InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
FinCEN fines company for willfully failing to comply with GTO
On April 1, FinCEN announced its first enforcement action for failing to comply with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of a Geographic Targeting Order (GTO). The 2014 GTO in question was designed to combat what FinCEN and the Department of Justice viewed as widespread trade-based money laundering in the Los Angeles Fashion District, in which businesses accepted bulk cash from Mexican drug trafficking organizations as part the black market peso exchange. The GTO required that a wide range of non-financial businesses within the Los Angeles Fashion District, including perfume stores, travel agencies, and electronics stores, report and keep records related to whether they “received currency in excess of $3,000 in one transaction or two or more related transactions in a 24-hour period.” FinCEN imposed a $275,000 penalty on a perfume company in the Los Angeles Fashion District for failure to report more than 114 covered transactions worth more than $2.3 million. According to FinCEN, these failures were first identified in a 2015 examination by the IRS. Later attempts made by the company to submit reports for the 114 transactions were declared “substantially incomplete,” as the reports, among other things, failed to include customer information or any indication that the cash payments were made on behalf of another person or business. The IRS rejected the reports and referred the matter to FinCEN, who conducted an investigation and determined that the company failed to comply with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements until long after it became aware of the GTO.
The $275,000 civil money penalty was assessed based on a number of factors, including the company’s allegedly willful violations of the Bank Secrecy Act and the nature and seriousness of the violations, including the extent of possible public harm and the amounts involved. FinCEN noted that “[w]hile there is no direct evidence indicating that the unreported transactions involved illegal activity or the proceeds of illegal activity, the company’s failures were significant and led to the loss of valuable financial intelligence that could assist law enforcement efforts against significant money laundering activity on behalf of international drug trafficking organizations.” FinCEN also stated that the company’s actions impacted the agency’s mission to safeguard the financial system and target specific illicit financial threats, and that the company’s systemic failure to take any action in response to the GTO enabled them to continue.
“FinCEN’s enforcement action puts nonfinancial trades and businesses on notice that they must comply with Geographic Targeting Orders,” FinCEN’s acting Director Himamauli Das stated. “This action also illustrates FinCEN’s long-standing efforts to partner with other government agencies to combat money laundering schemes designed to launder the proceeds of criminal activity through nonfinancial trades and businesses in the United States.”
OFAC sanctions IRGC-connected entities
On March 30, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, as amended, as well as E.O. 13382, against an Iran-based procurement agent and his network of companies that supported the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Research and Self Sufficiency Jihad Organization (IRGC), the IRGC unit responsible for the research and development of ballistic missiles, as well as Iran’s Parchin Chemical Industries (PCI), an element of Iran’s Defense Industries Organization. Additionally, OFAC sanctioned an Iranian intermediary involved in the procurement of parts used to develop missile propellant on behalf of PCI.
According to OFAC, the sanctions follow Iran’s missile attack on March 13 in Erbil, Iraq and an Iranian-enabled Houthi missile attack against a Saudi Aramco facility on March 25, in addition to other missile attacks by Iranian proxies against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned persons that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, and “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more” by the targeted persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons.
FinCEN’s interactive SAR stats now include 2021 data
On March 28, FinCEN announced that its Interactive SAR Stats webpage now includes Filing Trend Data by industry updated through December 31, 2021. As previously covered by InfoBytes, SAR Stats—formerly called By the Numbers—is an annual compilation of numerical data gathered from the Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) filed by financial institutions using FinCEN’s new unified SAR form and e-filing process. Interactive SAR Stats provide users the opportunity to find FinCEN’s trend data for aggregated counts of defined suspicious activities that financial institutions file with FinCEN as required by the Bank Secrecy Act.
OFAC sanctions individuals for raising funds supporting Nigerian terrorist group
On March 25, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13224, as amended, against six individuals connected to the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram. According to OFAC, the six individuals “were found guilty of establishing a Boko Haram cell in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to raise funds for and provide material assistance to Boko Haram insurgents in Nigeria.” The sanctions follow “arrests, prosecutions, and designations in the UAE in September 2021, demonstrating the commitment of the Emirati government to using judicial measures and targeted financial sanctions to disrupt the flow of funds to these networks.” Under Secretary of the Treasury Brian Nelson stated that the U.S. is joining the UAE in targeting terrorist financing networks to ensure the Boko Haram network is unable to further move funds through the international financial system. As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned individuals in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, and “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more” by the targeted individuals are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, U.S. persons are prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons, unless exempt or authorized by a general or specific OFAC license.
OFAC’s announcement further warned that “engaging in certain transactions with the individuals designated today entails risk of secondary sanctions” and that any foreign financial institution that knowingly facilitates significant transactions or provides significant financial services on behalf of a Specially Designated Global Terrorist may be subject to U.S. correspondent account or payable-through account sanctions.
OFAC sanctions Russian defense companies, political leaders, and Sberbank CEO
On March 24, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced several new sanctions in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The new sanctions, issued pursuant to Executive Order (EO) 14024, target dozens of Russian defense companies, 328 members of the Russian State Duma, and the CEO of Sberbank, Russia’s largest financial institution. According to OFAC, the sanctions target “companies that are part of Russia’s defense-industrial base and that produce weapons that have been used in Russia’s assault against Ukraine’s people, infrastructure, and territory,” and are intended to prevent 48 companies from accessing western technological and financial resources. The sanctions imposed against the Russian Duma members (political and national security leaders who have supported Russia’s invasion of Ukraine) expand on previous sanctions taken against other Duma members (covered by InfoBytes here) and expand designations to now include the State Duma itself as an entity. OFAC further noted that the sanctioned CEO of Sberbank is a close Putin associate who oversees a large number of companies owned by Sberbank in other industries. As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned persons that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, and “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more” by the targeted persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, U.S. persons are prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons, unless exempt or authorized by a general or specific OFAC license.
The same day, OFAC also published one new Frequently Asked Question clarifying the impact of EO 14024 and other Russia-related sanctions on gold-related transactions or persons participating in the gold market.
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on the U.S. sanctions response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine here.
OFAC announces Burmese sanctions
On March 25, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 14014 against five individuals and five entities connected to the military regime in Burma. According to OFAC, the sanctions “come[] as the regime prepares to mark the 77th Armed Forces Day.” OFAC also described that “[f]ollowing the February 1, 2021, coup that overthrew Burma’s democratically elected civilian government, the military committed numerous atrocities against the people of Burma, including the violent repression of political dissent and violence against innocent people, including at pro-democracy protests during last year’s Armed Forces Day that killed more than 100 people.” As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned entities subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.” U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons.
OFAC issues Ukraine general license and Russian FAQ
On March 24, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced three Russia-related General Licenses (GL). GL 6A authorizes transactions related to the exportation or reexportation of agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, replacement parts and components, or software updates, research activities related to the Covid-19 pandemic, or clinical trial activities. GL 17A authorizes the import of existing purchases of prohibited products that are under pre-existing contract by Executive Order (E.O.) 14068. And GL 20 authorizes third-country diplomatic and consular funds transfers. The same day, OFAC issued Ukraine/Russia-related GL 25, which authorizes news reporting organizations to engage in certain transactions related to their work in the Crimea, Donetsk People’s Republic, and Luhansk People’s Republic regions of Ukraine. OFAC also announced that it updated two frequently asked questions regarding E.O. 14068, which prohibits the importation into the United States of fish, seafood, and preparations thereof; alcoholic beverages; and non-industrial diamonds of Russian Federation origin.
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on the U.S. sanctions response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine here.
Treasury official says it’s time to reconsider “culture of compliance”
On March 21, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes Elizabeth Rosenberg delivered remarks before the Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (ACAMS) Hollywood Conference, asking attendees to consider “[w]hat must a culture of compliance look like in a world where autocracy is on the rise” and how financial institutions should adapt their Bank Secrecy Act/anti-money laundering (AML) obligations to ensure they are effective. Rosenberg praised the quick responses taken by financial institutions and financial service providers in implementing the growing list of sanctions against Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s support structure in light of the recent invasion of Ukraine. “Russia’s war has meaningfully expanded AML and sanctions obligations,” Rosenberg cautioned, stressing it was time for an updated approach to considering and managing risk. “Geopolitical events are evolving fast, and we need financial institutions more than ever to act swiftly as we in the government are pushing out new designations and advisories almost daily.” She instructed attendees to “think about risk and enhanced due diligence when it comes to Russian oligarchs and kleptocrats who may not have been priorities for [entities’] compliance efforts in early February but are now crucial players, supporting Putin’s power structure.”
Rosenberg further noted that Treasury’s efforts would be aided if public and private sectors were faster about sharing information and if information sharing was improved “across borders, between financial institutions, and with the government.” Closing money laundering and global passport loopholes through which sanctioned actors can move funds and assets around the globe is also critical, Rosenberg stated. She also highlighted the U.S. government’s recent collaboration with foreign partners to help countries effectively take measures to “find, restrain, freeze, and where appropriate, to confiscate the assets of those who have been sanctioned in connection with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.” These multilateral efforts include the recent launch of the Russian Elites, Proxies, and Oligarchs multilateral task force, and Treasury’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Rewards Program, as well as recently issued FinCEN advisories to help compliance officials better identify Russian sanctions evasion and suspicious financial activity including through real estate, luxury goods, and other high-value assets. (Covered by InfoBytes here.)
Find continuing InfoBytes coverage on the U.S. sanctions response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine here.
OFAC announces human rights abuse sanctions
On March 21, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13818 against the Republic of the Sudan Central Reserve Police (CRP) for serious human rights abuse. According to OFAC, the “CRP has used excessive force against pro-democracy protesters peacefully demonstrating against the military-led overthrow of the civilian-led transitional government in Sudan.” As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned person subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. OFAC also noted that its regulations generally prohibit all dealings by U.S. persons that involve any property or interests in property of designated persons.
Senate holds hearing on the role of digital assets in illicit finance
On March 17, the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee held a hearing titled “Understanding the Role of Digital Assets in Illicit Finance” to consider the risks crypto technology and digital assets pose for consumers and the financial system. The Committee heard from several witnesses, including FinCEN’s Former Acting Director, Deputy Director/Digital Innovation Officer Michael Mosier, who stressed that policymakers should focus on finding a balance that does not only “chase bad actors but also prevents exploitation of the vulnerable from the start.” Chairman Sherrod Brown (D-OH) opened the hearing by explaining that the “dollar has safeguards to protect against crime and illicit activity” because companies dealing in real money “are required to know their customers, and report suspicious transactions.” In contrast, digital assets “make it easier for money launderers to use webs of transactions across the globe to cover their tracks” and hinders law enforcement agencies’ ability to trace illicit funds. Brown cautioned that “lax rules and little oversight” are providing bad actors more opportunities to “hide and move money in the dark” using cryptocurrency. He stressed, however, that President Biden’s recent executive order, which outlined a coordinated approach to digital asset innovation (covered by InfoBytes here), will “drive progress on this issue” and “jumpstart a coordinated strategy from law enforcement and regulators to fight bad actors who want to use crypto.” Ranking Member Pat Toomey (R-PA) took a different view, noting that the “traceable nature of many cryptocurrencies” can also support the detection and prevention of illicit crime, which is “a factor making [cryptocurrency] terribly risky to utilize for criminal purposes.” He also expressed concerns that the lack of regulatory clarity surrounding digital assets has driven innovation abroad.
Witnesses provided various recommendations designed to, among other things, reduce the risk of sanctions evasion through digital assets, as well as improve detection, disruption, and deterrence of the illicit use of digital assets. While one witness stated that “transparency of blockchains enhances the ability of policymakers and law enforcement to detect, disrupt, and ultimately, deter illicit activity,” another witness cautioned that “[e]ven with the latest blockchain analytics, investigations can take years to complete,” particularly because “prosecutors must demonstrate that an identifiable person is behind the criminal activity.”