News
From the Editor: Compliance Pros Worry ‘De-Risking’ Has Become Risky
By Kieran Beer
printShort of abiding by the Community Reinvestment Act and other prohibitions against discriminatory lending, banks still have the right to choose who they'll do business with. While that seems like an obvious statement, it gets drowned out in the debate about "de-risking." That was apparent Monday morning during a panel at the ABA/ABA Money Laundering Enforcement Conference. "I really believe it is our decision to choose who we want to do business with" and a risk process isn't required to justify that, said Rick Small, senior vice president, enterprise AML & anti-corruption and international compliance at American Express, during a...
TO READ THE FULL STORY
Subscribe
Learn More
Related News
Governments have yet to collect sufficient data to fully understand the reasons for and impact of a reported decline in correspondent banking services throughout the globe, a Basel-based organization said Friday.
Fear of regulatory trouble is compelling some banks to turn down business to avoid the huge compliance costs of vetting potential clients, attendees at a banking conference in London heard Thursday.
In a rare gesture last week, a federal regulator signaled to banks that they might relax when it comes to implementing certain anti-money laundering policies. There was only one problem: no one is likely to listen.
Failing to find conventional financial services, some money services businesses have asked armored car companies to bank on their behalf without the knowledge of the institutions maintaining the accounts, say consultants.
If you attended the ACAMS moneylaundering.com conference in Hollywood, FL this past week, you were certain to hear concerns by compliance officers about Russian sanctions and, when the regulators weren't standing nearby, complaints that AML requirements aren't getting any easier.
A number of large U.S. and international banks are dropping customer accounts and services tied to high-risk geographical regions and lines of business in response to regulatory pressure, including enforcement actions.
The British High Court injunction Tuesday against Barclays ending its relationship with Somali money services businesses is likely to keep the bank from dropping the accounts for five or six months, according to compliance experts.
American sanctions, terrorist financing prosecutions and rising related compliance costs have made it increasingly difficult for Somalia's U.S.-based community to move money to the African nation.
Dozens of small banks and credit unions have begun courting money services businesses over the past year, offering financial services to the high-risk clients in exchange for compliance-related fees.
A U.S. Treasury Department division charged with reviewing how financial institutions make use of complex risk models has begun asking questions about how companies calculate money laundering risks.
Finding themselves locked out of some large U.S. banks because of compliance concerns, third-party payment processors are increasingly turning to small- and mid-sized institutions for financial services, say consultants.
Compliance officers face challenges anytime two financial institutions merge. But when one bank buys up the assets and the problems of a failed competitor, the hurdles can exponentially increase.
Since 2008, federal financial regulators have increasingly quizzed compliance staff about such scenarios in an effort to determine how banks are distinguishing their low-, moderate- and high-risk clients, according to bank officials.
Few small financial firms in the U.K. have adequate anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance programs, including enhanced due diligence controls for high-risk clients, Britain's top financial regulator said Monday.
The Financial Action Task Force reiterated its call Monday for anti-money laundering controls by life insurance companies in a report outlining how the industry can apply risk-based checks.