Are High-Security Checks Worth It?

by PJ Rohall
Introduced in 2020, the 6th Anti Money-Laundering Directive (6AMLD) identifies 22 crimes as being within its purview, including those related to digital assets and taxes.
This directive was penned by the European Union, but is one of the pieces of multinational legislation that sets the pace for money laundering law worldwide. In order to fall into compliance with 6AMLD, it is mandatory for financial institutions and certain other companies to have technological safeguards to avoid participation in these crimes.
The scrutiny of these safeguards – layers of software security – must amount to an AML verification, or AML check.
The specifics of what constitutes a compliant AML check are sometimes characterized as a moving target, with the mandates changing regularly to encompass the expanding landscape of fraud and money laundering.
Let’s explore the practicalities of the current AML environment.
An AML verification, or AML check, is a data collection and analysis protocol that financial institutions must have in place in order to legally conduct transactions. In practicality, it is a background vetting process that is conducted during customer onboarding, as well as along their customer journey to the satisfaction of “existing expectations for SAR reporting”.
The process is designed to keep companies within legal compliance for anti-terrorist legislation like the Banking Secrecy Act in the US and European 6AMLD regulation, and other mandates that help keep the international economy safe.
Notably, AML checks will overlap with the data gathered from KYC verification checks, though the former would normally take into account more information. But where KYC checks are mandated for financial and some other entities, AML verification also references other data-based strategies to address the concerns of money laundering specifically.
Utilize SEON’s identification technology and advanced APIs to create an onboarding process that is low-friction and high-compliance.
Book a Demo
To be compliant with international mandates, the name, date of birth, and address of the account holder must be validated. According to legislation, these data points are enough to be confident in a customer’s profile when it comes to potential liability. The institution will assess the validity of this personal information and ensure that they’re not on any sanctions lists, blacklists or PEP lists.
However, in the case of accounts not owned by individuals but companies, establishing the beneficial owner of a commercial entity can be tricky. Money launderers attempt to obfuscate the true ownership of a commercial bank account or other account within oversight to be able to use it as a bank drop to launder money.
Another way to hide transactions with criminal origins is to lean on plausible deniability. In some cases, bad actors at potentially high levels of a company might knowingly let financially valuable, criminal activity occur inside their systems. When it comes time to point the finger at a responsible party, these companies assume liability will get lost in the chaos of the blame game, to no conclusion.
To address this, Article 7 of 6AMLD assigns explicit criminality to situations where a “lack of supervision or control” makes a criminal act possible. Where, previously, correct liability was too vaguely defined to pursue legal action, the law now demands the place of blame to be occupied by a responsible professional, if not the beneficial owner.
A beneficial owner is defined as a single entity that owns or controls an interest in a legal or commercial entity, such as a company, property, or security. Most commonly, though, knowing the beneficial owner answers the question “Whose money is this, really?” This designation of ownership is in place for the sake of legal responsibility when it comes to that entity’s conduct in the larger economy.
In the context of AML legislation, the establishment of a beneficial owner of a financial product is also part of enhanced due diligence, as any legal culpability will fall to this person. For a personal bank account, the beneficial owner is, of course, the account holder, but for many larger accounts, there may be many apparent owners, one or several of whom must be designated the beneficiary.
Sometimes these layers of ownership will be structured to hide the beneficial owner, and, thus, the legal responsibility in the case of any wrongdoing. They may, for example, put in place unnecessarily complex ownership structures with layers of proxies or shell companies.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) defines certain thresholds for the establishment of beneficial ownership. Generally, if an individual owns more than 25% of the interest in an entity, they are a legal beneficial owner. However, FinCEN has particular language for considering the below:
To receive a valid AML verification, FinCEN also has a list of acceptable forms of identification that can be provided. These tend to overlap with KYC compliance checks and include:
The validity of the above will be confirmed using identity verification software (IDV tools). At the financial entity’s discretion, photocopies of the above can be acceptable, as long as this is paired with a risk assessment during onboarding. The institution will also cross-reference the identity of the beneficiary against sanctions lists, PEP lists, and other applicable blacklists.
In the screenshot above, SEON is used to supervise potentially money laundering-related transactions.
Current AML regulations are based on the idea of keeping the economy and the world safe from terrorism, cross-border aggression, corruption and other criminal enterprises. Thus, any entity that could play or facilitate a role in the financing of the above falls under the jurisdiction of AML mandates. Across the world, AML requirements in banking are a given. But, depending on the country, there are also AML mandates for iGaming, fintech, high value dealers and more.
Generally, worldwide, the entities that are required to execute compliant AML verification are largely in the financial sector, though AML regulations have also expanded into verticals where money has traditionally been hidden, like luxury real estate, art collection, and gambling. For example, in cases where shell companies are used to purchase luxury residences.
The industries that generally need to meet BSA AML compliance include:
Notably, financial companies that want to play in the stateside banking sandbox have to comply with the specifics of the American AML regulation. Currently, these companies are:
In the UK, the businesses required to register for money laundering supervision extend to industries commonly associated with criminal laundering:
With the adoption of 6AMLD protocols, AML verification has become an even higher priority for financial bodies than it was. The most obvious benefit is being part of the greater effort to negate the financial power of criminal enterprises and terrorism worldwide – a reward in and of itself. But avoiding fines is also key for these companies.
For most companies, the looming threat of massive fines is a key motivator to maintain watertight compliance. For example, for companies in the EU subject to 6AMLD mandates, the punishments for noncompliance offenders were hardened significantly by comparison to 5AMLD, with the minimum fine now at €5/$4.8 million and four years imprisonment for the responsible party.
Entities found to be repeat or extreme lawbreakers can also be subject to:
Staying compliant with AML regulations is a huge part of what SEON can help achieve. International AML mandates all describe a compliant process as one that has a risk-based software security solution in place to give confidence in the validity of new customers.
Over 80% of SEON customers are under the jurisdiction of AML mandates, and we get them over the finish line of both compliance and ROI by providing flexible risk mitigation solutions.
We provide a way to do AML screenings, including checking whether names and their variations appear on any AML related lists – PEPs and RCAs, watchlists, fugitive lists, sanctions lists, and so on. SEON’s AML API can be used in isolation or as part of the end-to-end fraud prevention platform.
Our comprehensive risk assessment is based on real-time data being fed through machine-learning algorithms, escalating potential bad actors to further scrutiny and approving obviously good customers with minimal friction.
During AML checks, SEON allows fraud teams to do all of the following:
In other words, implementing SEON makes keeping AML compliant at both digital onboarding and throughout the customer journey by constantly checking for signs of misdeeds.
The safest environment for a financial institution to do business in is certainly one that is free from money laundering, but cultivating that space requires work. With SEON, that work can be streamlined significantly, saving both time and operational costs while also boosting fraud prevention and mitigation.
In the screenshot above, SEON is used to pause the journey of customers from high-risk countries to be reviewed manually.
Sources
Showing all with `` tag
Click here
The top stories of the month delivered straight to your inbox