You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing’ tag.

> Posted by Aurora Bila and Kim Dancey, Director of Payment Systems at the Bank of Mozambique and Head of Payments at First National Bank

Of the 338 million citizens of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states, 138 million lack adequate official means of identification. This limits their access to and usage of many government services, as well as the range of services offered by financial service providers. This affects their wellbeing in a host of ways, which is why the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals include the goal of a robust “Identity for All” by 2030.

Some SADC countries lack a standardized form of identification, and citizens require various pieces of documentation to access financial services in the formal sector. And in some instances there are no legislative frameworks for issuing any form of formal identification document.

Even among those SADC adults who do have national IDs, documents are often not accepted across borders for opening bank accounts or sending remittances home. Banks and remittances agencies in SADC countries face more stringent Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements for cross-border than for domestic remittances. Therefore, if the identity source document is not easily verifiable to the level of assurance required, to manage both internal risk and to comply with Anti-Money Laundering/Combatting the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) requirements in force, the provider will not make the service accessible. Furthermore, global standard-setting bodies are increasing the pressure on local regulators regarding identity. For example, it is no longer sufficient to identify only the remittance-sending customer. Financial services providers are now compelled to also know the identity of the recipient and to hold these identities throughout the payment transaction. Consequently, only institutions willing and able to price and charge for the risk and cost will offer the services.

Read the rest of this entry »

> Posted by Tess Johnson, Project Associate, CFI

Embed from Getty Images

This post is part of a series examining the global phenomenon of de-risking and its impact on financial inclusion. To investigate this issue, CFI staff partnered with Credit Suisse Global Citizen Rissa Ofilada, a compliance lawyer based in the Philippines, to undertake a literature review and conduct interviews with key players in the conversation on de-risking.

NGOs, both large and small, are often on the front lines of humanitarian efforts, assisting people who are affected by conflict and terrorism. It is troubling that so many of these organizations’ efforts are hampered by de-risking. The funding and other forms of non-monetary aid that NGOs provide are directed towards addressing seemingly intractable problems – such as humanitarian conflict, forced displacement, natural disaster, and violent extremism – and yet, the de-risking behavior of banks, brought on in response to anti-money laundering and combatting the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regulation, often makes it difficult for these organizations to function and serve those who are most in need.

Read the rest of this entry »

> Posted by Sonja Kelly, Director of Research, CFI

Embed from Getty Images

A customer waits to collect money at the Juba Express money transfer company in Mogadishu, Somalia. 

This post is part of a series examining the global phenomenon of de-risking and its impact on financial inclusion. To investigate this issue, CFI staff partnered with Credit Suisse Global Citizen Rissa Ofilada, a compliance lawyer based in the Philippines, to undertake a literature review and conduct interviews with key players in the conversation on de-risking.

This is not a rhetorical question—I really do want to know. As we’ve put out a modest blog series about de-risking, I’ve been thinking about regulations on anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT). Are stringent regulations and dramatic consequences for non-compliance really necessary? Is it fair to expect the financial system to bear so large a burden? Would it be better for everyone if the onus were on law enforcement to detect and eliminate illicit activity and financial institutions just had to cooperate where necessary?

Read the rest of this entry »

> Posted by Center Staff

Number of AML-related fines by U.S. regulators 2000–2014. (click to enlarge)

This post is part of a series examining the global phenomenon of de-risking and its impact on financial inclusion. To investigate this issue, CFI staff partnered with Credit Suisse Global Citizen Rissa Ofilada, a compliance lawyer based in the Philippines, to undertake a literature review and conduct interviews with key players in the conversation on de-risking.

The root causes of de-risking have been surprisingly hard to pin down. In our previous post in this series, we looked at the role that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and global standards have played. Today we’ll examine the role of the U.S. government.

It is no wonder that decisions by the U.S. government—at both federal and state-levels—have a significant ripple effect. Most international settlement systems—the way that banks move money across borders—are pegged to the U.S. dollar. Furthermore, the U.S. plays a strong role in setting international global norms. Added to this is the massive size of the U.S. financial system and the power that the U.S. government has to govern the system. Finally, banks located in emerging markets, even if they are largely domestically oriented, need to be able to do business with U.S. businesses and banks, and therefore must remain in good standing with American authorities.

Read the rest of this entry »

> Posted by Center Staff

Embed from Getty Images

Customers wait to collect money at the Juba Express money transfer company in Mogadishu, Somalia. 

This post is part of a series examining the global phenomenon of de-risking and its impact on financial inclusion. To investigate this issue, CFI staff partnered with Credit Suisse Global Citizen Rissa Ofilada, a compliance lawyer based in the Philippines, to undertake a comprehensive literature review and conduct interviews with key players in the conversation on de-risking.

Are anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) rules to blame for de-risking and the resulting financial exclusion? A World Bank survey of financial institutions says, “probably.” The survey respondents listed concerns about money laundering and terrorism financing risks, including the imposition of international sanctions pertaining to AML/CTF. To say the least, the de-risking phenomenon has huge implications for the advancement of financial inclusion in our current geopolitical climate.

De-risking has been defined as the trend of financial institutions terminating or restricting business relationships with clients or categories of clients to avoid, rather than manage, risk. This can take the form of: restricting or terminating correspondent banking relationships (CBRs) where one bank provides services to another; restricting or terminating money transfer operators (MTOs); and restricting or terminating the accounts of individual clients deemed to be risky. It’s important to note that recently “de-risking” as a term has been called inappropriate by some as there may be other reasons why, to give one example, CBRs are terminated. Nevertheless, we use it here as it is the most commonly used phrase to describe this phenomenon.

Read the rest of this entry »

Enter your email

Join 2,332 other followers

Visit the CFI Website

Twitter Updates

Archives

Founding Sponsor


Credit Suisse is a founding sponsor of the Center for Financial Inclusion. The Credit Suisse Group Foundation looks to its philanthropic partners to foster research, innovation and constructive dialogue in order to spread best practices and develop new solutions for financial inclusion.

Note

The views and opinions expressed on this blog, except where otherwise noted, are those of the authors and guest bloggers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center for Financial Inclusion or its affiliates.