FinCEN leaks damage trust between banks and regulators, but serve higher purpose
By 
Martin Woods2020-09-22T15:17:00
The “FinCEN Files” leaks divided opinions within the community of financial crime compliance officers. Trust has been damaged, writes Martin Woods, but these leaks could facilitate real reform.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT
You are not logged in and do not have access to members-only content.
If you are already a registered user or a member, SIGN IN now.
Related articles
-
Article‘FinCEN Files’ source sentenced to 6 months in prison for disclosing SARs
Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, a former senior advisor at FinCEN who provided 2,100 SARs to BuzzFeed News that would form the basis of 2020’s “FinCEN Files” investigation, was sentenced to six months in prison.
-
ArticleProgress on beneficial ownership key to AML fight
With the British Virgin Islands vowing its commitment to a beneficial ownership public register, financial crime expert Martin Woods turns his attention toward how the U.K. and U.S. are progressing in the space.
-
Article‘FinCEN Files’ show Europe’s AML efforts maybe aren’t so world class
The damning revelations from the “FinCEN Files” leaks have once again put Europe and its supposed world-leading anti-money laundering rules under the spotlight.
More from Opinion
-
OpinionCreating effective compliance messages for specific employee groups
As 2026 arrives, have you considered the efficacy of your compliance messaging efforts? We have all seen these compliance taglines “Speak Up!,” “See Something, Say Something,” “Ethics Matter!”
-
OpinionTeaching the business to speak risk
Compliance professionals understand the value of risk assessments. We conduct them annually, map risks to controls, and present heat maps to the board. But there is a strategic opportunity that many compliance programs overlook: Teaching the business itself to think in the language of risk.
-
OpinionSOX was built for humans. AI doesn’t fit that model.
For more than two decades, assurance and compliance frameworks have rested on a simple assumption: Material decisions are made by people. Post‑Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) assurance reset worked because it aligned accountability with human behavior. That assumption shapes how internal controls are designed, how accountability is assigned, and how assurance is ...