Norway’s DNB facing potential $45M AML fine
By 
Kyle Brasseur2020-12-07T17:11:00
DNB ASA, Norway’s largest financial services group, is facing a potential fine of NOK 400 million (U.S. $45.4 million) for inadequate compliance with the Norwegian Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Related articles
-
ArticleNorway’s DNB fined $48.1M for AML violations
DNB ASA, Norway’s largest financial services group, will pay a fine of NOK 400 million ($48.1 million) for failing to adhere to Norwegian Anti-Money Laundering Act standards.
-
ArticleCCO Philippe Vollot has a plan for Danske’s compliance reboot
Danske Bank CCO Philippe Vollot knows his journey to build a robust compliance program and culture at the troubled lender is far from over.
-
ArticleHow Danske is cleaning up after a €200B money laundering scandal
It is not clear what action Danske Bank will take on the back of its investigation into Europe’s biggest-ever money laundering scandal, but it is a safe bet to think further improving compliance will be on the list.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
News BriefDOJ targets $14.6B in health care fraud with focus on transnational crime
Emerging enforcement priorities of the U.S. Department of Justice’s health care fraud division align with the Trump administration’s emphasis on prosecuting transnational criminal organizations and ending opioid trafficking.
-
News BriefFTC raises antitrust concerns over $1.57B Circle K deal, orders divestitures
Since President Donald Trump took office, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has yet to keep up the level of enforcement it had under previous chair Lina Khan. The agency, however, returned to antitrust action in the case of fuel stations, just in time for the July 4th holiday.
-
News BriefJudge reinstates fired CPSC commissioners in latest battle over government cuts
In May, three commissioners for the Consumer Product Safety Commission were abruptly fired by President Donald Trump and sued for their jobs shortly after. A federal judge has ruled that the commissioners should be reinstated, although it’s unclear whether that ruling may itself be reversed.