2: FinCEN, Anti-Money Laundering Program and Suspicious Activity Reporting Requirements for Insurance Companies

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.

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

The bank’s internal investigation is aimed at understanding the activities and legitimacy of the client who wants to open multiple accounts for their swimming pool company, with each account assigned to a debit card for the company’s technicians. The purpose of these accounts, as stated by the client, is to facilitate the purchase of pool chemicals. To conduct a thorough investigation, the bank can consider several available sources of information. Let’s analyze each option:

A. Client’s credit bureau report: The client’s credit bureau report primarily contains information related to the individual’s credit history, including loans, credit cards, payment patterns, and any financial obligations. While this information may be useful in assessing the client’s creditworthiness, it may not provide substantial insight into the specific activities and legitimacy of the swimming pool company or the need for multiple accounts.

B. Local law enforcement investigation report: The local law enforcement investigation report may contain information about any criminal or suspicious activities involving the client or the swimming pool company, such as fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, or other offenses. However, this source may not be readily available to the bank, as it may require a formal request or a subpoena to access. Moreover, the report may not be comprehensive or up-to-date, as it may depend on the scope and progress of the law enforcement investigation.

C. Interview swimming pool technicians and chemical suppliers: The interview with the swimming pool technicians and chemical suppliers may provide some information about the nature and frequency of the transactions involving the pool chemicals, such as the amount, the price, the payment method, and the delivery mode. However, this source may not be reliable or verifiable, as the technicians and suppliers may be biased or influenced by the client. Moreover, the interview may not be feasible or practical, as it may require the bank to contact and arrange meetings with multiple parties, which may be time-consuming and costly.

D. Internet search showing how such business are typically operated: The internet search showing how such business are typically operated may provide some information about the industry standards and best practices for running a swimming pool company, such as the average number of technicians, the typical expenses, the common suppliers, and the expected revenue. This source may be useful in comparing and contrasting the client’s business model and operations with the industry norms and identifying any red flags or anomalies. Moreover, this source may be easily accessible and inexpensive, as it may only require the bank to use a web browser and a search engine.

Therefore, the best available source for the bank’s internal investigation on this client’s activities is option D.

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS 2: CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS 3: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs 4: Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) 5: Bank’s Internal Investigation on Client’s Activities | CAMS Exam Prep 6: South Florida: Couple arrested for more than $2 million fraud 7: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations

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.

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

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.

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

According to the CAMS Study Guide, page 191, “Reloadable open-loop prepaid cards are a high-risk product for money laundering because they can be used to store and move large amounts of funds anonymously. They can also be used to access cash at ATMs or through cash-back transactions at merchants.” Therefore, option B is a red flag that may indicate money laundering, as a non-bank customer who regularly loads large amounts of cash onto several prepaid cards may be trying to avoid identification, verification, or transaction reporting requirements.

CAMS Study Guide, page 1911

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 principlesand 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.

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

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, customerservice, 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.

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

A compliance officer should cooperate with the law enforcement inquiry as much as possible, but also ensure that the request is valid, lawful, and does not violate any confidentiality or privacy obligations. Therefore, the compliance officer should collaboratewith the FI’s designated department, such as the legal counsel, the senior management, or the board of directors, to determine the appropriate course of action to comply withthe request12. The compliance officer should also ensure that all communication, written and oral, is funneled through a centralized place, and that the FI maintains a record of the request and the response12.

1: Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts, FinCEN, 2014

2: Best Practices for Compliance and Enforcement-Related Information Requests, EPA, 2018

The payment received from an account in an offshore jurisdiction and the lack of beneficial ownership details for the originating account are two money laundering red flags.Offshore jurisdictions are often used by money launderers to hide the source and destination of their funds, as they typically have low transparency and weak regulatory oversight. The absence of beneficial ownership information makes it difficult to identify the true owners and controllers of the funds, and to assess the legitimacy and risk of the transaction. These factors increase the possibility that the payment is related to money laundering, tax evasion, or other illicit activities.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 33

ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline, 6th Edition, Domain 1, Task 1.2

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 1, Lesson 1.2

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 315

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 formeranti-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.

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

What Is An AML Compliance Program? | ComplyAdvantage

 New business products should be evaluated for AML concerns before they are launched into the market. This is because new products may introduce new risks or vulnerabilities that could be exploited by money launderers or terrorist financiers. By conducting a pre-launch assessment, a financial institution can identify and mitigate these risks, design appropriate controls and procedures, and ensure compliance with the relevant laws and regulations. A pre-launch assessment can also help a financial institutionto align its AML strategy with its business objectives, and avoid potential reputational damage or regulatory sanctions.

9 Things to Consider When Evaluating an AML Solution

CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, page 38.

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.

CAMS Study Guide, page 1731

CAMS Exam Questions and Free Practice Test, Question 2872

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), a sound KYC program should contain four essential elements: (i) customer acceptance policy; (ii) customer identification; (iii) on-going monitoring of higher risk accounts; and (iv) risk management1. These elements correspond to the options B in the question, as customer identification involves verifying the identity and beneficial ownership of the customers, risk assessment involves determining the level of risk posed by the customers and their activities, customer screening involves checking the customers against relevant sanctions and watch lists, and monitoring involves reviewing the customers’ transactions and behavior for any anomalies or red flags.

Consolidated KYC Risk Management - Bank for International Settlements

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 institutionmay 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.

1, Chapter 2: Risk Assessments

2, Section 2: Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program

3, Question 145

 Enhanced due diligence (EDD) is a set of additional measures that must be applied by financial institutions (FIs) in higher-risk situations, such as when dealing with customers or transactions from high-risk third countries, customers who are politically exposed persons (PEPs), or customers who present a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. EDD may include obtaining more information on the customer’s identity, source of funds, source of wealth, business relationships, and purpose of the transaction, as well as conducting more frequent and intensive ongoing monitoring of the customer’s activities.

However, EDD may be bypassed for certain situations where the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing is low, and where the customer is subject to adequate supervision and regulation in the EU or the US. According to the CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition1, one such situation is when on-boarding a casino that is part of an international hotel chain, provides less than 50% of overall revenue and that fully complies with group-wide policies and procedures. This is because such a casino is likely to have a low risk profile, as it is not the main source of income for the hotel chain, and it adheres to the same standards and controls as the rest of the group. Therefore, EDD may not be necessary for this situation, and the FI may apply simplified due diligence (SDD) instead.

The other situations listed in the question are not eligible for bypassing EDD, as they involve higher-risk factors, such as dealing with customers or entities from high-risk third countries, customers with complex ownership structures, or customers who are PEPs. These situations require FIs to apply EDD measures to mitigate the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4, page 84

White Paper on KYC — Enhanced Due-Diligence, page 2

Anti-money laundering – a guide to customer due diligence, page 3

Enhanced Due Diligence for High-risk Customers, page 1

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 andwould 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.

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

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.

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 FATF is an inter-governmental body that sets standards and promotes effective implementation of legal, regulatory and operational measures to combat money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system1. The FATF identifies jurisdictions with serious strategic deficiencies in their anti-money laundering / counter financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regimes and issues public statements to warn the international community of the risks emanating from these jurisdictions2. These jurisdictions are also known as high-risk jurisdictions subject to a call for action, or the “black list” in external sources2. The FATF urges its members and all other jurisdictions to apply counter-measures to protect themselves from the money laundering and terrorist financing risks posed by these jurisdictions2. Counter-measures are enhanced due diligence or restrictive measures that go beyond the normal AML/CFT requirements, such as requiring additional information or documentation, rejecting transactions, restricting business relationships, or terminating correspondent banking relationships3. The FATF also provides guidance on the types and levels of counter-measures that may be appropriate, depending on the specific risks and circumstances of each jurisdiction3.

1: What is the FATF? | FATF

2: High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action | FATF

3: Guidance on Counter Proliferation Financing - The Implementation of Financial Provisions of United Nations Security Council Resolutions to Counter the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction | FATF

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.

Wolfsberg Correspondent Banking Principles 20221, Section 4.5: Nested Relationships

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

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).

= 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.

Large and frequent credit balances on a credit card resulting in request for refunds is an indicator of suspicious activity because it may suggest that the cardholder is using the credit card to launder money or to conceal the source of funds. This is also known as credit card refund fraud or credit card laundering. The cardholder may make purchases with the credit card using illicit funds, then request refunds to another account or in cash, thus transferring the funds to a legitimate or less traceable channel. This activity may also be used to evade currency reporting requirements or to avoid detection by law enforcement or financial institutions.

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

Suspicious Activity Reporting Indicators and Examples, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Indicator 14: Excess Purchases or Transactions2

Credit Card Laundering, Money Laundering Bulletin, Issue 245, October 2019

 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.

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 multinational institution may face challenges in conducting a full investigation of unusual activity across its foreign operations, due to the different legal and regulatory frameworks that apply in each jurisdiction. One of the main obstacles is the local privacy and data protection laws that may restrict the access, transfer, or disclosure of customer information, especially personal or sensitive data, to other entities within the same group or to external parties, such as law enforcement or regulators. Therefore, the institution should be aware of the local laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, and sharing of customer data, and ensure compliance with them12.

ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 191

Which statement about a multinational institution’s ability to fully investigate unusual activity in all its foreign operations is correct? - Exam4Training

Learn more

1blob:https://www.bing.com/12e36647-a7b4-48a5-9dff-13e7aab69e80

quizlet.com2blob:https://www.bing.com/2c9f865a-c41c-4acb-9e08-acb661cdbbe3

exam4training.com3blob:https://www.bing.com/2c9f865a-c41c-4acb-9e08-acb661cdbbe3

exam4training.com4blob:https://www.bing.com/12e36647-a7b4-48a5-9dff-13e7aab69e80

quizlet.com

A multinational institution may face challenges in conducting a full investigation of unusual activity across its foreign operations, due to the different legal and regulatory frameworks that apply in each jurisdiction. One of the main obstacles is the local privacy and data protection lawsthat may restrict the access, transfer, or disclosure of customer information, especially personal or sensitive data, to other entities within the same group or to external parties, such as law enforcement or regulators. Therefore, the institution should be aware of the local laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, and sharing of customer data, and ensure compliance with them12.

An enterprise-wide compliance culture is a centralized, coordinated approach to ethics and compliance program design and assessment that cuts across multiple business units within an organization1. One key aspect of promoting such a culture is that the relevant information should be shared throughout the organization, so that all employees are aware of the compliance risks, policies, procedures, and expectations, and can act accordingly2. Sharing information also facilitates collaboration, communication, and feedback among different functions and levels of the organization, and helps identify and address any gaps or issues in the compliance program3. By contrast, the other options are not conducive to an enterprise-wide compliance culture, as they either create silos, conflicts, or inefficiencies in the compliance function.

1: Enterprise Compliance Risk Management Services | Deloitte US

2: Enterprise Risk Management and Risk Culture - McKinsey & Company

3: FRB: Speech, Bies–Enterprise-wide Compliance Programs–February 4, 2004

 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.

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

Implementing a sound customer due diligence (CDD) program is the most effective way to prevent money laundering through financial institutions, according to experts. CDD is the process of identifying and verifying the identity of customers and assessing their risk profile, source of funds, and expected activity. CDD helps financial institutions to detect and prevent money laundering by enabling them to know their customers, monitor their transactions, and report any suspicious or unusual behavior. CDD is also a key requirement of the international standards and best practices for anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) Guidelines.

The other options are not as effective as CDD, as they are either too narrow or too broad in scope. Ensuring that transaction monitoring systems can identify terrorist financing is important, but it does not address the broader issue of money laundering, which may involve other types of criminal proceeds or activities. Collecting information on beneficial owners and foreign customers is a part of CDD, but it is not sufficient by itself, as it does not cover the risk assessment and ongoing monitoring aspects of CDD. Instituting a policy prohibiting the acceptance of funds intended for terrorist financing is a good practice, but it is not a preventive measure, as it relies on the assumption that the funds are already identified as such, which may not be the case.

Customer Due Diligence - FATF-GAFI.ORG

Sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism - Bank for International Settlements

CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, page 36-37.

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.

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 first European Union Directive, “Prevention of the Use of the Financial System for the Purpose of Money Laundering (Directive 91/308/EEC),” was adopted by the Council of the European Communities in June 1991. Like all directives adopted by the Council, it required member states to achieve (by amending national law, if necessary) the specified results. This First Directive required the members to enact legislation to prevent their domestic financial systems from being used for money laundering"

https://www.wolfsberg-principles.com/sites/default/files/wb/pdfs/wolfsbergstandards/10.%20Wolfsberg-Private-Banking-Prinicples-May-2012.pdf

2.4 Senior Management Approval

The bank's internal policies should indicate whether, for any one or more among these categories, Senior

Management must approve entering into new relationships.

Relationships with Politically Exposed Persons may only be entered into with the approval of Senior Management.

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.

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.”

The primary international authoritative body that designates sanctions is the United Nations (UN). The UN Security Council has the power to impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which deals with threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression. The UN sanctions are legally binding on all UN member states and aim to maintain or restore international peace and security. The UN sanctions can target individuals, entities, groups, sectors, or countries, and can include measures such as arms embargoes, travel bans, asset freezes, trade restrictions, or diplomatic isolation. The UN sanctions are implemented and enforced by the member states, with the assistance of the UN Secretariat and other specialized agencies. The UN sanctions are periodically reviewed and adjusted by the Security Council, based on the reports of the sanctions committees and expert panels.

1: UN Sanctions1

2: UN Charter, Chapter VII2

3: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination3

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, one of the best practices for hiring an AML officer is to do a thorough background check, including verifying the candidate’s credentials, qualifications, references, and reputation1. This is because the AML officer plays a crucial role in ensuring the compliance and integrity of the financial institution, and therefore must have the necessary skills, knowledge, experience, and ethics to perform the job effectively and professionally. A background check can also help to identify any potential conflicts of interest, criminal records, or regulatory sanctions that may affect the candidate’s suitability for the position1. The other options are incorrect because:

B. Confering with the regulatory agency may not be necessary or appropriate, as the hiring decision is ultimately the responsibility of the financial institution, and the regulatory agency may not have any specific or relevant information or guidance on the candidate2.

C. Hiring the individual, relying on the recommendation of the correspondent, may not be sufficient or prudent, as the correspondent may have different standards, expectations, or interests than the financial institution, and may not have conducted a comprehensive or objective assessment of the candidate3.

D. Hiring the individual on a probationary basis may not be feasible or fair, as the AML officer role requires a high level of trust, authority, and responsibility, and the financial institution may not be able to evaluate the candidate’s performance or potential in a short period of time4.

1: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 147

2: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 148

3: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 147

4: ACAMS, CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 148

Transaction monitoring governanceinvolves ensuring thatAML detection systems are effective, aligned with regulatory standards, and capable of identifying evolving threats.

Option B (Correct):Legal cooperation is essential for responding to subpoenas and law enforcement inquiries.

Option D (Correct):Regularly updating transaction monitoring scenarios ensures that the system adapts to emerging financial crime trends.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):SARs cannot be withdrawn unless an error was made—once filed, SARs remain confidential and must be retained.

Option C (Incorrect):Client profile updates are a CDD/KYC function, not directly related to transaction monitoring governance.

Best Practices for Transaction Monitoring Governance:

Regularly review system effectiveness through validation tests.

Collaborate with legal and compliance teams for risk mitigation.

Use AI and data analytics to refine detection accuracy.

"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.

Financial institutionsoperating in the EU must comply with GDPR and AML directives, ensuring a balance betweenprivacy and AML compliance.

Option B (Correct):Data minimization is a key GDPR principle, ensuring that only necessary data is collected and processed.

Option D (Correct):Strict guidelines apply to AI and machine learning models used in AML complianceto prevent bias and ensure transparency.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):FIs cannot use third parties to supplement missing customer identification unless proper KYC measures are followed.

Option C (Incorrect):Customers cannot be informed about ongoing AML investigations due to “tipping off” restrictions under AML laws.

Best Practices for AML Compliance Under GDPR:

Limit data collection to what is necessary for AML compliance.

Ensure AI and machine learning models comply with transparency regulations.

Prevent unauthorized data access through strict internal controls.

Aneffective AML programbalancesalert accuracy and operational efficiency.

Option D (Correct):The true positive vs. false positive ratio reflects the efficiency and accuracy of an AML transaction monitoring system.

Option A (Incorrect):The number of alerts does not indicate system effectiveness—many could be false positives.

Option B (Incorrect):Clients exiting for commercial reasons are unrelated to AML efficiency.

Option C (Incorrect):Tracking high-risk customer onboarding is important but does not measure AML effectiveness.

Best Practices for Measuring AML Effectiveness:

Monitor system efficiency through alert validation metrics.

Reduce false positives while maintaining regulatory compliance.

Enhance machine learning and AI models for transaction monitoring.

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), a sound KYC program should consist of four essential elements: (i) customer acceptance policy; (ii) customer identification; (iii) on-going monitoring of higher risk accounts; and (iv) risk management. Therefore, B and D are the correct choices among the given options. A customer acceptance policy defines the types of customers that the bank is willing to accept and the conditions for doing so. A risk management system ensures that the bank has adequate policies, procedures, and controls to identify, measure, monitor, and mitigate the risks arising from its KYC program.

Regulatory exams assess whether financial institutions comply with AML/CFT laws and have adequately addressed previous deficiencies.

Option C (Correct):Regulators may still issue remediation orders if the bank's improvements do not fully resolve prior AML compliance gaps.

Option D (Correct):If deficiencies persist, regulators may impose civil or criminal penalties.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):Secondary sanctions typically apply to institutions violating international sanctions laws, not AML program deficiencies.

Option B (Incorrect):Regulatory orders are not always confidential—major enforcement actions may be publicly disclosed.

Option E (Incorrect):Boards are responsible for AML oversight but are not always required to disclose corrective actions publicly.

Best Practices for Addressing AML Exam Findings:

Document all remediation efforts with clear implementation timelines.

Demonstrate a culture of compliance through leadership and training.

Ensure sustained improvements, not just short-term fixes.

ARisk-Based Approach (RBA)allows financial institutions toallocate compliance resources effectivelyandprioritize higher-risk areasforenhanced due diligence (EDD).

Option A (Correct):An RBA enables institutions to tailor their AML controls based on risk exposure, ensuring better resource allocation.

Option B (Incorrect):While RBAimproves efficiency, itdoes not guarantee faster implementationof controls.

Option C (Incorrect):RBA is a regulatory requirement, butit is not necessarily determined by customer acceptance.

Option D (Incorrect):RBA provides guidance on risk mitigation, but itdoes not dictate specific resource usage.

Benefits of a Risk-Based Approach (RBA):

Efficient use of compliance resourcesby focusing onhigh-risk transactions, customers, and geographies.

Regulatory compliance alignmentwithFATF, Basel Committee, and Wolfsberg Group AML principles.

Flexibility to adjust AML controlsas new threats emerge.

Best Practices for Implementing RBA in AML Compliance:

Conduct enterprise-wide risk assessments (EWRAs).

Classify customers and transactions based on risk levels.

Apply enhanced due diligence (EDD) for high-risk clients.

AnEnterprise-Wide Risk Assessment (EWRA)helpsfinancial institutionsidentify and mitigatemoney laundering risks.

Option B (Correct):Wolfsberg Group and FATF emphasize that an EWRA should focus onhigher-risk customers, products, and geographies, ensuringappropriate controlsare in place.

Option A (Incorrect):Institutions shouldnot blindly adopt third-party frameworkswithoutcustomizing themto their specific risk exposure.

Option C (Incorrect):While new clients are important, an EWRA mustassess risks across all customers and transactions.

Option D (Incorrect):EWRAmust address residual risk, not just inherent risk. Effectivemitigation strategiesare essential.

Data sharingbetween financial institutions, FIUs, and law enforcement is essential toAML compliance.

Option A (Correct):Transparent financial systemsdetermoney laundering and terrorist financing.

Option B (Incorrect):FIUsdo not impose sanctions; theycollect and analyze data.

Option C (Incorrect):While data analysis is valuable, thekey goal is financial transparency.

Option D (Incorrect):In many jurisdictions,data sharing is encouraged, withsome restrictions.

Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs)areformal agreementsforcross-border law enforcement cooperation.

Option D (Correct):MLATsallow countries toexchange information, conduct joint investigations, and provide legal assistance.

Option A (Incorrect):Memoranda of Agreement (MOA)are typicallynon-binding agreementsbetween private entities.

Option B (Incorrect):Declarations of understandingare informal statements, not legally binding treaties.

Option C (Incorrect):Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)governgeneral cooperation, notformal legal assistance.

In anEnterprise-Wide Risk Assessment (EWRA),residual riskis the level of risk that remains after applying mitigating controls to theinherent risk(the risk present before controls are applied).

In this scenario, theinherent risk is highdue to the nature of private banking—high net worth clients,cross-border transactions,complex ownership structures, andhigh-value financial products. However, the institution has implementedrobust CDD and EDD, as well asadvanced transaction monitoring systems.

According to the CAMS Study Guide – 6th Edition, wheneffective and properly implemented controlsare in place, they cansignificantly reducethe residual risk—even in high-risk business areas like private banking. However, no control framework caneliminate all riskentirely.

Option Ais correct: Controls can significantly reduce the residual risk when strong, effective systems and procedures are in place.

Option Bis partially true but suggests inadequacy, which is not indicated here.

Option Cincorrectly assumes residual risk cannot be lowered even with controls.

Option Dis incorrect because residual riskcannot be eliminated entirely.

Certain corporate structuresobscure beneficial ownership, making themattractive for money laundering.

Option A (Correct):Nominee shareholders and directors conceal the true owners of a company, increasing AML risk.

Option C (Correct):Bearer shares allow ownership to be transferred anonymously, making it difficult to trace transactions.

Option E (Correct):Private investment companies in tax havens with strict secrecy laws enable illicit fund movements.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option B (Incorrect):A private company that does not operate in a tax haven presents lower ML risk.

Option D (Incorrect):A foreign LLC is not necessarily high-risk unless linked to a secrecy jurisdiction.

Best Practices for Identifying High-Risk Corporate Structures:

Require full disclosure of beneficial ownership.

Apply enhanced due diligence (EDD) on tax-haven entities.

Monitor for unusual cross-border transactions.

According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), financial institutions should apply a risk-based approach to customer due diligence (CDD), which includes obtaining and updating information on the identity, beneficial ownership, and business activities of their clients. If a client refuses to provide or update such information, or provides false or misleading information, the financial institution should consider this as a red flag for potential money laundering or terrorist financing, and should exit the relationship with the client, unless the circumstances warrant otherwise. Exiting the relationship with a client who refuses to update information is also consistent with the FATF’s Recommendation 10, which requires financial institutions to terminate the business relationship if they are unable to perform CDD measures.

Accounts may beclosedif theypose high money laundering or sanction risks.

Option A (Correct):MultipleSAR filingsindicatehigh risk, possibly requiringaccount closureif AML concerns persist.

Option B (Incorrect):Tuition paymentsare alegitimate purposefor fund transfers.

Option C (Incorrect):Indirect dealings withSDNs require compliance review, but notimmediate account closure.

Option D (Incorrect):Civil subpoenasalone do not justifyaccount termination.

USA PATRIOT Act Section 319(b)gives theU.S. governmentthe power toseize fundsfroma U.S. correspondent bank account held for a foreign bank, if the funds are linked to illicit activity.

Option C (Correct):Section 319(b) explicitly allows asset forfeiturefromforeign correspondent bank accounts in the U.S.

Option A (Incorrect):Section 319(a)grants U.S. regulatorsfaster access to bank records(within120 hours).

Option B (Incorrect):Section 314(a)deals withinformation sharing between banks and law enforcement.

Option D (Incorrect):Section 314(b)allowsbanks to voluntarily share AML information among themselves.

PEPs posehigher risks for corruption and money laundering, requiringenhanced due diligence (EDD).

Option D (Correct):Understanding aPEP’s source of wealth and fundsensureslegitimacy of transactions.

Option A (Incorrect):Commercial databases help identify PEPsbutdo not mitigate risk alone.

Option B (Incorrect):Lowering monitoring thresholds, not raising them, helps detect suspicious activity.

Option C (Incorrect):Regulatory approval isnot required, but internal risk assessments are.

Trade-based money laundering (TBML) involves manipulating trade transactions to move illicit funds rather than goods. One common technique is over-invoicing, where an exporter intentionally inflates the invoice value of goods. In this scenario, an England-based exporter would over-invoice a shipment to Cyprus. By doing so, the exporter creates a surplus amount that can be transferred back to the terrorist organization in England, effectively disguising the movement of illicit funds12.

FIUsexchange information through secure platformsto investigate financial crime cases.

Option B (Correct):TheEgmont Secure Webis theprimary communication platformforFIUs globally.

Option A (Incorrect):MLATsallow forformal legal cooperationbut arenot an FIU-to-FIU communication tool.

Option C (Incorrect):INTERPOL databasestrackcriminal records, not financial intelligence data.

Option D (Incorrect):TheUN Sanctions Listprovidesentity restrictions, not an FIU data-sharing mechanism.

Financial institutions must screen customers against adverse information and determine whether they pose a significant financial crime risk.

Option B (Correct):A direct link to an organized crime group is a severe red flag. Organized crime networks engage in money laundering, corruption, and other illicit activities. UnderFATF Recommendations 10 and 12, financial institutions must implement enhanced due diligence (EDD) for high-risk customers and consider account closure if they pose undue risk.

Option A (Incorrect):Bankruptcy does not necessarily indicate financial crime risk, though it may raise financial stability concerns.

Option C (Incorrect):While PEPs pose a higher risk for corruption, financial institutions typically apply EDD rather than immediately terminating the relationship.

Option D (Incorrect):Violating a construction permit is a regulatory issue, not directly linked to financial crime.

Lawyers and legal professionalsare frequently used inmoney laundering schemes, particularly throughtrust accountsthat offeranonymity and client privilege protections.

Option A (Correct):Repeated wire transfers from unknown sources followed by immediate outward transferssuggest that the lawyer’s trust accountis being used as a pass-through account for laundering funds.

Option B (Incorrect):If legal services were actually rendered,this is a normal transactionunless other risk factors exist.

Option C (Incorrect):Receiving funds from aregulated insurance companyisnot inherently suspicious, unless the transaction isinconsistent with the lawyer’s usual business activity.

Option D (Incorrect):Large transactions are normal inreal estate purchases, as long as proper documentation exists.

Red Flags in Legal Sector Money Laundering:

Use of lawyer trust accounts to move funds with no legitimate business purpose.

Frequent transactions from high-risk jurisdictions.

Transactions that are inconsistent with the lawyer’s area of practice.

Clients who refuse to disclose the source of funds.

Best Practices:

Apply AML measures to law firmshandling financial transactions, as required by FATF’sDesignated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs)guidelines.

Require enhanced due diligence (EDD) for high-risk clientsandunusual transactions.

 Spear phishing is a targeted form of phishing scam in which cybercriminals send highly convincing emails to specific individuals within an organization. The emails often contain personal information or details that make them seem legitimate and trustworthy. The goal of spear phishing is to trick the recipients into clicking a malicious link or downloading an infected attachment, or to reveal confidential information or money to the attackers. In this case, the customers of the telecommunications firm received an email that pretended to be from the company, but was actually a fake. The email directed them to a spoofed website that asked for their personal information, which could be used for identity theft or fraud. This is a clear example of a spear phishing attack.

Money laundering through capital marketsoften involvespump-and-dump schemes, wash trading, and layering funds through rapid trading activity.

Option A (Correct):A sudden spike in demand for a low-priced security is a red flag for pump-and-dump schemes, where criminals manipulate the marketto inflate stock prices artificially before selling off shares for a profit.

Option B (Incorrect):A gradual decline in trading volume and price does not indicate suspicious activity related to money laundering.

Option C (Incorrect):An increase in demand for ETFs is common and not necessarily linked to money laundering.

Option D (Incorrect):Holding securities in one specific emerging market may indicate a geographic investment strategy, not necessarily money laundering.

Common Money Laundering Typologies in Capital Markets:

Pump-and-Dump Schemes– Fraudulently inflating stock prices to cash out illicit funds.

Wash Trading– Conductingself-tradesto create an illusion of high market activity.

Layering Funds Through Rapid Trading– Engaging infrequent buy-and-sell ordersto obfuscate the origin of funds.

Best Practices for AML in Capital Markets:

Monitor unusual trading volume and price fluctuations.

Use AI-driven surveillance systems to detect manipulative behavior.

Investigate transactions involving offshore brokers or shell entities.

TheEU AMLD provides the legal framework, butmember states have discretionin implementation.

Option B (Correct):Countries canimpose stricter AML lawsthan theminimum EU requirements.

Option C (Correct):AMLDsset the foundation, and member statesimplement local laws.

Option A (Incorrect):EU law takes precedence, and national lawsmust alignwith it.

Option D (Incorrect):AMLDs and local AML regulations areinterlinked.

Option E (Incorrect):National AML rules do not have to be identicalacross all EU members.

Money laundering through real estate transactions involves integrating illicit funds into the legitimate financial system while providing a relatively “safe” property investment. In this context, the most relevant factor to examine is the beneficial owner of the asset. Identifying the true owner behind a property helps uncover potential money laundering schemes. Criminals often use third parties, shell companies, or complex ownership structures to distance the transaction from the source of illicit funds. Investigating the beneficial owner’s identity is crucial for detecting and preventing real estate-related money laundering12.

The art and antiquities market is highly vulnerable to money laundering and terrorist financingdue toanonymity in transactions, lack of regulatory oversight, and difficulty in tracing ownership.

Option A (Correct):Art storage in tax-free zones can be used to obscure ownership and avoid AML scrutiny.

Option C (Correct):Using third-party art advisors can facilitate anonymous transactions and shield beneficial ownership.

Option D (Correct):High-value art sold on social media without proper provenance raises ML/TF risksdue tolack of financial oversight.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option B (Incorrect):Paying fair market value does not indicate illicit activity—underpricing or rapid resale are bigger red flags.

Option E (Incorrect):Authenticity verification is common in legitimate art transactions and is not a direct ML/TF red flag.

Red Flags for Art & Antiquities Money Laundering:

Frequent high-value art transactions with no clear business purpose.

Use of intermediaries to conceal beneficial ownership.

Rapid resale of newly purchased art at below-market prices.

Best Practices for AML in the Art Market:

Conduct enhanced due diligence (EDD) on high-value art transactions.

Monitor transactions involving politically exposed persons (PEPs).

Report suspicious transactions linked to high-risk art traders.

Casinos and gambling institutionsare highly vulnerable to money launderingbecause they allow theconversion of cash into chips, checks, or electronic credits, which can later be redeemed as “clean” funds.

Option A (Correct):A privately held company funding multiple patrons' betting accounts is highly suspiciousand may indicate:

Structuring/smurfing, where multiple individuals are used to move illicit funds.

Third-party money laundering, where the real source of funds is obscured.

Trade-based money laundering, if linked to non-gaming businesses.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option B (Incorrect):Placing multiple bets on the same eventis not inherently suspiciousunless linked tofraudulent betting patterns.

Option C (Incorrect):Large chip purchases in cashmay requirereporting, but they do not necessarily indicatemoney laundering.

Option D (Incorrect):Transferring winnings to another operator may beunusual, butnot automatically suspiciousunless the amount is large and unjustified.

Common Money Laundering Techniques in Casinos:

Chip Walking– Buying chips with illicit funds and cashing them out later as "clean" funds.

Casino Account Transfers– Using multiple accounts or third-party accounts to move funds.

High-Value Gambling with No Loss Intent– Betting on both sides of an event to ensure clean withdrawal of funds.

Best Practices for Casino AML Compliance:

Monitor suspicious large transactions and third-party funding activities.

Perform enhanced due diligence (EDD) on high-risk patrons.

File Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) for unusual gambling activity.

When assessing the risk rating of customers, financial institutions should consider various factors that may indicate the potential for money laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities. According to the ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination1, some of the key risk factors are:

Customer risk: This refers to the characteristics of the customer that may affect their risk profile, such as their identity, occupation, source of funds, business activities, reputation, and political exposure. For example, customers who are politically exposed persons (PEPs), cash-intensive businesses, non-resident customers, or customers with complex ownership structures may pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Geographic risk: This refers to the location of the customer, their business, or their transactions, and the level of risk associated with that location. For example, customers who are based in, operate in, or transact with jurisdictions that have weak anti-money laundering (AML) regulations, high levels of corruption, or are subject to sanctions or embargoes may pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Product risk: This refers to the type of products or services that the customer uses or offers, and the level of risk associated with those products or services. For example, customers who use or offer products or services that are anonymous, complex, or facilitate cross-border transactions may pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Other risk factors that may be considered include transaction risk, delivery channel risk, and industry risk2. However, these are not among the options given in the question.

Verified Answer: = A. Collect further customer reference data and determine what must be screened and at which frequency. and C. Deploy an independent risk-based test to ensure the screening on this customer is effective.

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation: = When an existing customer changes its business scope and jurisdictions, banks need to manage sanctions compliance risk effectively. Here are the steps they should take:

1. Collect Further Customer Reference Data: Obtain updated information about the customer’s new business activities, locations, and counterparties. Understand the nature of their transactions and assess the associated risks. Determine what specific data elements need to be screened (e.g., names, addresses, beneficial owners) and establish the appropriate screening frequency.

2. Deploy an Independent Risk-Based Test: Conduct a comprehensive risk assessment tailored to the customer’s changes. This assessment should consider factors such as the customer’s industry, geographic exposure, and transaction volume. The risk assessment helps identify high-risk areas that require enhanced scrutiny.

3. Screen Directors and Ultimate Beneficial Owners: Perform sanctions screening not only on the customer but also on their directors and ultimate beneficial owners. This ensures that any potential risks associated with these individuals are identified and mitigated.

4. Perform Politically Exposed Person (PEP) and Negative Media Screenings: Continue to screen the customer and related parties against PEP lists and negative media sources. This helps detect any adverse information related to politically exposed individuals or entities.

By following these steps, banks can proactively manage sanctions compliance risk and safeguard their institution’s reputation while adhering to regulatory requirements12.

The6th AML Directive (6AMLD)introducedtighter rulesto combat financial crime, particularly aroundbeneficial ownership transparency.

Option D (Correct):6AMLD enhances transparencyby requiring accurate and verified datain central beneficial ownership registries, making it harder to hide illicit funds behind shell companies.

Option A (Incorrect):While some entities face increased scrutiny,crowdfunding platforms and football clubs were not the primary focusof 6AMLD.

Option B (Incorrect):6AMLD does not remove the EU’s obligation to conduct risk assessments;risk-based approaches remain centralto AML efforts.

Option C (Incorrect):TheEU AML Authority (AMLA), planned for2024, will centralize enforcement, but6AMLD did not createthis entity.

According to section 313 of the USA PATRIOT Act, a covered financial institution (generally any U.S. bank or broker dealer in securities) is prohibited from establishing, maintaining, administering, or managing a correspondent account in the U.S. for, or on behalf of, a foreign shell bank. A foreign shell bank is defined as a foreign bank that does not have a physical presence in any country. The only exception to this prohibition is if the foreign shell bank is a regulated affiliate of a depository institution, credit union, or foreign bank that maintains a physical presence in the U.S. or a foreign country, respectively. In that case, the U.S. financial institution must obtain a written certification from the foreign bank that it does not provide banking services to any other foreign shell banks.

Financial institutions (FIs) are required to cooperate with law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in their investigations of money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. However, sometimes LEAs may submit requests for information or documents that are overly broad, unduly intrusive, or unreasonable in scope or volume. Such requests may pose challenges or risks for FIs, such as violating customer privacy, compromising data security, disrupting business operations, or incurring excessive costs.

The most appropriate response for an FI in such a situation is to narrow the request through a prompt response to the LEA. This means that the FI should communicate with the LEA as soon as possible to clarify the purpose, scope, and relevance of the request, and to negotiate a more reasonable and proportionate request that meets the LEA’s needs and the FI’s capabilities. The FI should also explain the potential difficulties or consequences of complying with the original request, and propose alternative or additional sources of information that may be more useful or accessible. The FI should document the communication and the agreed terms of the request, and comply with the request in a timely and accurate manner.

By narrowing the request through a prompt response, the FI can demonstrate its good faith and willingness to cooperate with the LEA, while also protecting its own interests and obligations. This can help avoid or resolve any conflicts or misunderstandings between the FI and the LEA, and facilitate a more efficient and effective investigation.

AML compliancemust be balanced with data privacy laws, includingGDPR (EU), CCPA (U.S.), and banking secrecy regulations.

Option A (Correct):FIUsmust documentwhy and how personal data in SARs is shared with law enforcement or regulators.

Option B (Incorrect):SAR subjects cannot request redaction—SARs are confidential to avoid "tipping off" the suspect.

Option C (Incorrect):Many jurisdictions allow AML-related information sharing, particularlyunder FATF guidance.

Option D (Incorrect):SARsdo not require customer consent—they are filed based on legal obligations.

Key Data Privacy Considerations in AML Investigations:

GDPR Article 6permits data processing for AML compliance.

Banking secrecy laws have exemptions for AML disclosures.

FIUs must document SAR handling procedures for legal compliance.

Best Practices for Managing Data Privacy in AML:

Limit data collection to what is necessary for AML compliance.

Ensure SAR information is only shared with authorized agencies.

Comply with local and international data privacy laws.

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) and charities are at risk of being exploited for terrorist financing due to their access to large sums of money and their operational reach into high-risk areas. FATF’sRecommendation 8specifically recognizes that terrorist organizations may misuse NPOs to raise and move funds, provide logistical support, or conceal the diversion of funds for illicit purposes.

Option A (Correct):Many charities operate internationally, especially in areas with humanitarian crises. These regions often overlap with locations where terrorist organizations are active, making them vulnerable to abuse.

Option D (Correct):Charities handle large volumes of cash and enjoy public trust, which makes it easier for illicit actors to integrate illicit funds without raising immediate suspicion.

Option B (Incorrect):While charities are generally legitimate, the concern is that they can be exploited, not that they necessarily intend to misuse funds.

Option C (Incorrect):Although collecting donations is a legitimate practice, it does not directly contribute to their vulnerability to terrorist financing.

In theEuropean Union (EU), data protection laws (GDPR) and AML regulations (AMLDs) must be balancedwhen sharing customer data.

Option D (Correct):Data sharing must be"necessary, reasonable, and proportionate,"followingAML regulations and data protection requirements.

Option A (Incorrect):While data protection laws apply,AML/CFT regulations provide exemptionsfor legitimate investigations.

Option B (Incorrect):Aformal production orderis not always required if information sharing islegally permitted under AML regulations.

Option C (Incorrect):Privacy laws still apply, even in financial crime investigations. AML/CFT obligations donot override GDPRbut must be balanced appropriately.

Key Considerations in Cross-Border AML Data Sharing in the EU:

GDPR & AML Regulations Must Align:TheGeneral Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)protects customer privacy, but theEU Anti-Money Laundering Directives (AMLDs) require data sharing for AML purposes.

Proportionality Principle:Anydata shared must be strictly limited to what is necessaryfor AML purposes (e.g., transaction details but not unnecessary personal data).

Regulatory Guidance:Banks must comply withArticle 23 of GDPR, which allowsexceptions for AML compliance.

Why This Matters:

Failure toproperly balance AML compliance and data privacycan lead to:

Regulatory fines under GDPRfor data breaches.

AML penaltiesfor failing to cooperate in financial crime investigations.

 According to the Wolfsberg Group, the FI should take the following steps regarding the opening of the account for the senior government official:

Reasonably establish if the source of wealth and funds of the official is legitimate. This is to ensure that the FI is not facilitating the laundering of proceeds of corruption, bribery, or other illicit activities by the official, who is considered a politically exposed person (PEP) and poses a higher risk of financial crime. The FI should obtain information and documentation on the origin andownership of the funds, the official’s income and assets, and the purpose and expected activity of the account12.

Perform due diligence procedures on the managing intermediary. This is to verify the identity, reputation, and regulatory status of the intermediary, who acts as a third party on behalf of the official. The FI should also assess the intermediary’s own AML/CFT policies and controls, and the nature and extent of the relationship between the intermediary and the official13.

Determine whether the intermediary representative is acting on the officer’s behalf. This is to establish the beneficial ownership and control of the account, and to avoid any potential conflicts of interest or undue influence by the intermediary. The FI should obtain a written confirmation from the intermediary that they are authorized to act on behalf of the official, and that they will disclose any changes in the beneficial ownership or control of the account13.

 According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) study guide, a risk-based approach for EDD means that the FI applies more or less stringent measures depending on the level of risk posed by each client1. This allows the FI to allocate its resources more efficiently and effectively, and to focus on the clients that pose the highest risk of money laundering or terrorist financing2. Applying EDD for every new client, regardless of their risk profile, may not be the best use of the FI’s resources, and may not reflect the proportionality and relevance of the EDD measures3.

Ongoing Due Diligence: FATF emphasizes the importance of continuous monitoring of business relationships and transactions. This involves regularly assessing the risk associated with a customer and ensuring that the information remains up-to-date. It includes monitoring transactions for any suspicious activity or red flags.

Beneficial Owners: Identifying beneficial owners is crucial, but it must be done with verification of their true identity. This is part of the initial due diligence process.

Risk Assessment: Conducting risk assessments is essential, but it is not specific to customer due diligence. Risk assessment applies broadly to anti-money laundering (AML) programs.

Products and Services Suitability: While understanding the suitability of products and services is relevant, it is not a direct measure within customer due diligence.

AML compliancemust be balanced with data privacy laws, such asGDPR (EU), CCPA (U.S.), and jurisdictional banking secrecy laws.

Option A (Correct):Data protection laws regulate how customer information can be shared internallyand externally, ensuringconfidentiality and regulatory compliance.

Option B (Incorrect):Enterprise risk assessments do not determine data sharing rules; legal and regulatory policies do.

Option C (Incorrect):Risk rating does not impact legal data-sharing restrictions.

Option D (Incorrect):AML policies must align with data protection laws, not override them.

Key Data Privacy Considerations in AML Compliance:

GDPR (Article 6) requires a legal basis for processing personal data, including AML investigations.

Banking secrecy laws restrict sharing certain customer information without consent or legal obligation.

Internal information-sharing policies must be clear on what AML teams can disclose.

Best Practices for AML & Data Privacy Compliance:

Consult legal teams before sharing AML-related data internally or externally.

Ensure compliance with GDPR, CCPA, and banking secrecy laws.

Minimize data sharing to what is strictly necessary.

A transaction monitoring system (TMS) is a tool that helps financial institutions detect and report suspicious activities related to money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. A TMS needs to be implemented carefully and effectively to ensure its accuracy, reliability, and compliance with regulatory requirements.

One of the best practices for implementing a TMS is to perform systems integration testing (SIT) at key steps of development and user acceptance testing (UAT) prior to going live with the TMS. SIT is a process of verifying that the TMS can interact with other systems and data sources correctly and efficiently. UAT is a process of validating that the TMS meets the functional and operational expectations of the end-users and stakeholders.

By conducting SIT and UAT, the financial institution can identify and resolve any issues or defects in the TMS before it is deployed in the production environment. This can help avoid potential problems such as data quality issues, false positives, false negatives, system errors, performance issues, and regulatory breaches. Performing SIT and UAT can also help ensure that the TMS is aligned with the financial institution’s risk assessment, policies, procedures, and controls.

United Nations (UN) sanctionsarebindingon allUN member states, but their effectiveness depends onswift adoption and enforcement by national governments.

Option B (Correct):For UN sanctions to be effective, they must be enforced by all member statesthroughstrong domestic legal mechanisms.

Option A (Incorrect):UN sanctions are not necessarily implemented faster than unilateral sanctions (e.g., U.S. OFAC sanctions).

Option C (Incorrect):While UN sanctions apply internationally, enforcement depends on national governments, making implementation inconsistent.

Option D (Incorrect):Clarity of sanction measures is important, but enforcement is the primary factor determining effectiveness.

Key Features of UN Sanctions:

Mandated by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

Binding on all 193 UN member states.

May include asset freezes, travel bans, and trade embargoes.

Best Practices for UN Sanctions Compliance:

Ensure national enforcement aligns with UN Security Council resolutions.

Monitor sanctioned individuals/entities through real-time screening tools.

Cooperate with international organizations to prevent sanctions evasion.

Economic sanctionsare used as anon-military toolto enforceforeign policy and national security objectives.

Option D (Correct):Sanctions aim tochange the behaviorof entities engaged inmoney laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities.

Option A (Incorrect):Sanctions do not necessarily indicatemilitary action.

Option B (Incorrect):NGOs may be exempt from sanctions, but this is not their primary purpose.

Option C (Incorrect):Whilehuman rights concernscan lead to sanctions, they are primarily imposed tochange behavior.

Lawyers’ trust accounts arecommonly exploited for money laundering, particularly forlayering and integration stages.

Option A (Correct):Receiving and immediately forwarding wire transfers from unknown sources in a high-risk jurisdiction is a strong red flag for money laundering.

Option B (Incorrect):While legal professionals in high-risk countries require monitoring, the transaction itself is not necessarily suspicious.

Option C (Incorrect):Insurance company payments are typically traceable, reducing money laundering risk.

Option D (Incorrect):Lawyers handling real estate transactions is normal unless the deal structure is highly irregular.

Red Flags for Money Laundering in Legal Professions:

Use of client accounts to receive and distribute funds without legal purpose.

Multiple transactions involving unrelated third parties.

Legal services that do not align with the nature of payments received.

Best Practices for AML in Legal Professions:

Conduct enhanced due diligence (EDD) on high-risk transactions.

Monitor transactions involving high-risk jurisdictions.

File Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) for unexplained transactions.

Along-term, root cause-based approach ensures AML deficiencies are fully remediated.

Option C (Correct):Addressing root causes ensures the institution remains compliant and prevents recurring violations.

Option A (Incorrect):Consulting with an FIU is unnecessary for internal remediation plans.

Option B (Incorrect):Short-term fixes do not resolve systemic AML issues.

Option D (Incorrect):AML compliance improvements may require investment—cost-cutting should not compromise compliance.

Best Practices for AML Audit Remediation:

Conduct root cause analysis before implementing corrective measures.

Develop a long-term compliance improvement plan.

Allocate sufficient resources for sustainable AML enhancements.

Casinos arehigh-riskformoney launderingdue to theircash-intensive natureandease of moving funds anonymously.

Option A (Correct):Aprivate company sending funds into multiple patron accountsissuspiciousbecause it may indicatemoney laundering structuringor use ofmules.

Option B (Incorrect):Betting on multiple events isnormal behaviorunless there isevidence of match-fixing.

Option C (Incorrect):Large cash buy-ins are common in casinos; however, they become suspicious when coupled withother red flags(e.g., no actual gambling).

Option D (Incorrect):Transferring winnings may be aregular transactionunless linked tostructured transactions.

Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) applies to high-risk customers and transactions, includingpolitically exposed persons (PEPs), high-risk jurisdictions, and correspondent banking relationships.

Option C (Correct):Correspondent banking relationships with high-risk jurisdictions require EDDto prevent cross-border financial crime.

Option D (Correct):Ambassadors are considered PEPs, which require EDD due to corruption risks.

Option E (Correct):A current prime minister is a high-profile PEP, requiringEDD and ongoing transaction monitoring.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):The individual no longer holds a PEP position and is in a low-risk country, soEDD is not required.

Option B (Incorrect):A local footballer does not present a high financial crime risk warranting EDD.

EDD Best Practices for High-Risk Customers:

Verify the source of wealth and funds for PEPs.

Conduct ongoing transaction monitoring on high-risk accounts.

Apply stricter controls on correspondent banking with high-risk jurisdictions.

Chip dumpingis a commonmoney laundering techniquein online gambling.

Option D (Correct):Chip dumpingoccurs whenplayers colludetotransfer fundsvia staged betting, making illicit funds appear as gambling winnings.

Option A (Incorrect):Concealmentis a broad term, not a specific technique.

Option B (Incorrect):Coordinated bettingrefers tomatch-fixing, not money laundering.

Option C (Incorrect):Player-to-player transfersare used in money laundering but arenot specific to online gambling.

Aproper investigation of unusual transactions requires a mix of data analysis, contextual review, and expert judgmentto assess potential risks.

Option B (Correct):Cross-referencing transactions with external factors(e.g.,political events, commodity price fluctuations, news reports) helps identifypotential links to illicit activities.

Option C (Correct):Therelationship managermay provide insights intowhether a transaction aligns with the customer’s known profile and business activity.

Option D (Correct):Arisk-based approachensures thathigher-risk transactions receive enhanced scrutiny, while lower-risk ones undergo standard monitoring.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):Focusing only on transaction amountsignorescontextual factors, such asunusual behavior in low-value transactions.

Option E (Incorrect):Automated alerts are valuable but cannot replace human analysis and judgment.Manual reviews remain necessary for complex cases.

Red Flags in Unusual Transactions:

Large or frequent transactions inconsistent with a customer’s normal profile.

Payments from/to high-risk jurisdictions without a clear purpose.

Use of intermediaries or shell companies to move funds.

Best Practices for AML Investigations:

Use both qualitative and quantitative factorsto assess transaction risks.

Collaborate with business units(e.g., relationship managers) to understand client behavior.

Apply a risk-based approach to allocate investigation resources efficiently.

FIs mustcooperate with law enforcement requestswhile ensuringlegal compliance.

Option C (Correct):Adesignated compliance officershould handledocument preparation and internal review.

Option A (Incorrect):There isno requirementto wait for theCEO’s approval.

Option B (Incorrect):Privacy policies should already align withAML laws, delaying compliance isnot recommended.

Option D (Incorrect):Blocking a lawful requestcould lead tolegal and regulatory action.

A robust AML training program should incorporate the followingbest practicesto ensure awareness and ongoing engagement:

Option A – Tailored and regular training:

Training should berisk-based and role-specific, ensuring employees understand how AML applies to their function.

Option D – Variety and resources:

Use ofinteractive, digital, live, and scenario-based methodskeeps training effective and adaptable. Providing materials and resources supports continued learning.

Option E – Communication and measurement:

Ongoing AML awareness campaigns andfeedback mechanismshelp assess theeffectivenessof training and reinforce its importance.

Option Bis too vague and not recognized as a best practice.

Option C, while helpful, isnot sufficient alone—annual frequency without contextual or tailored content is inadequate.

The activities that could be considered a potential spear phishing scam are:

A courier delivers a duplicate invoice to a business that contains updated payment details of an existing supplier. This could be a way of diverting funds to a fraudulent account by impersonating a legitimate vendor and exploiting the trust relationship between the business and the supplier1.

Payroll receives an external email from an employee looking to update their bank account information. This could be a way of stealing money from the employee or the employer by pretending to be the employee and requesting a change in the payment method or destination2.

An employee receives an email that asks to download an attachment, but the attachment is a malware. This could be a way of infecting the employee’s computer or network with malicious software that could compromise sensitive data, disrupt operations, or demand ransom3.

The other options are not necessarily spear phishing scams, although they may be other types of fraud or deception. For example:

An employee receives a phone call requesting that money be sent to assist someone in trouble. This could be a vishing scam, which is a form of voice phishing that uses phone calls to solicit personal or financial information or to request money transfers4.

A business sends its employees an email warning that email passwords must be changed to prevent cyber-fraud. This could be a legitimate security measure, or it could be a phishing scam, which is a form of email phishing that targets a broad audience and tries to trick them into revealing their credentials or clicking on malicious links.

Members of a religious organization receive a donation request by email claiming to be from their leader. This could be a genuine appeal, or it could be a social engineering scam, which is aform of manipulation that exploits the human factor and relies on the victim’s emotions, trust, or sympathy.

 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.

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.

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.

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

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is a US agency that administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals1. OFAC has a list of sanctions programs and country information for various regions and topics, such as Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and more2. If a charity is headquartered in a country on the OFAC list, it means that the US government has imposed restrictions or prohibitions on transactions or dealings with that country, its government, entities, or individuals. This poses a high risk of violating the sanctions regulations and exposing the bank to legal, regulatory, or reputational consequences. Therefore, the bank may decide to terminate the banking relationship with the charity to avoid such risks.

The other options are not sufficient reasons to terminate the banking relationship, as they may not indicate illegal or suspicious activities by the charity. A high turnover rate of official positions may be due to various factors, such as organizational changes, staff turnover, or personal reasons. It does not necessarily imply that the charity is involved in money laundering or terrorist financing. However, the bank should verify the identity and authority of the new officials and update the customer due diligence information accordingly. The charity may have several incoming international funds transfers because it receives donations or grants from different sources or countries. This is not unusual for an international charity, as long as the funds are consistent with its stated purpose and activities. The bank should monitor the transactions and report any anomalies or red flags to the relevant authorities. The flow of funds both in and out may be complex and hard to trace because the charity operates in multiple jurisdictions or sectors, or has a decentralized or layered structure. This may increase the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, but it does not necessarily mean that the charity is engaged in such activities. The bank should conduct enhanced due diligence and ongoing monitoring of the charity’s transactions and beneficiaries, and apply a risk-based approach to mitigate the potential risks.

 1: Sanctions List Search Tool | Office of Foreign Assets Control 2: Sanctions Programs and Country Information | U.S. Department of the Treasury

Online banking is vulnerable to all three stages of money laundering, namely placement, layering, and integration, because it allows the movement of funds across different accounts, jurisdictions, and institutions with speed, anonymity, and convenience. Online banking can facilitate the following money laundering methods:

Placement: The initial stage of money laundering, where illicit funds are introduced into the financial system. Online banking can enable placement by allowing the deposit of cash or checks through ATMs, mobile devices, or remote deposit capture, or the transfer of funds from prepaid cards, digital wallets, or cryptocurrencies to bank accounts.

Layering: The second stage of money laundering, where illicit funds are moved, disguised, or concealed to obscure their origin and ownership. Online banking can enable layering by allowing the transfer of funds between multiple accounts, often in different jurisdictions or currencies, or the purchase of financial products or services, such as money orders, wire transfers, or online gambling, that create complex transaction trails.

Integration: The final stage of money laundering, where illicit funds are reintroduced into the legitimate economy as apparently legal income or assets. Online banking can enable integration by allowing the transfer of funds to legitimate businesses, investments, or charities, or the purchase of goods or services, such as real estate, luxury items, or travel, that provide a cover for the source of funds.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course1, Module 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Lesson 2.1: The Three Stages of Money Laundering

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition2, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.1: The Three Stages of Money Laundering, pp. 29-34

ACAMS CAMS Examination Preparation Seminar, 6th Edition3, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.1: The Three Stages of Money Laundering, Slides 9-13

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.

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

This represents the highest risk factor for terrorist financing because it may indicate that the charity is diverting funds to support terrorist organizations or activities, or that it is acting as a front or conduit for terrorist financing. Disbursement of funds to entities unrelated to the purpose of the charity may also violate the donor’s intentions, the charity’s mission, or the applicable laws and regulations. A charity with unaudited accounts may have weak internal controls, governance, or transparency, which may increase the risk of misappropriation, diversion, or misuse of funds.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course1, Module 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Lesson 2.3: Money Laundering Risks and Methods by Sector

ACAMS CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition2, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.3: Money Laundering Risks and Methods by Sector, pp. 40-41

ACAMS CAMS Examination Preparation Seminar, 6th Edition3, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Section 2.3: Money Laundering Risks and Methods by Sector, Slide 18

 According to the ACAMS study guide, one of the insurance products that is particularly vulnerable to money laundering is annuity, which is “a contract that provides a series of payments over a specified period of time, usually for the life of the annuitant” (p. 223). Annuities can be used by money launderers to deposit large sums of illicit funds in a single transaction, or to receive regular payments from a legitimate source after paying the premiums with dirty money. Annuities can also be surrendered or transferred to third parties, making it difficult to trace the origin and destination of funds.

ACAMS. (2020). Study Guide for the Certification Examination for Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (6th ed.). Miami, FL: ACAMS.

ComplyAdvantage. (2023)AML in Insurance: How to Detect & Combat Money Laundering 1. Retrieved from https://complyadvantage.com

Financial Crime Academy. (2023)Anti Money Laundering (AML) In Insurance Industry In 2021 2. Retrieved from https://financialcrimeacademy.org

 Before disclosing any supporting documentation for a suspicious transaction report (STR) to a law enforcement agency, the financial institution should confirm thatthe request is legitimate and authorized by verifying the identity and credentials of the requester1. This is to prevent unauthorized access or misuse of the confidential information by impostors or fraudsters. The other options are not true, as they may either compromise the security, integrity, or timeliness of the disclosure, or violate the confidentiality or privacy rights of the customer.

ACAMS, CAMS Examination Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, p. 117

FATF Guidance: The Role of Hawala and Other Similar Service Providers in Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, October 20132, p. 20

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism, June 20173, p. 11

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.

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

 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 Bankspaper1. 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.

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

"Increasingly, countries are using economic sanctions instead of military force as an instrument of foreign policy"

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), the bank should file a SAR if it knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect that a transaction involves funds derived from illegal activity, or is intended or conducted to hide or disguise funds or assets derived from illegal activity, or to evade any BSA regulation or federal law, or has no business or apparent lawful purpose, or is not the sort in which the customer would normally be expected to engage1. The scenario described in the question meets these criteria, as the small deposits and withdrawals from a high-risk country could indicate money laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities. The bank should also document its decision to file or not file a SAR, and retain thesupporting documentation for five years1.

The other options are not correct because they either do not comply with the BSA requirements, or do not adequately address the potential risk of the activity. Blocking any further activity could alert the customer of the bank’s suspicion, and could also interfere with law enforcement investigations. Initiating an investigation into the activity could be part of the bank’s due diligence process, but it does not substitute the obligation to file a SAR if the activity is suspicious. Contacting the customer could also tip off the customer, or elicit false or misleading explanations that could hinder the bank’s assessment of the activity.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 82-83. 12345678 [9]

The customer’s wire transfers to high-risk jurisdictions and the large volume of activity with low month-end balance are two facts that should be considered during the course of an investigation into possible money laundering. These facts may indicate that the customer is trying to move funds from or to countries that have weak anti-money laundering (AML) controls, or that are known to be a source or destination of illicitfunds12. They may also suggest that the customer is using a technique called “smurfing” or “structuring”, which involves breaking down large amounts of cash into smaller transactions to avoid detection or reporting34. The other two facts are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, as the customer may have a legitimate reason to have a long-standing account at the bank or to be on the exempt list for currency transaction reporting requirements.

 1: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Appendix F: Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, Geographic Concerns, 5; 2: AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators?, ComplyAdvantage, 6; 3: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Appendix F: Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, Transaction Has Unusual Features, 5; 4: Money Laundering Red Flags | Key Behaviours and Indicators, High Speed Training, 7.

 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 partof 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.

 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 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.

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

A customer’s account appears to function as a funnel account whereby cash deposits occur in cities/states where the customer does not reside or conduct business. Frequently, in the case of funnel accounts, the funds are quickly withdrawn (same day) after the deposits are made

as there's NO mitigating control, the temporary control system must be developed and implemented until the permanent mitigating control is developed and implemented.

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.

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

 According to the web search results, the Egmont Group is a united body of 170 Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) that provides a platform for FIUs tosecurely exchange expertise and financial intelligence to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and associated predicate offences12. The goal of the Egmont Group is to provide a forum for FIUs around the world to improve support to their respective governments in the fight against money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes345. The other options are not correct because they either do not capture the full scope of the Egmont Group’s activities, or they are not the primary focus of the Egmont Group.

 https://egmontgroup.org/

https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2015/vol2/239473.htm\

Under the USA PATRIOT Act, a U.S. bank that maintains a correspondent account for a foreign bank operating under an offshore license must obtain from the foreign bank the name and address of a person residing in the United States who is authorized to accept service of legal process for records related to the correspondent account1. This requirement is intended to facilitate the U.S. authorities’ access to information and records regarding the correspondent account and its underlying transactions, especially in cases where the foreign bank is located in a jurisdiction that does not cooperate with U.S. law enforcement or regulatory requests2.

USA PATRIOT Act, Section 319(b)(2)(A)1

ACAMS, CAMS Examination Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, pp. 151-152

The Black Market Peso Exchange (BMPE) is a trade-based money laundering technique commonly used by narcotics traffickers based in Colombia and Mexico. The central feature is the use of a money trader to ensure that the revenue from drug sales in the U.S.doesn’t actually 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 cartels12. The BMPE involves six distinct steps:

Obtaining criminal proceeds: The drug cartels sell drugs for dollars in the U.S.

Involvement of intermediary services: The drug cartels sell the dollars to black market peso exchangers in Colombia at a discounted rate.

Identification of complicit companies: The black market peso exchangers identify exporting companies in the U.S. and importing companies in South America that are willing to participate in the scheme.

Placement of funds: The black market peso exchangers deposit the dollars into U.S. bank accounts or use money service businesses or other methods to transfer the funds.

Layering of funds: The black market peso exchangers use the funds to purchase monetary instruments such as checks, money orders, or wire transfers, or to pay for the goods ordered by the South American importers.

Integration of funds: The South American importers receive the goods or the monetary instruments and use them to pay for their imports or to sell them for pesos in the local market.

1: Black Market Peso Exchange in Money Laundering - Financial Crime Academy

2: Overview - FinCEN.gov

The audit function should report to the audit committee of the board of directors (or similar oversight body) and independently evaluate the risk management and controls of the bank through periodic assessments, including the adequacy of the bank’s controls to mitigate the identified risks, the effectiveness of the bank’s staff’s execution of the controls, the effectiveness of the compliance oversight and quality controls and the effectiveness of the training.

Bank A should file a suspicious transaction report (STR) on the transaction in Country A, as it is the financial institution that observes and processes the suspicious activity in its jurisdiction. According to the FATF Recommendations, financial institutions should report any transaction that they have reason to suspect is related to money laundering, terrorist financing, or other criminal activities, regardless of the amount involved1. The STR should include information about the originator, the beneficiary, and the purpose of the transaction, as well as the reasons for suspicion2. Bank A should also comply with any legal or regulatory requirements in Country A regarding the reporting of cross-border wire transfers3.

1: FATF Recommendation 20 - Reporting of suspicious transactions

2: FATF Interpretive Note to Recommendation 20

3: FATF Recommendation 16 - Wire transfers

Wire transfers to high-risk jurisdictions and large cash deposits from a high-risk jurisdiction are two red flags that may indicate money laundering. These activities suggest thatthe customer is trying to move funds from or to a country that has weak anti-money laundering (AML) controls, or that is known to be a source or destination of illicit funds12. Wire transfers can also be used to obscure the origin or destination of the funds, or to layer transactions through multiple accounts or intermediaries3. Large cash deposits can indicate that the customer is trying to avoid the reporting or record-keeping requirements that apply to cash transactions, or that the customer is dealing with proceeds from illegal activities45. The other two options are not necessarily red flags, as the bank may have legitimate reasons to allow cash deposits, and the client may reside in a high-risk jurisdiction for legitimate reasons.

 1: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Appendix F: Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, Geographic Concerns, 6; 2: AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators?, ComplyAdvantage, 5; 3: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Appendix F: Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, Transaction Has Unusual Features, 6; 4: FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Appendix F: Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Red Flags, Unusual Source of Funds, 6; 5: Money Laundering Red Flags | Key Behaviours and Indicators, High Speed Training, 8.

The correct answer is C. Wires received in large, even dollar amounts are a suspicious behavior, as they may indicate an attempt to avoid reporting thresholds or to conceal the source of funds. Large and round numbers are often used by money launderers to simplify calculations or to avoid arousing suspicion12. The other options are not necessarily suspicious, as they may reflect the normal business operations of a wholesale auto business that ships vehicles internationally. The dock shipping receipts match the vehicles (A), vehicles are regularly shipped internationally (B), and account debits are payable to transport companies (D) are all plausible and legitimate activities for such a business.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course3, Module 3: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Lesson 2: Methods of Money Laundering

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide1, Chapter 3: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Section 3.2: Methods of Money Laundering, pp. 79-80

Alternative remittance, also known as underground banking or informal value transfer systems, is a method of transferring money or value without using formal financial institutions or channels. It is often used by migrant workers, refugees, or people who lack access to formal banking services. However, it can also be exploited by criminals and terrorists to move funds across borders without detection or regulation. The Wolfsberg Group, a group of leading international banks that promotes best practices in anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing, cited alternative remittance as one of the sectors and activities that are widely used for the financing of terrorism in its Statement on the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. The Wolfsberg Group recommended that financial institutions apply enhanced and appropriate due diligence to customers engaged in alternative remittance and report any suspicious transactions to the relevant authorities.

Wolfsberg Group (2002). Wolfsberg Statement on Anti-Terrorism Financing1

Pieth, M. (ed.) (2002). Financing Terrorism. Springer, Dordrecht2

ACAMS (2020). CAMS Certification Package (6th Edition)3

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.

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

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.

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

The Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking require new clients to be approved by at least one person other than the private banker. This is because the private banker may have a conflict of interest or be influenced by the client’s wealth or reputation. The approval process should involve a senior manager or a compliance officer who can independently assess the client’s risk profile and suitability for the institution’s services12.

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, p. 37 2: The Wolfsberg Group, The Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking, June 2000, p. 3, https://www.wolfsberg-principles.com/sites/default/files/wb/pdfs/Wolfsberg-AML-Principles-for-Private-Banking-June-2000.pdf

The primary consideration the institution should keep in mind when deciding whether to agree to the law enforcement request is whether the institution can continue to meet its regulatory obligations with the accounts open. This is because the institution has a duty to comply with the applicable laws and regulations, and to protect its reputation and integrity from being associated with money laundering or terrorist financing. The institution should assess the risks and benefits of keeping the account open, and consult with its legal counsel and senior management before making a decision. The institution should also document itsdecision and the rationale behind it, and communicate it to the law enforcement agency12.

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 7: Conducting or Supporting the Investigation Process, p. 143-144 2: FATF Guidance: Anti-Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Measures and Financial Inclusion, February 2013, p. 50-51, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/AML_CFT_Measures_and_Financial_Inclusion_2013.pdf

The European Union Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (4th AMLD) is a legal framework that aims to prevent the use of the Union’s financial system for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing. One of the provisions of the 4th AMLD is to lower the currency threshold for cash payments from €15,000 to €10,000. This means that any person who makes or receives cash payments of €10,000 or more, whether in a single transaction or in several linked transactions, is subject to customer due diligence and record-keeping obligations. The 4th AMLD also extends its applicability to providers of gambling services, which are now listed as ‘obliged entities’.

Directive - 2015/849 - EN - Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive - EUR-Lex, Article 11 and Recital 23.

EUR-Lex - 02015L0849-20210630 - EN - EUR-Lex, Article 11 and Recital 23.

Key elements of the 4th EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive, Section: Cash payments.

Anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism legislative package, Section: New EU AML/CFT Regulation.

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 theFinancial 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.

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

 Having inadequate privacy policies and procedures can expose an organization to legal risks such as industry or regulatory sanctions and charges of deceptive business practices. Industry or regulatory sanctions can result from violating the laws and regulations that govern data privacy and protection, such as the GDPR, the CCPA, or the GLBA.These sanctions can include fines, penalties, injunctions, or revocation of licenses. Charges of deceptive business practices can arise from misleading or false statements about how the organization collects, uses, or discloses personal data, or from failing to comply with its own privacy policies and procedures. These charges can lead to lawsuits, settlements, or enforcement actions by authorities such as the FTC or the state attorneys general.

=

The 4 Biggest Risks of Non-Compliance With Data Privacy Regulations

Security and privacy laws, regulations, and compliance: The complete guide

An Ethical Approach to Data Privacy Protection

 According to the BSA/AML Manual1, one purpose of filing SARs is to identify violations or potential violations of law to the appropriate law enforcement authorities for criminal investigation. Therefore, when an institution receives a document request from law enforcement with regard to an STR that the institution has filed, it should cooperate and provide the documents that were previously collected to support the STR. This will help the law enforcement agency to conduct its investigation and follow up on the suspicious activity reported by the institution. The institution should also maintain the confidentiality of the STR and the document request, and avoid tipping off the customer or any other person involved in the suspicious activity.

BSA/AML Manual1

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

Suspicious Transaction Report STR3

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.

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

Designating a country as being of “prime money laundering concern” allows the U.S. government to impose one or more of five special measures under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act12. These special measures are intended to protect the U.S. financial system from the risks posed by the designated country, such as money laundering, terrorist financing, or other illicit activities. The fifth special measure, which is the most severe, authorizes the Treasury Department to prohibit U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining correspondent or payable-through accounts for foreign financial institutions that involve the designated country12. Correspondent accounts are accounts that enable foreign banks to access the U.S. financial system and provide services to their customers, while payable-through accounts are accounts that allow foreign banks to offer their customers direct access to the U.S. financial system3. Closing these accounts effectively cuts off the designated country from the U.S. financial system and imposes significant costs and burdens on its financial sector.

1: 311 Actions | U.S. Department of the Treasury

2: Press Releases - U.S. Department of the Treasury

3: Anti-Money Laundering Laws and Regulations USA 2023-2024

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.

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

On-line banking offers a significant money laundering risk to a financial institution because:

The nature of on-line banking can make it difficult to establish who is controlling the account. On-line banking allows customers to access their accounts remotely, without face-to-face contact with the financial institution. This can pose challenges for verifying the identity and legitimacy of the account holder, especially if the account is opened on-line or through a third-party intermediary. On-line banking can also facilitate the use of anonymous or fictitious identities, or the use of proxies or nominees to hide the true beneficial owner of the account.

The ease of access through the internet enables cross border movement of funds. On-line banking allows customers to transfer funds quickly and easily across different jurisdictions, without physical movement of cash or other instruments. This can increase the risk of money laundering, as funds can be moved to or from high-risk countries or regions, or through multiple accounts or financial institutions, to obscure the origin, destination, or purpose of the funds. On-line banking can also enable customers to access or use alternative payment systems or virtual currencies, which may have lower regulatory oversight or transparency standards than traditional banking systems.

The speed of electronic transaction enables execution of multiple complex transactions within short time frame. On-line banking allows customers to conduct transactions in real time, with minimal or no human intervention or verification. This can increase the risk of money laundering, as customers can execute multiple transactions in a short period of time, or use complex transaction structures or patterns, to avoid detection or reporting thresholds, or to conceal the source, nature, or ownership of the funds. On-line banking can also enable customers to use automated or algorithmic trading systems, which may generate large volumes of transactions that are difficult to monitor or analyze.

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 5, pages 139-140

CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 2, Task 2.1, Skill 2.1.1

Online Banking and Money Laundering, ACAMS Today, September 2012

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course1, one of the red flags for money laundering is “transferring funds to or from foreign countries or jurisdictions that are known to have weak anti-money laundering standards or are considered high-risk for money laundering or terrorist financing” (Module 2, Lesson 3, Part 2). This is also consistent with the suspicious activity report (SAR) criteria, which require financial institutions to report transactions that “involve funds derived from illegal activity or are intended or conducted to hide or disguise funds or assets derived from illegal activity” or “involve the use of the financial institution to facilitate criminal activity” (31 CFR § 1020.320(a)(2)). Therefore, the customer’s request to transfer funds to accounts in three different foreign jurisdictions should be the focus of the SAR, as it may indicate an attempt to launder money or finance terrorism.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course

[31 CFR § 1020.320 - Reports by banks of suspicious transactions]

The correct answer is A and D, as these two statements are directly quoted from the Wolfsberg Group’s “Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism” document1. Statement A describes the general role of financial institutions in the fight against terrorism, while statement D describes the specific due diligence measures that financial institutions should apply to customers engaged in high-risk sectors or activities. Statement B and C are not part of the Wolfsberg Group’s document, and they are not accurate descriptions of the role of financial institutions in the fight against terrorism. Statement B is too vague and unrealistic, as financial institutions cannot guarantee to drive down terrorism by analyzing activity types. Statement C is too narrow and prescriptive, as financial institutions may not have the resources or the mandate to create dedicated financial intelligence units for terrorist financing.

 1: The Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism – Wolfsberg Statement, page 213-214.

 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.

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

The anti-money laundering officer should advise the account-opening officer to verify the identity of all the partners as an initial step. This is because opening a bank account for an offshore company with multiple owners from different jurisdictions poses a high risk of money laundering and terrorist financing. Therefore, the bank should apply enhanced due diligence measures to ensure that the offshore company and its owners are legitimate and not involved in any criminal activities. One of the key measures is to verify the identity of all the partners, not just the one who presents the power of attorney. This will help the bank to establish the beneficial ownership and control structure of the offshore company, as well as to detect any possible fraud, forgery, or coercion in the power of attorney document. The bank should also verify the authenticity and validity of the power of attorney, and the scope and purpose of the authority granted to the partner who requests the account opening.

The other options are less important or irrelevant as initial steps. Verifying the source of the deposit is also a part of the enhanced due diligence process, but it should be done after verifying the identity of the partners and the offshore company. Filing a suspicious transaction report with the appropriate Financial Intelligence Unit or the Egmont Group is a possible action that the bank may take if it detects any indicators of money laundering or terrorist financing in the account opening process, but it is not an initial step. The Egmont Group is an international network of Financial Intelligence Units that facilitates information exchange and cooperation, but it is not a reporting authority.

ACAMS Study Guide, Chapter 3: Customer Identification and Verification, 1

ACAMS Study Guide, Chapter 4: Customer Risk Assessment, 2

ACAMS Study Guide, Chapter 5: Ongoing Monitoring, 3

Powers of attorney: opening a bank account, 4

 The integration stage of money laundering is where the illicit funds are reintroduced into the legitimate financial system, making them appear as lawful income or assets. This may include using multiple accounts, transferring funds between different banks or jurisdictions, and engaging in various financial activities to legitimize the illicit funds. The integration stage aims to make the illicit funds appear legitimate and indistinguishable from lawful funds within the financial system1.

Option C is an example of the integration stage of money laundering involving a bank or another deposit-taking institution, as it involves moving the illicit funds from one bank account to another, creating a complex trail of transactions that obscures the origin and ownership of the funds. This technique is also known as wire transfer laundering or electronic funds transfer laundering2.

Option A is an example of the placement stage of money laundering, as it involves depositing the illicit funds into the financial system for the first time, using a front company as a cover for the illegal source of the funds. A front company is a legitimate business that is used to conceal or facilitate illicit activity.

Option B is an example of the layering stage of money laundering, as it involves converting the illicit cash into other forms of value that are less conspicuous and easier to move, such as negotiable instruments. Negotiable instruments are documents that promise payment to a specified person or the bearer, such as checks, money orders, or traveler’s checks.

Option D is not an example of the integration stage of money laundering involving a bank or another deposit-taking institution, as it does not involve any financial transactions or accounts. It is rather an example of the integration stage of money laundering involving the purchase of goods or services, such as a luxury vehicle, with the illicit funds that had previously been deposited and layered through the financial system.

1: Integration Stage of Money Laundering: Bank or Deposit-Taking Institution

2: Process of Money Laundering: Placement, Layering, Integration - Tutorial

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 32

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 34

The Three Stages Of Money Laundering And How Money Laundering Works

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, the employee should report the conversation to the compliance officer because the colleague is engaging in tipping off, which is a serious violation of anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Tipping off is the act of informing a person or entity that they are the subject of a suspicious transaction report or an investigation, or providing any information that may compromise or impede the investigation. Tipping off can result in criminal penalties, civil liabilities, and disciplinary actions for the individual and the institution. Therefore, the employee has a duty to report the colleague’s misconduct to the compliance officer, who is responsible for ensuring compliance with the anti-money laundering policies and procedures, and taking appropriate corrective actions.

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), page 97

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

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Module 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism, video 3.4: Tipping Off and Confidentiality

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 8, Answer B

According to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), a financial institution or business must establish an anti-money laundering (AML) program that includes at least four elements: (a) a system of internal policies, procedures and controls to prevent, detect and report money laundering and other illicit activities; (b) a designated compliance officer who is responsible for overseeing the implementation and effectiveness of the AML program; © an ongoing employee training program that covers the legal and regulatory obligations, the risks and red flags of money laundering, and the roles and responsibilities of the staff in the AML program; and (d) an independent audit function that tests and evaluates the adequacy and compliance of the AML program12.

While the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is a key agency that enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries, entities and individuals, it is not part of the BSA or the AML program requirements. However, financial institutions and businesses are expected to comply with OFAC regulations and screen their customers and transactions against the OFAC lists of sanctioned parties. Failure to do so may result in civil or criminal penalties34. Therefore, it is advisable for financial institutions and businesses to have an OFAC program that is integrated with their AML program, but it is not a mandatory element that they have to specifically address in their AML program.

1: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (2020). Anti-Money Laundering Programs

2: ACAMS (2020). CAMS Certification Package (6th Edition)

3: Office of Foreign Assets Control (2023). Sanctions Programs and Country Information

4: Moses & Singer LLP (2023). Anti-Money Laundering, Bank Secrecy and OFAC Regulations

A sound Customer Due Diligence Program (CDD) is a key component of an effective anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) framework. According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global standard-setter for AML/CFT, CDD involves the following elements1:

Identifying the customer and verifying their identity using reliable, independent sources of information or documents.

Identifying the beneficial owner and taking reasonable measures to verify their identity, so that the financial institution understands who ultimately owns or controls the customer or the funds.

Understanding and obtaining information on the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship.

Conducting ongoing due diligence on the business relationship and scrutinizing transactions to ensure that they are consistent with the financial institution’s knowledge of the customer, their business and risk profile, and the source of funds.

Therefore, the three elements of a sound CDD program that are listed in the question are:

Determination of what type of customer the financial institution will accept: This involves defining the customer acceptance policy and risk appetite of the financial institution, and applying appropriate risk-based measures to accept or reject customers based on their risk profile and the financial institution’s ability to manage and mitigate those risks2.

Training as to how and to what extent to identify prospective customers: This involves providing adequate and regular training to the staff who are responsible for conducting CDD, and ensuring that they are aware of the legal and regulatory requirements, the internal policies and procedures, the risk indicators, the verification methods, and the reporting obligations3.

Obtaining date of birth and address of a prospective customer: This is part of the basic information that is required to identify and verify the customer’s identity, and to establish their risk profile and the source of funds. The date of birth and address can also be used to check against various databases and watchlists to detect any potential matches with sanctioned or high-risk individuals or entities4.

The element that is not part of a sound CDD program is:

Determination of who in the institution should be assigned to the prospective customer as a liaison: This is not a mandatory or essential element of CDD, although it may be a good practice to assign a dedicated relationship manager or contact person to each customer, especially for high-risk or complex customers, to ensure effective communication, monitoring, and service delivery.

FATF Guidance on Customer Due Diligence and Financial Inclusion 1

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) 2

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination (6th Edition), Chapter 4: Developing an AML/CFT Program 3

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination (6th Edition), Chapter 5: Conducting and Supporting the Investigation Process 4

Wolfsberg Group Guidance on Customer Due Diligence (CDD)

Suspicious transaction report (STR) information is confidential and should not be disclosed to anyone outside the compliance function or law enforcement authorities. Providing STR information to the credit department could compromise the integrity of the reporting process and expose the institution to legal risks. The compliance officer should decline to provide the STR information to the credit department and explain the reasons for doing so.

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 4: Conducting and Supporting the Investigation Process, page 136

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, Candidate Handbook, page 16

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs, Video 4.3: Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Practice Test 1,

https://www.naic.org/documents/committees_d_antifraud_meetingcc_faqsinsurance_103105.pdf

Paying the quarterly life insurance premium using money orders from two different banks is considered a red flag for potential money laundering. This is because moneyorders are often used by money launderers to avoid the scrutiny of banks and regulators, and to disguise the source and origin of funds12. Using money orders from two different banks also suggests that the client is trying to evade the reporting thresholds or the record-keeping requirements that apply to cash transactions3. The other transactions are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, although they may warrant further due diligence depending on the risk profile of the client and the nature of the insurance product.

 1: AML in Insurance: How to Detect & Combat Money Laundering, ComplyAdvantage, 5; 2: AML fraud flags: best practices for insurers, Thomson Reuters, 6; 3: Money Laundering ‘Red Flags’: How To Spot Risky Scenarios, ThinkAdvisor, 7

According to the ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 38, one of the steps that a financial institution should take when it suspects money laundering activity is to file a suspicious transaction report (STR) or a suspicious activity report (SAR) to the relevant authorities. This will alert the regulators and law enforcement of the potentialmoney laundering scheme and provide them with valuable information to trace the funds and identify the perpetrators.

Another step that a financial institution should take is to identify any unusual or suspicious wire transfers initiated by casas de cambio to jurisdictions outside of Mexico that bear no apparent business relationship with that casa de cambio. This could indicate that the casas de cambio are involved in layering and integration stages of money laundering, where they are moving the illicit funds across borders and disguising their origin and ownership. The financial institution should monitor and document these wire transfers and report them to the authorities if necessary.

Option B is not a relevant step to trace funds through the bank, as it does not provide any information about the source, destination, or purpose of the funds. A decrease in the sale of large denomination U.S. bank notes to casas de cambio by the bank could be due to various factors, such as market demand, exchange rates, or regulatory changes, and does not necessarily indicate money laundering activity.

Option C is also not a relevant step to trace funds through the bank, as it does not indicate any connection to the suspected money laundering scheme. Deposits by casas de cambio that include third-party items, such as sequentially numbered monetary instruments, could be legitimate transactions that are part of the normal business operations of the casas de cambio. Unless there is evidence that these deposits are related to the sale of large denomination U.S. bank notes or the Mexican syndicate, they are not useful for tracing the funds.

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 38

Combating Money Laundering and Other Forms of Illicit Finance

Sting Operation Snares Casa de Cambio for Allegedly Laundering Millions Through U.S. Banks

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 diligencemeasures for customers that pose higher risks, and simplified due diligence measures for customers that pose lower risks12.

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 first Financial Action Task Force (FATF) initiative was the 40 Recommendations on Money Laundering, which were issued in April 1990, less than a year after the FATF was established by the G7 summit in Paris in 1989. The 40 Recommendations aimed to provide a comprehensive plan of action to fight money laundering by setting out the principles and measures for effective legal, regulatory, and operational frameworks at the national and international levels. The 40 Recommendations have been revised and updated several times since then, most recently in 2022, to reflect the evolving trends and techniques of money laundering and to include the issues of terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The other options are not the first FATF initiative, but they are related to the FATF’s work and mandate. The Report on Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories (NCCTs) was launched in 2000 to identify and monitor the jurisdictions that did not comply with the FATF standards and posed a risk to the international financial system. The Report on Money Laundering Typologies was first published in 1996 and has been updated annually to provide an analysis of the methods, techniques, and trends of money launderingand to assist the FATF members and observers in developing effective countermeasures. The Special Recommendations on Terrorist Financing were issued in October 2001, following the September 11 attacks, to complement the 40 Recommendations and to address the specific challenges of combating the financing of terrorism and terrorist acts.

History of the FATF, 1

Financial Action Task Force - Wikipedia, 2

Financial Action Task Force (FATF): What it is, How it Works - Investopedia, 3

The FINANCIAL ACTION TASK FORCE (FATF) - INSIGHTSIAS, 4

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) 40 Recommendations address the transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons (such as companies, foundations, associations, etc.) and legal arrangements (such as trusts, fiducies, anstalts, etc.) in Recommendations 24 and 25. These recommendations aim to prevent the misuse of legal persons and arrangements for money laundering, terrorist financing and other illicit purposes, by requiring countries to ensure that accurate and up-to-date information on the natural persons who ultimately own or control them (the beneficial owners) is available to the competent authorities in a timely manner.

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 112

CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 1, Task 1.2, Skill 1.2.2

Guidance on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership, FATF, October 2014

Recommendation 24: Transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons, FATF

[Recommendation 25: Transparency and beneficial ownership of legal arrangements], FATF

These are the information that can help the correspondent bank to assess the risk profile, the regulatory compliance, and the operational capacity of the respondent bank, and to verify its identity and legitimacy. The correspondent bank should obtain and verify the following information about the respondent bank:

Respondent’s management, nature of license, and major business activity. This can help the correspondent bank to understand the governance, the legal status, and the core functions of the respondent bank, and to evaluate its reputation, integrity, and competence.

The quality of supervision in the home country. This can help the correspondent bank to determine the level of oversight and regulation that the respondent bank is subject to, and to identify any potential gaps or weaknesses in the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) framework of the home country.

Respondent’s location, in particular the existence of a real physical presence. This can help the correspondent bank to verify the actual existence and operation of the respondent bank, and to avoid dealing with shell banks or banks located in high-risk or non-cooperative jurisdictions.

The other option is not necessarily information that should be included to establish a rigorous “Know Your Respondent” procedure, although it may have some relevance or importance depending on the circumstances and the nature of the correspondent relationship. Option 2 describes computer equipment and software capability, which may be useful to assess the technical and operational compatibility and efficiency of the respondent bank, but it is not essential to evaluate its risk or compliance level.

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 7, pages 154-155

https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-7.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.

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

According to the CAMS study guide, chapter 4, page 851, bearer shares are shares that do not have the name of the owner registered on them, and the ownership is transferred by the physical delivery of the share certificate. This means that the true beneficial owner of the company can be hidden or changed without any record or notification. Bearer shares are considered a high-risk factor for money laundering and terrorist financing, as they can facilitate the movement and concealment of illicit funds through anonymous corporate vehicles. Therefore, the company having bearer shares should cause the most suspicion of money laundering among the options given.

The other options are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, although they may have some risk implications depending on the context and the customer profile. Option A, the jurisdiction being a known tax haven, may suggest that the company is seeking to avoid or minimize taxes, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be legitimate tax planning or optimization purposes. Option C, the corporation director being a European citizen, may indicate that the company has some cross-border or international activities, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be valid business or personal reasons for the director’s nationality. Option D, no financial statements being filed for 3 years, maysuggest that the company is not complying with the accounting or reporting standards of the jurisdiction, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be other explanations or mitigating factors for the lack of financial statements.

1: ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 85: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf

The inherent level of anti-money laundering risk across the entire organization depends on various factors, such as the nature, size, complexity, and structure of the business, the customers, the products and services, and the countries or jurisdictions involved. Among the four options given, the transaction monitoring program and the customer due diligence program are not factors that determine the inherent risk, but rather measures that mitigate the risk. Therefore, they are not relevant for the compliance officer’s purpose. The countries that the bank operates in and the products and services offered by the bank are important factors that affect the inherent risk, as they may expose the bank to different levels of money laundering threats, vulnerabilities, and regulatory requirements. For example, some countries or jurisdictions have high levels of corruption, unstable governments, or are known as money laundering havens1. They could also have inadequate AML/CFT regulatory and judicial frameworks, or be subject to economic sanctions2. Similarly, some products and services may pose higher risks thanothers, such as those that involve cash transactions, cross-border transfers, anonymous or non-face-to-face customers, or complex or innovative features34.

=

1: AML risk-rating models | McKinsey

2: Money laundering and terrorist financing risks - Financial Action Task Force (FATF)

4: AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators? - ComplyAdvantage

5: Anti Money Laundering Risk Assessment - Financial Crime Academy

Wire stripping is a technique used by money launderers to remove or alter information that identifies the originator or beneficiary of a wire transfer, in order to avoid detection or tracing. To detect wire stripping, a bank employee should compare the wire transaction as it enters and after it leaves the bank, and look for any discrepancies or missing information in the fields related to the originator or beneficiary. The employee should also check for suspicious phrases usually used to conceal originator or beneficiary identity, such as “for further credit”, “in favor of”, “on behalf of”, or “as instructed”.

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

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.31

ACAMS Chapter 3 Exam Questions, Question 792

FATF Guidance on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership, Section 3.23

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 moneylaundering 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.

Egmont Group’s 100 Cases1

Financial Action Task Force Typologies2

FinCEN’s SAR Activity Review3

The Wolfsberg Principles4

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.

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

The method of purchasing chips with cash and redeeming them for a check is used to launder money in casinos. This is because the check can be deposited into a bank account or cashed at another location, creating a paper trail that appears to be legitimate. The check can also be used to conceal the source and amount of the cash, as well as the identity of the person who obtained it. This method is also known as “chip washing” or “chip dumping” and is one of the common ways that money launderers exploit casinos12.

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, p. 32-33 2: FATF Report: Money Laundering through the Physical Transportation of Cash, October 2015, p. 28-29, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/money-laundering-through-transportation-cash.pdf

 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 seniormanagers, 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.

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 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.

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

 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.

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

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.

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 40 Recommendations provide a complete set of countermeasures against money laundering

and terrorist financing, covering

• the identification of risks and development of appropriate policies;

• the criminal justice system and law enforcement;

• the financial system and its regulation;

• the transparency of legal persons and arrangements; and

• international cooperation.

Before sharing customer records within the same jurisdiction, an FI should consider the legal and regulatory framework that governs the protection of personal data and the disclosure of client information. Different jurisdictions may have different laws and rules regarding the privacy and confidentiality of customer data, the consent and notification requirements for data sharing, the purposes and scope of data sharing, and the safeguards and accountability measures for data protection. An FI should ensure that it complies with the applicable restrictions and obligations when sharing customer records within the same jurisdiction, and that it does not violate the rights and expectations of its customers.

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4, page 83

CAMS Dumps Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 352, page 8

CAMS Dumps Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 352, page 8

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) hasconducted mutual evaluations of its members such as Barbados, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago34.

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

International wire transfers are considered to be of highest money laundering risk because they can facilitate the rapid and anonymous movement of funds across borders and jurisdictions, making it difficult for law enforcement and regulators to trace the origin and destination of the funds, and to identify the beneficial owners and controllers of the accounts involved. International wire transfers can also be used to layer and integrate illicit proceeds into the legitimate financial system, by disguising the source, ownership, and purpose of the funds. International wire transfers can involve multiple intermediaries, complex payment chains, and inconsistent or incomplete information, whichcan increase the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing. Therefore, international wire transfers are subject to enhanced due diligence, record-keeping, and reporting requirements under various anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) regulations and standards, such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations1, the European Union (EU) Funds Transfer Regulation2, and the United States (US) Bank Secrecy Act3.

1: FATF (2012), International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation, FATF, Paris, France, Recommendation 16 and Interpretive Note to Recommendation 16. 2: Regulation (EU) 2015/847 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on information accompanying transfers of funds and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1781/2006 (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 1) 4 3: 31 U.S.C. §§ 5311-5330 and 31 C.F.R. Chapter X

V

You cannot make international money transfers unless the money is credited to the account. So first priority saving account, subsequent risk international wire transfer

"A savings account, as well as a checking account, can be one of the riskiest financial instruments for money laundering operations given the ease with which it can be opened and operated".

 A key reason why a FI conducts an enterprise-wide AML risk assessment is to assess money laundering and terrorist financing risks and ensure there are adequate controls to mitigate those risks. An enterprise-wide AML risk assessment allows the FI to identify and appropriately manage the ML/TF and other illicit financial activity risks within its banking operations. It also helps the FI to establish global AML control standards and determine the effectiveness of its AML risk management program, including internal preventive and detective controls. By understanding its risk profile, the FI can better apply appropriate risk management processes to the BSA/AML compliance program to mitigate and manage risk and comply with BSA regulatory requirements. The BSA/AML risk assessment should provide a comprehensive analysis of the FI’s ML/TF and other illicit financial activity risks, and should be documented in writing and communicated to all relevant stakeholders.

1: Enterprise Wide AML, CTF,Sanctions Risk Assessment (EWRA … - Eloquens2

3: BSA/AML Risk Assessment - FFIEC BSA/AML3

2: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination2

The FATF measures the effectiveness of a country’s efforts to combat money laundering and terrorist financing through a process known as mutual evaluation. This process involves peer reviews, where experts from other member countries assess the technical compliance and the effectiveness of a country’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) framework. The FATF has developed a methodology that identifies 11 key areas, or immediate outcomes, that an effective AML/CTF system should achieve, and uses them as the basis for the mutual evaluation. The FATF publishes the mutual evaluation reports, which provide an in-depth analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each country’s AML/CTF regime, as well as recommendations for improvement.

1: An effective system to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, FATF, February 2013.

2: Report on the State of Effectiveness and Compliance with the FATF Standards, FATF, June 2021.

3: Financial Action Task Force (FATF) | Meaning, Functions, Impact, Finance Strategists, September 2023.

4: FATF Recommendations, FATF, October 2020.

The activity described in the question raises several red flags for money laundering, such as large and frequent cash deposits, transfers to offshore jurisdictions, and involvement of a charitable organization that could be a front for illicit funds. The Compliance Officer should file a suspicious transaction report (STR) with the competent authority, such as the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), as soon as possible, and provide all the relevant information and documentation to support the suspicion. Filing an STR is a legal obligation for financial institutions and does not require the consent or notification of the customer. The Compliance Officer should also follow the bank’s internal policies and procedures for handling such cases, which may include freezing the account, conducting further investigation, or escalating the matter to senior management.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide1, Chapter 4: Conducting or Supporting the Investigation, Section 4.4: Reporting, pp. 137-139

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course2, Module 4: Conducting or Supporting the Investigation, Lesson 4.4: Reporting

ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline3, Domain 4: Conducting or Supporting the Investigation, Task 4.4: File internal and external reports, p. 18

 The internal review would most likely recommend that the institution provide product-specific anti-money laundering training to all relevant employees, not just actuaries. This is because life insurance products can be used for money laundering purposes, such as purchasing policies with illicit funds, surrendering policies for cash value, or using policies as collateral for loans. Therefore, all employees who are involved in selling, servicing, or processing life insurance products should be aware of the money laundering risks and red flags associated with these products, and how to report any suspicious activity. The institution should also ensure that the training is timely, effective, and tailored to the specific roles and responsibilities of the employees.

The other options are not as relevant or appropriate as the correct answer. Option A is too broad, as not all staff need to be trained on anti-money laundering, only those who are relevant to the institution’s business activities and exposure to money laundering risks. Option C is too narrow, as it only focuses on actuaries and does not address the need for training other employees who may deal with life insurance products. Option D is not sufficient, as e-learning alone may not be effective in ensuring that employees understand and retain the anti-money laundering content, and the institution should also conduct follow-up assessments to measure the impact and outcomes of the training.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), page 57.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 3: Compliance Standards for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT), Lesson 3.5: Training and Testing.

Best Practices for Anti-Money Laundering Compliance - DIRO Original, Section 3: Adequate Training.

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.

1: Different types of sanctions - Consilium1

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

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.

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.)”

 According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), a financial institution (FI) should update its ML/TF risk assessment when there are changes in its business activities, customer base, or operating environment that may affect its exposure to ML/TF risks1 Some examples of such changes are:

When new products, services or customer types are introduced: New products, services or customer types may introduce new or increased ML/TF risks that the FI may not have previously considered or addressed. For example, offering online banking, prepaid cards, or cross-border remittances may create new opportunities for money launderers or terrorist financiers to exploit the FI’s systems and processes. Therefore, the FI should assess the ML/TF risks associated with the new products, services or customer types and implement appropriate controls to mitigate them12

When the institution faces a merger or acquisition: A merger or acquisition may result in the FI inheriting the ML/TF risks of the other entity, as well as the potential liabilities and reputational damage that may arise from any ML/TF issues or violations. Therefore, the FI should conduct a due diligence on the other entity’s ML/TF risk assessment, policies, procedures, and controls, and identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. The FI should also integrate and harmonize the ML/TF risk assessment and compliance programs of the merged or acquired entity with its own13

 1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 32. 2: Money laundering/terrorism financing risk assessment | AUSTRAC4 3: MONEY LAUNDERING & TERRORIST FINANCING (ML/TF) RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY5, page 4.

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, banks should apply a risk-based approach to customer due diligence, which means that they should adopt enhanced measures for higher-risk customers and simplified measures for lower-risk customers. Enhanced due diligence (EDD) may include obtaining additional information on the customer’s identity, source of funds, business activities, beneficial owners, and expected transactions, as well as conducting more frequent and intensive monitoring ofthe account activity. EDD is especially important for customers who are politically exposed persons (PEPs), who are from or have connections with high-risk countries or jurisdictions, or who are involved in high-risk industries or sectors. Therefore, performing EDD including enhanced ongoing monitoring of the account activity is the correct way for banks to deal with high-risk customers.

 Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 121.

B. An internal auditor with the requisite knowledge and expertise of AML: An internal auditor with sufficient knowledge and expertise in AML regulations and compliance requirements can perform the AML audit.

D. Qualified bank staff if not involved in the AML function being tested: Qualified bank staff who are not involved in the AML function being audited can perform the AML audit.

According to the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), the financial institution (Fl) should take the following actions:

A. Review the client's activity, determine if suspicious activity exists, and report accordingly. The Fl should assess the risk of the situation and determine if there is any suspicious activity that needs to be reported to the appropriate authorities. This would involve conducting a review of the client's account activity and transactions to determine if there are any indicators of money laundering or terrorist financing.

D. Inform local LEA and regulator of the request for awareness. The Fl should inform the local law enforcement agency and regulator of the request from the foreign jurisdiction to raise awareness of the situation and determine if any further actions need to be taken.

Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) is a form of cooperation between different countries for the purpose of collecting and exchanging information and evidence in criminal matters. MLA is usually governed by bilateral or multilateral treaties that establish the procedures and requirements for requesting and providing assistance. The first valid step in the MLA process is to send a formal request from the central authority of the requesting country to the central authority of the requested country. The central authority is the designated entity that is responsible for making, receiving, and facilitating the execution of MLA requests. The request should contain the necessary information and documents to enable the requested country to assess and execute the request, such as the nature and purpose of the request, the legal basis, the description of the assistance sought, the identity of the persons involved, the applicable legal provisions, and the deadline for the response. The request may also be accompanied by a commission letter of request, which is a judicial document that authorizes a foreign authority to perform certain acts on behalf of the requesting authority, such as taking evidence or statements from witnesses or suspects.

Guidelines on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.18, 2.19, 2.20, 2.21, 2.22, 2.23, 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, 2.27, 2.28, 2.29, 2.30, 2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 2.34, 2.35, 2.36, 2.37, 2.38, 2.39, 2.40, 2.41, 2.42, 2.43, 2.44, 2.45, 2.46, 2.47, 2.48, 2.49, 2.50, 2.51, 2.52, 2.53, 2.54, 2.55, 2.56, 2.57, 2.58, 2.59, 2.60, 2.61, 2.62, 2.63, 2.64, 2.65, 2.66, 2.67, 2.68, 2.69, 2.70, 2.71, 2.72, 2.73, 2.74, 2.75, 2.76, 2.77, 2.78, 2.79, 2.80, 2.81, 2.82, 2.83, 2.84, 2.85, 2.86, 2.87, 2.88, 2.89, 2.90, 2.91, 2.92, 2.

Typical events to identify and investigate potential AML activities include: A) blocked transactions involving individuals included in the Office of Foreign Assets Control Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List; B) internal tips from employees of the bank about potential suspicious activity; and C) alerts triggered by the automated AML monitoring system [1]. Blocked transactions are those which involve individuals included on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List – this is a list maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of individuals who are subject to economic or trade sanctions [1], or who may be involved in money laundering or terrorist activities [2]. Internal tips are those which are provided by employees of the bank who may have observed suspicious activity, or have reason to believe that certain transactions or activities may be related to potential money laundering. Alerts triggered by the automated AML monitoring system are those which are generated by the banks systems and processes which are designed to detect potential money laundering.

Cryptocurrency is a digital or virtual currency that uses cryptography to secure and verify transactions. Cryptocurrencies are decentralized and operate outside the control of any central authority, such as a government or a bank. This makes them attractive for money launderers, who can use them to transfer funds anonymously, quickly, and globally, without leaving a trace or being subject to regulation. Cryptocurrencies pose more risk of money laundering than other sources of money, such as wire transfers, credit cards, or money service businesses, which are subject to more oversight, verification, and reporting requirements.

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.9, page 37

CAMS eLearning Course, Module 1, Lesson 9

ACAMS Crypto Hub

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, one of the red flags for money laundering in real estate transactions is the use of an appraiser who is not on the approved list of the financial institution. This could indicate a possible collusion between the appraiser and the borrower or the underwriter to inflate the value of the property and obtain a higher loan amount. The anti-money laundering specialist should document the underwriter’s actions and the reasons for approving the exception, as well as the discrepancy between the appraised value and the market value of theproperty. The specialist should then file a suspicious transaction report (STR) to the relevant authorities, as required by the local regulations .

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Chapter 7: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, page 201.

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Chapter 8: Anti-Money Laundering Programs, page 227.

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Chapter 9: Conducting or Supporting the Investigation Process, page 255.

 The anti-money laundering officer (AML officer) is responsible for overseeing the implementation and effectiveness of the anti-money laundering (AML) program of a financial institution. The AML officer should have sufficient authority, independence, and access to resources to perform this role. Reporting to the Sales Director may compromise the independence and objectivity of the AML officer, as the Sales Director may have conflicting interests or incentives that could influence the AML officer’s decisions or actions. The AML officer should report to a senior management level that is independent of business functions and has direct access to the board of directors or a relevant committee. This would ensure that the AML officer can communicate any AML issues or concerns to the board without any interference or undue influence from the business functions.

= Some of the references that support this answer are:

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 41: “The AML officer should report to a senior management level that is independent of the business line and has direct access to the board of directors or a relevant committee.”

Money Laundering Reporting Officer: The Role Of MLRO, Section “Role Of Money Laundering Reporting Officer”: “The MLRO should have independent monitoring and should be able to connect directly with people who make business decisions, such as senior management or the board of directors.”

Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO)? | Dow Jones, Section “What is a Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO)?”: “A Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO) is tasked with overseeing a firm’s compliance with the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) rules on money laundering. … The MLRO should have sufficient authority and independence within the firm to carry out their responsibilities effectively.”

 The correct answer is C because the European Union Money Laundering Directives require lawyers and other independent legal professionals to report suspicious transactions to the competent authority when they are involved in certain activities on behalf of their clients, such as creating or managing companies, trusts, or other legal arrangements. The directives also provide that the obligation to report overrides any professional secrecy or confidentiality rules, except when the lawyer is ascertaining the legal position of the client or representing the client in legal proceedings or in connection with such proceedings. Therefore, the lawyer in this scenario should report the activity as suspicious to the competent authority, as creating a financial holding company for the client falls within the scope of the reporting obligation and does not qualify for the exemption12

=

1: ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 141

2: Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, Article 33 and 34

The anti-money laundering specialist should recommend a financial institution to investigate the source of funds, identify people and companies that are clearly related, and identify a person fully, including their political history, when dealing with individuals holding important public positions. These are essential steps to conduct enhanced due diligence based on public information, as they can help to assess the risk profile, the legitimacy, and the transparency of the customer relationship. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s list of public officials is not a reliable source of public information, as it is not comprehensive, updated, or verified. Therefore, it is not a sufficient criterion to check the background of potential customers.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 971

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4, Lesson 32

ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 4, Task 23

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an inter-governmental body that sets standards and monitors compliance with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) measures. The FATF conducts periodic mutual evaluations of its members and other jurisdictions to assess their level of implementation of the FATF Recommendations, which are the international AML/CFT standards. The FATF also identifies jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT regimes that pose a risk to the international financial system, and places them on two public lists: the High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action (also known as the black list) and the Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring (also known as the grey list). The FATF works with these jurisdictions to address their deficiencies and monitors their progress through regular follow-up reports and on-site visits. The FATF may remove a jurisdiction from the list if it has made sufficient and sustainable progress in implementing the required reforms and has effectively addressed the identified strategic deficiencies. Therefore, receiving a favorable mutual evaluation is the most likely reason for the FATF to remove a jurisdictionfrom the list, as it indicates that the jurisdiction has met the FATF standards and has a robust AML/CFT system in place.

Conducting successful annual self-assessments, entering into a mutual legal assistance treaty, or joining the Wolfsberg Group are not sufficient reasons for the FATF to remove a jurisdiction from the list, as they do not necessarily reflect the overall compliance with the FATF Recommendations or the resolution of the strategic deficiencies. Moreover, the Wolfsberg Group is a private association of global banks that develops guidance and best practices for the financial sector on AML/CFT issues, and is not affiliated with the FATF.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, page 11.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Lesson 1.4: FATF and the 40 Recommendations.

About the Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories NCCT Initiative, FATF website.

Using self-hosted wallets, or wallets that are stored on the user’s computer, is one of the tactics that may be used to finance terrorism with virtual assets such as Bitcoin. By creating many different donation addresses that are updated continuously, law enforcement will have a harder time tracing transactions. It is also important to note that using the same donation address across multiple donation campaigns and media types, as well as forming relationships with virtual asset service providers that have strong KYC processes in place, can draw attention from law enforcement and should be avoided.

Funds transfers are electronic payments that move money from one account to another, either within the same financial institution or across different institutions, countries, or currencies1. Funds transfers are commonly used for legitimate purposes, such as remittances, trade, or investment, but they can also be abused by money launderers, terrorists, or fraudsters to move illicit funds or conceal their origin or destination2. Therefore, financial institutions and other entities that offer funds transfer services are required to apply anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CFT) measures, such as customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, record-keeping, and reporting of suspicious activities2.

One of the red flags for funds transfers that may indicate money laundering or other criminal activity is when funds transfers are repeatedly sent to the same beneficiary out of line with the business purpose3. This could suggest that the originator and the beneficiary are colluding to layer or integrate illicit funds, or to evade reporting or sanctions requirements. For example, a business may send multiple funds transfers to the same supplier, but the amounts or frequencies do not match the invoices or contracts, or the supplier is located in a high-risk jurisdiction or is subject to sanctions. Alternatively, an individual may send frequent funds transfers to the same person, but the relationship or the reason for the transfers is unclear or inconsistent, or the person is associated with a criminal or terrorist organization. In such cases, the financial institution or the funds transfer service provider should conduct enhanced due diligence, verify the source and purpose of the funds, and report any suspicious activity to the relevant authorities.

1: Wire Transfer Definition - Investopedia

2: International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation - The FATF Recommendations | FATF

3: Wire Transfer Red Flags: Money Laundering & Fraud Risks - Alessa1

The potential red flag that alludes to money laundering is option B, where the trio engage in minimal gambling and combine the funds to request a casino cheque for the chips presented. This behavior is indicative of structuring, which involves breaking down large transactions into smaller ones to avoid detection by the casino and regulatory authorities. The fact that the trio only used a small amount of chips to play games, and then combined their funds to request a casino cheque, raises suspicions that they may be attempting to disguise the origin of their funds.

Money laundering can have serious consequences for financial institutions. They may face increased investigation costs and fines from regulators and law enforcement agencies for failing to detect or prevent money laundering activities. Additionally, money laundering can result in a loss of profitable business as customers and counterparties may no longer want to do business with the institution due to its reputation for being associated with illicit activity.

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.”

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 FATF Recommendations, financial institutions should maintain all necessary records on transactions and customers for at least five years, and make them available to competent authorities upon appropriate authority1. This includes records and documents related to suspicious transactions that have been reported to the financial intelligence unit (FIU) or other designated authorities. Providing the supporting documentation to competent authorities upon request is essential for the investigation and prosecution of money laundering and terrorist financing offences, as well as for the identification and tracing of criminal assets2.

Hinting to the customer that she should come in and explain her behavior is not a correct answer, as it may tip off the customer about the suspicion and compromise the effectiveness of the reporting system. Financial institutions should not disclose to the customer or to third parties that a suspicious transaction report (STR) or related information is being reported to the FIU3.

Maintaining adequate written documentation of all individuals and transactions reported is not a sufficient answer, as it does not imply cooperation with competent authorities. Financial institutions should not only keep records, but also provide them to the authorities when requested.

Submitting information upon receiving a legal request from parties involved in a civil lawsuit is not a relevant answer, as it does not relate to the cooperation with competent authorities for AML/CFT purposes. Civil lawsuits are not part of the AML/CFT framework, and financial institutions should not disclose confidential information to private parties without proper legal grounds.

FATF Recommendation 11: Record-keeping 1

FATF Recommendation 31: Powers of law enforcement and investigative authorities 2

FATF Recommendation 21: Tipping-off and confidentiality 3

---Wire transfers are one of the most common methods of moving funds across borders and jurisdictions, and therefore pose a high risk of violating OFAC sanctions. A bank’s OFAC sanctions screening audit program should include a test to review the wire transfer screening processes to ensure that potential name hits are investigated promptly and appropriately, and that any blocked or rejected transactions are reported to OFAC in a timely manner. This test would help the bank to assess the effectivenessof its screening system, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and demonstrate its compliance with OFAC regulations.

A Framework for OFAC Compliance Commitments1, page 4, section 4: Testing and Auditing

OFAC Framework for Sanctions Compliance Programs2, page 2, section 4: Testing and Auditing

OFAC Sanctions List Search Tool3

Economic sanctions are penalties imposed by a country or a group of countries on another country, entity, or individual for foreign policy or security purposes. There are different types of economic sanctions, depending on the scope, objective, and mechanism of the sanctions. Some of the common types are:

Targeted sanctions: These are sanctions that aim to minimize the adverse effects on the general population and the environment, and focus on specific individuals, entities, sectors, or activities that are responsible for or involved in the undesirable behavior or conduct. Targeted sanctions can include travel bans, asset freezes, arms embargoes, and trade restrictions on certain goods or services. For example, the United States and the European Union have imposed targeted sanctions on various officials, entities, and sectors in Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and other countries for human rights violations, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, corruption, and other reasons.

Sectoral sanctions: These are sanctions that target a specific sector or industry of the economy of the sanctioned country, such as energy, finance, defense, or transportation. Sectoral sanctions aim to disrupt the economic activity and revenue of the targeted sector, and to create pressure on the government or regime to change its policies or behavior. For example, the United States has imposed sectoral sanctions on Iran’s oil, gas, petrochemical, and automotive industries, as well as its central bank and other financial institutions, to curb its nuclear program and support for regional proxies.

Comprehensive sanction: These are sanctions that impose a total or near-total ban on trade, investment, and other economic relations with the sanctioned country. Comprehensive sanctions are the most severe and broadest form of economic sanctions, and they aim to isolate the country from the global market and cause severe economic hardship and social unrest. Comprehensive sanctions are often accompanied by diplomatic isolation and military intervention. For example, the United States has maintained a comprehensive embargo on Cuba since 1962, prohibiting most trade, travel, and financial transactions with the island nation, as well as supporting its political opposition and dissidents.

What Are Economic Sanctions?, Council on Foreign Relations

Types of Economic Sanctions, Profolus

Economic sanctions, Wikipedia

How Economic Sanctions Work, Investopedia

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition, ACAMS

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified, ACAMS

The red flags that most likely triggered the referral are:

B. Several cash deposits along the country's border that are quickly withdrawn by third parties. C. Several lodging and food payments made on the same day at unusual hours for a business.

Red flag B suggests possible structuring activity, where individuals are trying to avoid currency transaction reporting requirements by depositing and withdrawing cash in amounts below the reporting threshold. This activity is often associated with money laundering and could indicate human trafficking activity.

Red flag C suggests unusual activity that may be indicative of human trafficking, such as lodging and food payments made at unusual hours or in unusual patterns. This type of activity could indicate that the business is being used as a front for human trafficking or that the individuals involved in the trafficking are using the business to facilitate their activities.

The characteristic of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) 40 recommendations is that they comprise global standards for countering money laundering, recognized by government bodies across the world. The FATF 40 recommendations provide a comprehensive framework of measures that countries should implement to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. The recommendations are not mandatory, but are widely recognized and followed by countries across the globe. The recommendations cover a range of areas, including customer due diligence, record-keeping, suspicious activity reporting, and international cooperation.

An oil exploration company based in France does business with oil refineries in Iran, which is subject to comprehensive Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions. What type of OFAC sanctions should be imposed against the French company?

A. Sectoral

B. Country-based

C. Secondary

D. List-based

Answer: C

FSRBs are regional bodies that work with FATF to promote the implementation of AML and CFT standards. FSRBs are made up of member countries that have agreed to work together to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism [1]. The tools used by FSRBs to promote the implementation of AML and CFT standards include training measures, mutual evaluations of its members, technical assistance, and the sharing of information. FSRBs may also adopt recommendations and best practices based on the FATF’s 40 Recommendations.

Senior management bears the ultimate responsibility for approving a financial institution's relationship with a politically exposed person (PEP). The institution must ensure that appropriate measures are taken to manage the risks associated with a PEP, including conducting enhanced due diligence and applying appropriate mitigating measures. The relationship manager and the OKYC analyst may identify the risks associated with the PEP and recommend mitigating measures, but it is ultimately the responsibility of senior management to approve therelationship and ensure that the appropriate measures are taken. The enhanced due diligence compliance officer is responsible for ensuring that all due diligence requirements are met.

The key factor that would result in the decision for a financial institution (FI) to exit a client relationship is when the level of residual client risk exceeds the FI’s risk appetite. Residual client risk is the remaining risk after applying the FI’s risk mitigation measures, such as customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and suspicious activity reporting. Risk appetite is the level and type of risk that the FI is willing and able to accept inpursuit of its business objectives. If the residual client risk is higher than the risk appetite, the FI may decide to terminate the relationship to avoid potential regulatory, reputational, or operational consequences.

The other options are not necessarily key factors for exiting a client relationship, because:

The client is a registered charity known to remit funds to high risk geographies where there is limited due diligence information available. This option may indicate a higher level of inherent client risk, but it does not necessarily mean that the FI should exit the relationship. The FI may be able to apply enhanced due diligence, ongoing monitoring, and risk-based controls to mitigate the risk and comply with the regulatory requirements. The FI may also consider the nature and purpose of the client’s activities, the source and destination of the funds, and the potential impact on the client’s beneficiaries.

Closing the client accounts will help reduce the number of transaction monitoring alerts. This option may suggest a possible benefit of exiting the relationship, but it is not a key factor for making the decision. The FI should not base its decision solely on the volume of transaction monitoring alerts, but rather on the quality and relevance of the alerts, the results of the investigation, and the risk assessment of the client. The FI should also ensure that its transaction monitoring system is properly calibrated and validated to avoid generating excessive or false alerts.

Client transactions generate ongoing transaction monitoring alerts that did not result in any SAR/STR filings. This option may indicate a need for reviewing and improving the transaction monitoring system or the investigation process, but it does not necessarily imply that the FI should exit the relationship. The FI should not assume that the absence of SAR/STR filings means that the client is low risk or that the alerts are irrelevant. The FI should conduct a thorough and timely investigation of the alerts and document the rationale for filing or not filing a SAR/STR. The FI should also consider the overall risk profile of the client and the nature and frequency of the transactions.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 3: AML Programs, Section 3.2: AML Program Components, Subsection 3.2.2: Risk Assessment, pp. 77-79

FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual, Section: Assessing Compliance with BSA Regulatory Requirements, Subsection: Suspicious Activity Reporting, pp. 4-5

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations, Question 2, pp. 2-3

The threat of US sanctions against foreign individuals and entities continues to exist despite the absence of a US nexus. This is stated in the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) manual on page 591, which states: “It is important to note that the threat of US sanctions against foreign individuals and entities continues to exist even when there is no direct US nexus (i.e., no US persons or assets involved).”

Private investment companies (PICs) are potentially vulnerable to money laundering due to the difficulty in identifying the ultimate beneficial owners. PICs are often used to hold and manage private wealth, making them attractive targets for money launderers. Since these entities are privately held and not publicly traded, it can be challenging to identify the individuals whoultimately control or benefit from them. This makes it easier for money launderers to use them to disguise the origins of illicit funds.

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.

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

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 resoldor 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].

According to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision standards, the following statements best describe sound practices in relation to customer due diligence (CDD) policies and procedures:

Banks should take into consideration the occasional banking transaction or the size/level of assets to build an understanding of the customer’s profile and behavior. This is because the nature and frequency of transactions and the size of the account balance may indicate the level of risk associated with the customer and the need for ongoing monitoring1

Banks should develop and implement clear acceptance policies and procedures to identify the types of customer that are likely to pose a higher risk of financing terrorism or money laundering. This is because banks should not enter into or maintain relationships with customers who pose unacceptable risks to the bank or the financial system. Banks should also apply a risk-based approach to CDD and apply more stringent measures to higher-risk customers12

Banks should implement enhanced due diligence measures for entering business relationships with high-risk customers, such as approval by senior management. This is because banks should ensure that they have adequate information and controls to manage the risks posed by such customers and to comply with the relevant laws and regulations. Senior management should be involved in the decision-making process and be accountable for the outcomes12

 1: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Consolidated KYC Risk Management, October 2004, page 6-7. 2: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Customer due diligence for banks, October 2001, page 8-9.

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.

 a financial institution must perform a continuing review of the account for a period of 90 days. The continuing review must include an analysis of any transactions that occur in the account, as well as any changes in the customer's risk profile. The review should be updated as needed to ensure that the customer is not engaging in any suspicious activities.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions are extraterritorial in nature, meaning that they apply beyond the national borders of the United States. OFAC sanctions are intended to restrict transactions and the movement of assets between the U.S. and designated persons and organizations. These sanctions are imposed to disrupt the economic and financial relations between foreign countries and designated persons, organizations, or countries. These sanctionsinclude prohibiting transactions, requiring the blocking of assets, and implementing targeted measures such as arms embargoes, travel bans, and financial or commodity restrictions.

 The customer activity that should trigger a suspicious transaction report is purchasing travelers checks (cheques) for trips to a Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories (NCCTs). This could indicate an attempt to evade currency reporting requirements, avoid sanctions or embargoes, or facilitate money laundering or terrorist financingthrough high-risk jurisdictions12. NCCTs are countries or territories that have been identified by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) as having serious deficiencies in their anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regimes, and that pose a threat to the international financial system3.

The other options are not necessarily grounds for a suspicious transaction report, although they may require further due diligence or monitoring depending on the customer profile and the nature of the transaction. For example:

The increased activity is due to money order deposits. This could be a legitimate source of income for the customer’s export business, or it could be a way of disguising the origin or destination of the funds. The anti-money laundering specialist should verify the identity and background of the customer and the issuers of the money orders, and check for any red flags or suspicious indicators4.

Wire transfers are coming from a Financial Action Task Force member country. This could be a normal business practice, or it could be a sign of involvement in trade-based money laundering or other illicit activities. The anti-money laundering specialist should assess the customer’s source of funds, business rationale, and market conditions, and monitor for any changes or inconsistencies.

The client changed his address without advising the institution. This could be a simple oversight, or it could be a way of concealing the customer’s true location or identity. The anti-money laundering specialist should update the customer’s information, verify the new address, and check for any adverse media or sanctions.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs3

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

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 1, page 11: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ACAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-1.pdf

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 29: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ACAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-2.pdf

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 77: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ACAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 97: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ACAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-5.pdf

The compliance officer should report the suspicious activity to the Board of Directors, as they are ultimately responsible for the bank’s compliance program and oversight.The Board should be informed of the potential conflict of interest and reputational risk involved in the case, as well as the steps taken by the compliance officer to investigate and file the suspicious transaction report. The compliance officer should not prevent the filing of the report, as this would violate the legal obligations of the bank and expose it to regulatory sanctions and penalties. The compliance officer should not ask the Board member to explain the transaction, as this could compromise the integrity and independence of the investigation and the reporting process. The compliance officer should not maintain standard summary statistical reporting to the Board, as this would not adequately address the seriousness and complexity of the case.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, page 1271

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 5, Lesson 22

ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline, Domain 5, Task 13

The methods that are typically used to launder money using insurance companies are:

The policy holder overpays the policy and moves the funds out of the policy despite paying early withdrawal penalties. This method involves placing large amounts of illicit funds into an insurance policy, usually a life insurance or an annuity, and then requesting a refund or a surrender of the policy. The policy holder may incur some fees or penalties for the early withdrawal, but they will receive a check or a wire transfer from the insurance company that appears to be a legitimate source of income. This method allows the launderer to layer and integrate the funds into the financial system.

The policy holder uses an offshore company to pay the insurance installments. This method involves setting up a shell company or a trust in a jurisdiction with low or no tax and weak or no anti-money laundering regulations. The launderer then uses the offshore entity to purchase an insurance policy or a bond from a reputable insurance company. The offshore entity pays the premiums or the installments using the illicit funds, and the launderer can claim thebenefits or the returns from the policy or the bond as clean money. This method allows the launderer to hide the true ownership and origin of the funds.

The other options are not typical methods of money laundering using insurance companies, because:

The policy holder enters a sibling as a beneficiary of the insurance policy rather than themselves. This method does not involve any movement or disguise of the illicit funds, and it does not generate any income or return for the launderer. The beneficiary of the policy will only receive the payout upon the death of the policy holder, and the insurance company will conduct due diligence on the beneficiary before releasing the funds.

The policy holder purchases a bond and redeems it at a discount prior to its full term. This method does not make sense for a money launderer, because it involves losing money rather than gaining money. A bond is a fixed-income instrument that pays a regular interest and a principal amount at maturity. If the bond is redeemed before its full term, the bond holder will receive less than the face value of the bond, and will also forfeit the future interest payments. This method does not help the launderer to conceal or legitimize the source of the funds.

The policy holder is strongly interested in how many costs are incurred when taking out an insurance policy. This method does not indicate any money laundering activity, but rather a prudent and rational behavior of a potential customer. The policy holder may want to compare different insurance products and providers, and to understand the fees, charges, commissions, and taxes associated with the policy. This method does not involve any placement, layering, or integration of the illicit funds.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Section 1.2: Methods of Money Laundering, Subsection 1.2.5: Insurance Products, pp. 19-20

AML in Insurance: How to Detect & Combat Money Laundering, Section: Common Money Laundering Methods in Insurance, Paragraphs 1-3

Discuss Acams CAMS Exam Topic 1 Question 43, Suggested Answer by Deeanna at May 04, 2022, 10:16 PM

According to the Basel Committee's principles on customer due diligence, banks must obtain the necessary information to establish the identity of their customers, beneficial owners, and any persons acting on behalf of their customers. This includes verifying the identity of the customer and the beneficial owners and assessing the customer's risk profile. Additionally, banks must conduct ongoing due diligence to ensure that the customer does not give rise to suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing [1].

The potential client is attempting to commit the illegal activity of using insider information to trade securities. Insider information is any material, non-public information that could affect the price or value of a security, such as earnings reports, mergers, acquisitions, or regulatory actions. Insider trading is the act of buying or selling securities based on insider information, which gives the trader an unfair advantage over other investors who do not have access to such information. Insider trading violates the principles of market integrity, fairness, and transparency, and can undermine investor confidence and trust. Insider trading is also a form of market abuse and financial crime, and is subject to civil and criminal penalties.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Section 1.3: Financial Crime, Subsection 1.3.3: Market Abuse, pp. 25-26

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 1: Risks and Methods of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, Lesson 1.3: Financial Crime, Sublesson 1.3.3: Market Abuse, Video Time: 2:00-3:30

Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 12, Answer C

The most suspicious transaction indicators related to casino activities are:

A client requests a winnings check (cheque) in a third party’s name. This could indicate an attempt to conceal the source or ownership of the funds, or to evade reporting requirements.

Acquaintances bet against each other in even-money games and it appears they are intentionally losing to one of the parties. This could indicate a scheme to launder money through the casino by transferring funds from one party to another without attracting attention.

A client requests the transfer of winnings to the bank account of a third party in a country without an effective anti-money laundering regime. This could indicate an attempt to move funds to a high-risk jurisdiction or to a person or entity that is involved in illicit activities.

The option that is not suspicious is:

A new client who is a large volume player asks the casino operator about the ability to transfer the funds to other locations in the same country. This could be a legitimate inquiry from a high-net-worth individual who travels frequently and wants to access their funds conveniently.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - Exam-Labs1

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

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 8, page 173

https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ACAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-8.pdf

This is an emerging risk associated with cyber-enabled fraud because the use of false identities and documents can allow criminals to disguise their activities and evade detection. In such cases, the name and address provided on the account may not match the name and address on the government-issued documentation. This discrepancy can be difficult to detect, making it a potential risk for financial institutions.

Failure to report suspected fraud activity is a serious breach of the anti-money laundering (AML) and anti-fraud obligations of a financial institution (FI). It could expose the FI to legal risks, such as civil lawsuits, criminal prosecutions, regulatory sanctions, and reputational damage. One possible legal risk is that the FI could be held liable for the losses suffered by the victims of the fraudster, either by the victims themselves or by a third party acting on their behalf, such as a government agency or a class action representative. This could result in significant financial costs and damages for the FI, as well as loss of trust and confidence from its customers and stakeholders.

1: This web article explains what a suspicious activity report (SAR) is, who regulates it, when it is required, and what are the consequences of failing to file it.

2: This guide provides information on how to make a SAR, what to include, how to request a defence against money laundering (DAML), and what happens if you fail to report suspicious activity.

3: This blog post discusses the legal implications of not reporting an alleged crime, such as fraud, and gives examples of cases where individuals or entities were prosecuted or sued for their failure to report.