- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
Significant investment in systems has not been fully effective in mitigating financial crime risk. A fine of nearly £64 million (then-U.S. $84 million) imposed on HSBC by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority in December is a particularly potent example.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec.
Annual Membership best value
Subscribe now for $365
Our lowest price ($1 per day) for one year.
Register for free
Receive the CW newsletter and access CPE webcasts.
The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill aims to stem the flow of dirty money coming into the United Kingdom by giving Companies House more power and resources to help combat money laundering.
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority used its powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act to force fintech firm QPay Europe to forfeit £2 million (U.S. $2.5 million) alleged to be linked to a U.S.-based wire fraud conspiracy.
With the similarity of their nature and how they overlap, not to mention how often they are mentioned in the same breath, it can easily lead to confusion when trying to remember which is which between source of funds and source of wealth.
The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority asked banks and financial institutions “to do more” to ensure that U.K lawmakers and their families are not treated unfairly.
As the United States and other Western countries turn the screws on criminals, hackers, terrorist organizations, and sanctions evaders attempting to access global financial markets, financial institutions could respond by reducing their connections to risky sectors, according to Treasury Under Secretary Brian Nelson.
Jamaica and Türkiye made “significant progress” addressing deficiencies in their anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) programs, warranting their removal from the Financial Action Task Force’s grey list.
