InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
OCC Issues Consent Order to U.S. Branch of International Bank, Requires Development of BSA/AML Program
As previously reported in InfoBytes, on March 17 the OCC released its list of enforcement actions taken in February against national banks, federal savings associations, and current and former affiliated individuals. Among those actions is a consent order issued on February 13 against a U.S. branch of a Curacao-based subsidiary of a United Arab Emirates bank for allegedly failing to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act’s anti-money laundering (BSA/AML) rules and requirements, failing to timely file suspicious activity reports (SARs), and failing to conduct adequate due diligence on foreign correspondent accounts. The consent order, among other things, requires the U.S. branch to: (i) create and submit a comprehensive BSA/AML compliance action plan; (ii) appoint a BSA officer who will “ensure compliance with the requirements of the BSA and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)”; (iii) review, update, and implement an enhanced written ongoing BSA/AML Risk Assessment and a separate OFAC Risk Assessment process to timely identify and analyze risk categories; (iv) acquire an independent third-party consultant to conduct a “Look Back” plan to determine whether suspicious activity was timely identified and reported by the branch; (v) develop and implement a written program to ensure the timely review of BSA/AML suspicious activity alerts and filing of SARs; and (vi) create a comprehensive training program for “appropriate operational and supervisory personnel.”
FinCEN Seeks Comments on Proposed Renewal of its AML, Due Diligence Program Requirements for Correspondent Banks
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCen) published a notice and request for comments in the March 30 Federal Register. The notice sought public comment on its proposed renewal, without change, of the regulation implementing Section 5318(i)(1) & (2) of the Bank Secrecy Act (found at 31 CFR 1010.610). The regulation generally requires covered financial institutions (as defined in 31 CFR 1010.605(e)(1)) to establish due diligence policies, procedures, and controls reasonably designed to detect and report money laundering through correspondent accounts that covered U.S. financial institutions establish or maintain for certain foreign financial institutions. Written comments must be received on or before May 30.
FDIC Fines Two California Bank Employees for BSA/AML Violations
On March 31, the FDIC released a list of enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in February 2017. Among those listed was a February 14 stipulated order imposing a $70,000 civil money penalty against an employee of a California bank (Respondent) for allegedly engaging or participating in actions that caused the bank to violate the Bank Secrecy Act, thus resulting in financial loss or damage. According to the FDIC, the violations reflected a “continuing disregard for the safety or soundness of the bank” and were evidence of the Respondent’s “unfitness to serve as a . . . person participating in the conduct of the affairs, or as an institution-affiliated party of the bank [or] any other insured depository institution.” In addition to the civil money penalty, the Respondent is prohibited from further participation “in any manner in the conduct of the affairs of any financial institution or agency.”
The FDIC also imposed a $30,000 civil money penalty against the bank’s executive vice president of corporate and international banking for breaching his fiduciary duty during the period of 2011 – 2012 by failing to ensure his staff fully complied with the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations. And, as previously reported in InfoBytes, in July 2015 the bank was fined $140 million by the FDIC and the Commissioner of the California Department of Business Oversight for allegedly failing to implement and maintain a satisfactory BSA/AML compliance program.
FDIC Releases List of Enforcement Actions Taken Against Banks and Individuals in February 2017
On March 31, the FDIC released its list of administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in February. Several of the consent agreements included on the list seek civil money penalties for, among other things, violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and its flood insurance requirements. Other violations cited in the enforcement actions relate to unsafe or unsound banking practices, breaches of fiduciary duty, and violations of the Bank Secrecy Act. There are no administrative hearings scheduled for April 2017. The FDIC database containing all of its enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
FinCEN and OCC Penalize CA Bank for BSA/AML Violations
On February 27, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) announced that it had assessed a $7 million civil money penalty against a bank specializing in providing services for check-cashers and money transmitters, for alleged “willful violations” of several Bank Secrecy Act provisions. The OCC also identified deficiencies in the bank’s practices and assessed a $1 million civil money penalty for “violations of previous consent orders entered into by [the bank].” As noted in the release, the bank’s payment of the $1 million OCC penalty will go towards satisfying the FinCEN penalty. According to FinCEN, the bank allegedly failed to (i) “establish and implement an adequate anti-money laundering program;” (ii) “conduct required due diligence on its foreign correspondent accounts;” and (iii) “detect and report suspicious activity.” Furthermore, FinCEN claims $192 million in high-risk wire transfers were processed through some of these accounts.
FinCEN Proposes SAR Data Fields Revisions
FinCEN published, at 82 FR 9109 in the Federal Register, a notice and request for comment on proposed updates and revisions to the collection of information filings by financial institutions required to file such reports under the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”). While the notice does not propose any new regulatory requirements or changes to the requirements related to suspicious activity reporting, it suggests changes to the required data fields used when filing SARs under the BSA. The majority of the proposed changes would alter the "checklist" of violations in Part II of the filings, including the addition of several fields related to cyber events. Written comments must be received on or before April 3.
State Financial Regulators Release BSA/AML Compliance Tool
On February 1, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) announced the release of its BSA/AML Self-Assessment Tool—a new, voluntary tool to help banks and non-depository financial institutions better manage Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) risk. Building upon CSBS’s efforts to help banks understand their risk exposure to third-parties, the self-assessment tool—developed jointly by the CSBS and state regulators—aims to help institutions better identify, monitor, and communicate BSA/AML risk, thereby reducing some of the burden and uncertainty surrounding compliance and facilitating more transparency within the financial sector. The self-assessment tool is available for use by any institution and may be accessed here. A narrated tutorial is also available here. Last year, CSBS released a white paper that outlines state supervision of money services businesses.
Global Money Service Business Settles Alleged AML and Consumer Fraud Allegations; Fined $586 Million in Settlement
On January 19, the DOJ announced that it had entered into Deferred Prosecution Agreement with a global money services business regarding allegations the company failed to maintain effective anti-money laundering program and aiding and abetting wire fraud. The announcement claims that between 2004 and 2012, the company “violated U.S. laws—the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and anti-fraud statutes—by processing hundreds of thousands of transactions for Western Union agents and others involved in an international consumer fraud scheme.” Under the terms of the Agreement, the business must forfeit $586 million and “implement and maintain a comprehensive anti-fraud program with training for its agents and their front line associates, monitoring to detect and prevent fraud-induced money transfers, due diligence on all new and renewing company agents, and suspension or termination of noncompliant agents.”
In a related case, the company also agreed to a consent order with the FTC to resolve parallel allegations by the FTC in a complaint filed on January 19 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The complaint alleges that the company’s conduct violated Section 5 of the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule.
FDIC Announces New Regulatory Actions Against Florida-based Bank
On December 30, the FDIC announced new regulatory actions against a Florida-based bank. Along with the Florida Office of Financial Regulation, the FDIC issued a new Consent Order against the $121.5 million-asset bank, based on allegations that the bank had engaged in “unsafe or unsound” banking practices, or practices which constituted a violation of law or regulation in the following areas: (i) weakness in asset quality, (ii) capital adequacy, earnings, (iii) management effectiveness, (iv) liquidity, (v) sensitivity to market risk, and (vi) compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA).
Among other things, the Order notes that the bank currently falls short of FDIC requirements for qualifying as “well capitalized,” qualifying merely as “adequately capitalized,” and therefore must boost its capital levels or face continued restrictions on its operations. The Order also states that the bank—which consented to the Order without admitting or denying the charges—now has 120 days to meet its capital requirements and 60 days to submit a capital plan to both: (i) achieve and maintain the capital requirements; and (ii) provide for a contingency plan to sell or merge the bank.
FINRA Fines Brokerage Firm $5.75M for Lax Anti-Money Laundering Program
On December 28, FINRA entered into an acceptance, waiver, and consent (AWC) agreement with a Puerto-Rican-based brokerage firm based upon allegations that the firm’s anti-money laundering (AML) program “was not reasonably designed to achieve and monitor compliance with the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act.” In deciding to levy a $5.75 million fine, FINRA noted, among other things, that the firm improperly “relied on manual supervisory review of securities transactions” that was “not sufficiently focused on AML risks.” The firm neither admitted nor denied the findings set forth in the AWC agreement, but agreed to address deficiencies in their AML program within 180 days. According to a firm spokeswoman, the firm is “pleased to have this matter from 2013 resolved and we continue to improve, manage and monitor our AML efforts.”