Log In | Subscribe | | |

compliance

It has become fashionable to talk of "The Three Lines of Defence" in relation to money laundering, terrorist financing, etc. Is it just more more quasi-militaristic buzzwords, so loved by Americans, and a pretence of intellect or is there genuine merit here?

Free for seven days.

Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission has suspended the former responsible officer of China Merchants Securities (HK) Co., Limited for compliance failures.

BIScom Subsection: 

Financial crime risk management - be it related to money laundering, terrorist financing, fraud or embezzlement purposes, to say nothing of anti-bribery requirements - is expensive. For small businesses, it's cost prohibitive. Compliance is even worse. Is it feasible, permissible, even advisable to share the burden with others?

On 19th April, Australia's newest national bank, Members' Equity Bank a.k.a. ME Bank, announced that it was to increase its interest rates on existing home loans, with effect from 19th April. Then it made a silly error. Given that the banking sector in Australia is under the most intense scrutiny and that it would be logical to assume that, if at any time, this is the time where banks will double, triple even quadruple check their actions, the stupidity of the error raises a serious question: is the financial sector in Australia simply under-skilled and, therefore, unfit for purpose?

BIScom Subsection: 

For the second time recently, a matter before the Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal in England and Wales has considered the use of a firm's clients' account for the provision of quasi-banking services. The SDT is starting to impose more substantial penalties and has clearly had enough of solicitors who fail to comply with their obligations under counter-money laundering laws and regulations. Like in the first case, the solicitor concerned is elderly and one might say that he might be considered as having carried on long-standing practices in the face of changing practice requirements and culture.

The judgment in the AUSTRAC -v-Tabcorp civil case is a landmark: it's the first civil case that AUSTRAC has brought to a conclusion in court. But the judgment is only the latest step in a long running investigation and series of regulatory actions against the ASX-listed gambling giant.

One has to ask what took so long.. after American regulators and prosecutors began attacking European banks for failures in the USA European regulators remained surprisingly reticent about taking action against foreign banks, especially American banks. While it may not be blowback (US banks have long gone their own way in London, as have German and Japanese banks but there have been occasional action against those) it is certainly time that US banks were not treated as a special case. In the latest example, Merrill Lynch has been ordered to pay a penalty that, relative to the scale of the failure and corresponding penalties in the USA, seems relatively small.

BIScom Subsection: 

The Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal (which, trendily, omits the apostrophe when it writes its own name) has levied its largest fine ever. Like the previous largest, it's against the London office of a US law firm.

CoNet Section: 

With effect from 4th April, 2018, new rules will apply to Australian financial services (AFS) licensees that hold "derivative retail client money."

Inevitably, it's not that simple. Then again, our detailed analysis shows that compliance should not be expensive or difficult,

When the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) story first appeared, I instructed World Money Laundering Report that we should not become involved in what would inevitably become a frenzy of speculation and ill-informed comment as consultants (of which I am, obviously, one) and media outlets vied to benefit their own profile, and to get website visits, while the story was hot. I wrote what amounted to a placeholder article .

In May 2017, I addressed the global annual conference of the Institute of Enterprise Risk Managers. During that presentation, aimed at the CEOs of major corporations, I explained that board members are responsible for the whole of the Group, not merely a division or even the company of which they are expressly a director of. In this article, I publish those comments, as scripted.

BIScom Subsection: 

A post on LinkedIn recently * says "In the line of duty as a Compliance, I always said to my friend and subordinate; "Never ever say can not until the regulation really declare can not"."

Is this a safe policy?

There are two principles in the soft conversion of societies to various forms of centralised control, be that control from the left or right of politics, from vested interests or religion.

The first is the manipulation of language: using terms in ways that are inaccurate and, even, the direct opposite of what they truly mean.

The second is to give individual members of society the illusion that they have status, even a degree of control when in fact what they have is responsibility without authority.

Welcome to the worrying world of today's Compliance and Financial Crime Risk Officers.

BIScom Subsection: 

It's pathetic: according to a report in The Law Society's Gazette, the official publication of the Law Society of England and Wales, "The Legal Sector Affinity Group, whose members include the Law Society and Solicitors Regulation Authority, has told the Treasury that a ‘sensible supervisory approach’ to the new regulations would give firms and individuals time to adjust to their new obligations." Apparently the membership body and the regulator haven't had time to prepare their Guidance. Too busy with finding new crazy obligations to impose on an already over-stretched profession, one might conclude.

When the Department of Justice and others settled criminal proceedings against Western Union there were two special features: one, liability was admitted and two "ensure that its agents around the world will adhere to U.S. Regulatory and [counter-money laundering] standards."

Is this doable while remaining profitable or does the settlement mean inevitable de-risking and closing in some markets?

BIScom Subsection: 

Pages

 


 

hahagotcha