I ♥ the FATF (when they prove me right)

Unless you have been on retreat in an ashram or stuck in the fog in Guernsey, you will know that the Financial Action Task Force has recently issued a revised version of its 40+9 Recommendations.  For a start, it’s now back to the much more pleasing and rounded 40 Recs, as the nine special ones on terrorist financing have been brought into the fold.  But more important updates have been made, and I am feeling pretty smuggy-four-drawers here as I guessed (and indeed wished for) some of them.

For a start, tax crimes are now required to be included as predicate offences for money laundering.  Quite right too: I have no fondness for tax evaders, and quite why their crime should be seen as more acceptable and less productive of dirty money than, say, fraud or corruption is beyond me.  Domestic PEPs are now included: as I have long thought should be the case, all PEPs should be identified, and then enhanced due diligence applied according to risk, shading from the PEP-iest of PEPs (like so many of our old friends) to the least risky but still PEP-ish.

Sadly, the issue of beneficial ownership is still a bit of a dog’s dinner – much more will doubtless be written about this, but I don’t think the FATF has helped by introducing a new concept of “senior managing official”.  And it has still provided a get-out clause that will be abused by many when it says; “Where no natural person is identified [as beneficial owner], financial institutions should identify and take reasonable measures to verify the identity of the relevant natural person who holds the position of senior managing official”.  Is it just me, or does “senior managing official” sound less demanding (and easier to fudge) than “controlling mind and interest”?

This entry was posted in Legislation, Money laundering, Regulation, Supervision and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to I ♥ the FATF (when they prove me right)

  1. Helen Lampitt says:

    I love the PEP classifications Susan, the idea of the least PEP-iest of PEPs being just PEP-ish reminds me of the Rowan Atkinson sketch ‘Fatal Beatings’.
    You mean our local MP is a PEP? Mmmmm…PEP-ish!!!

  2. Hello Helen – we could have a whole new vocabulary, from PEP-ish to PEP-py to PEP-ful to PEP-iest! Or maybe pale PEP and dark PEP? And thanks for the reminder about Rowan Atkinson – a classic sketch. Perhaps some of these PEPs would have turned out better with a few fatal beatings…
    Best wishes from Susan

    • Helen Lampitt says:

      How brilliant, I wonder if I could get them to add those classifications to our AML Risk Rating system, it would make the whole classification process much more entertaining!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.