Anti-Money Laundering
Consulting Services & Strategies

0 Items - Total: $0.00 CAD

Amending the Amendments!

Background

Back on July 10, 2019, the highly anticipated final version of the amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA) and its enacted regulations were published. However, on February 15, 2020, further proposed amendments to those amended regulations was published in the Canada Gazette. To make reading these changes a little easier, we have created a redlined version of the regulations, with new content showing as tracked changes, which can be found here.

The Regulatory Impact Statement for this round of proposed changes states the following: “The proposed amendments to the regulations would strengthen Canada’s AML/ATF Regime, align measures with international standards and level the playing field across reporting entities by applying stronger customer due diligence requirements and beneficial ownership requirements to designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs); modifying the definition of business relationship for the real estate sector; aligning customer due diligence measures for casinos with international standards; aligning virtual currency record-keeping obligations with international standards; clarifying the cross-border currency reporting program; clarifying a number of existing requirements; and making minor technical amendments”. The proposed amendments are expected to come into force on June 1, 2021.

As with all proposed changes, there is a comment period. This comment period is much shorter than the last one, at only 30 days. For anyone interested in commenting on the proposed changes, comments are to be addressed to Lynn Hemmings, Director General, Financial Crimes and Security Division, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance, 90 Elgin Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G5 or email: fin.fc-cf.fin@canada.ca.

While these are proposed changes, guidance from FINTRAC related to the amendments to regulation would hopefully be seen ahead of the coming into force dates of the final version.

We have summarized what this could mean for your business below.

Money Services Businesses

PEP

The most significant proposed change for Money Services Businesses (MSB)s is related to Politically exposed persons (PEP) determinations. Currently, a PEP determination must be made for international EFTs of CAD 100,000 or more. The proposed regulations will require MSBs to make a PEP determination when the MSB enters into a business relationship with a person.

If you currently conduct list screening, PEP screening could easily be added to that process.

Dealers in Virtual Currency

Travel Rule

For dealers in virtual currency, there is an additional proposed requirement on top of the requirements that were published in the last round of AML changes.  The proposed amendments add the requirement for records to be kept for virtual currency transfers of CAD 1,000 or more.

The record must contain the following:

  1. include with the transfer, the name, address and, if any, the account number or other reference number of both the person or entity that requested the transfer and the beneficiary; and
  2. take reasonable measures to ensure that any transfer received includes the information referred to in paragraph (a) above.

If the information required is not obtained, a determination of whether the transaction should be suspended or rejected will need to be made.

Given the nature of virtual currency transfers, it will be interesting to see how this requirement plays out, as currently, there are no technology solutions (that we are aware of) that would solve for this.

A reminder that dealers in virtual currency will be considered MSBs as of June 1, 2020. Check out our blog post for a full list of regulatory requirements related to dealers in virtual currency.

Real Estate

Business Relationship

One of the most significant proposed changes for real estate developers, brokers and sale representatives is related to the definition of a business relationship. Currently, a business relationship is defined as:

If a person or entity does not have an account with you, a business relationship is formed once you have conducted two transactions or activities for which you have to:

  • verify the identity of the individual; or
  • confirm the existence of the entity.

The proposed amendments will change that definition for real estate developers, brokers and sale representatives to only one transaction.

For business relationships, a reporting entity must:

  • keep a record of the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship;
  • conduct ongoing monitoring of your business relationship with your client to:
    • detect any transactions that need to be reported as suspicious;
    • keep client identification and beneficial ownership information, as well as the purpose and intended nature records, up-to-date;
    • reassess your clients risk level based on their transactions and activities; and
    • determine if the transactions and activities are consistent with what you know about your client;
  • keep a record of the measures you take to monitor your business relationships and the information you obtain as a result.

We will have to wait for guidance to see how ongoing monitoring obligations applies to the real estate sector if this change takes effect.

PEP

The proposed amendments will require real estate developers, brokers and sale representatives to make a Politically exposed persons (PEP) determination when they enter into a business relationship (as defined above) with a client. In addition, they will also be required to take reasonable measures to determine whether a client from whom they receive an amount of CAD 100,000 or more is a PEP.

Beneficial Ownership

The proposed amendments will require real estate developers, brokers and sale representatives to comply with existing beneficial ownership requirements that apply to other reporting entities.

This means when identifying an entity, a reporting entity needs to collect the following for all Directors and individuals who own or control, directly or indirectly, 25% or more of the organization:

  • Their full legal name;
  • Their full home address; and
  • Their role and/or ownership stake in the organization.

Given the obligation is to obtain, rather than verify, such information, we do not expect this requirement to be overly burdensome for the real estate sector.

Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones

PEP

Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones (DPMS)s will be required to make a PEP determination when they enter into a business relationship with a client. In addition, a DPMS will be required to take reasonable measures to determine whether a person from whom they receive an amount of CAD 100,000 or more is a PEP.

A reminder that a business relationship is defined as:

If a person or entity does not have an account with you, a business relationship is formed once you have conducted two transactions or activities for which you have to:

  • verify the identity of the individual; or
  • confirm the existence of the entity.

Given the definition of a business relationship, we do not expect this requirement to be overly burdensome. If you currently conduct list screening, PEP screening could easily be added to that process.

Beneficial Ownership

The proposed amendments will required DPMSs to comply with existing beneficial ownership requirements that apply to other reporting entities.

This means when identifying an entity, a reporting entity needs to collect the following for all Directors and individuals who own or control, directly or indirectly, 25% or more of the organization:

  • Their full legal name;
  • Their full home address; and
  • Their role and/or ownership stake in the organization.

Given the obligation is to obtain, rather than verify, such information, we do not expect this requirement to be overly burdensome for the DPMS sector.

We’re Here To Help

If you would like assistance in updating your compliance program and processes, or have any questions related to the changes, please get in touch!

Regulations Amending the Regulations February 15, 2020- Redlined Versions

The following red-lined versions have been created to reflect the amendments to Canadian anti-money laundering (AML) regulations published in the Canada Gazette on February 15, 2020. You can also read our article “Amending the Amendments!” for a summary of the proposed changes by industry.

Redlined versions of all the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations are listed below for download.

These documents are not official versions of the regulations. Official versions can be found on the Government of Canada’s Justice Laws Website.

Regulations Amending the Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act

Please click the link below for downloadable PDF file.
Amending_the_Regulations_Amending_Certain_Regulations_Made_Under_the_Proceeds_of_Crime_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations

Please click the links below for downloadable pdf files.
PCMLTF_July_2019_Redlined_Full_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Suspicious Transaction Reporting Regulations

Please click the links below for downloadable pdf files.
PCMLTF_Suspicious_Transaction_Reporting_Regulations_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Registration Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable PDF file.
PCMLTF_Registration_Regulations_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.
PCMLTF_Administrative_Monetary_Penalties_Regulations_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Cross-Border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.
PCMLTF_Cross-Border_Currency_and_Monetary_Instruments_Reporting_Regulations_July_2019 – Redlined_Feb_2020

Need a Hand?

Whether you need to figure out if you’re a dealer in virtual currency, to put a compliance program in place, or to evaluate your existing compliance program, we can help. You can get in touch using our online form, by emailing info@outliercanada.com, or by calling us toll-free at 1-844-919-1623.

2019 AML Updates – Redlined Versions

The following red-lined versions have been created to reflect the changes to Canadian anti-money laundering (AML) regulations published in the Canada Gazette on July 10th, 2019.  A redlined version of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA), reflecting the changes published in Bill C-97 which received Royal Assent on June 21, 2019, is also included below.

These documents are not official versions of the regulations. Official versions can be found on the Government of Canada’s Justice Laws Website.

 

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.

PCMLTFA_July_2019_Redline

 

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations

Please click the links below for downloadable pdf files.

PCMLTFR_July_2019_Redlined_Full

PCMLTFR_July_2019_Redlined_Schedules Removed

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Suspicious Transaction Reporting Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.

PCMLTF_Suspicious_Transaction_Reporting_Regulations_July_2019_Redlined

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Registration Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.

PCMLTF_Registration_Regulations_July_2019_Redlined

Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.

PCMLTFR_Administrative_Monetary_Penalties_Regulations_July_2019_Redlined

Cross-Border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting Regulations

Please click the link below for a downloadable pdf file.

PCMLTFR_Cross-Border_Currency_and_Monetary_Instruments_Reporting_Regulations_July_2019_redline

 

Need a Hand?

Whether you need to figure out if you’re a dealer in virtual currency, to put a compliance program in place, or to evaluate your existing compliance program, we can help. You can get in touch using our online form, by emailing info@outliercanada.com, or by calling us toll-free at 1-844-919-1623.

Information Should Be Free!

Outlier has produced an open-source AML and CTF, and Privacy repositories of definitions, acronyms, and terminology that is free for whoever wants it.

Please feel free to provide contributions and/or feedback, as it would be greatly appreciated. We have already had three contributors!

Discombobulated

About a year ago, we had a client who was interacting with the world of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter Terrorist Financing (CTF) for the first time. They were aggravated by the amount of jargon, acronyms, and uncommon uses of certain commonly understood terms. An example is, a business relationship. Those of you that are relatively familiar with the AML space know a business relationship doesn’t mean what the rest of the world thinks it means. In Canada, in the AML context, it means something very different.

A Helping Hand

At the time, they wished for a simple reference point where they could easily find the meaning for different terms. Unfortunately, this entails combing multiple locations, including FINTRAC’s website, plus the Act and Regulations themselves. To make a long story short, there is no easy way. Fed up, they (not so) gently suggested that we (Outlier) fix this. Their idea was creating a GitHub repository.

For those unfamiliar with GitHub, it is a web-based hosting service for version control. It is mostly used for computer code, but has also been used to write and edit books. It offers access control and several collaboration features. A GitHub repository is where the code and/or information is maintained for a specific project. This process is fairly simple to someone who is a coder with years of experience working with GitHub. For myself, this was not so simple. A year later, almost to the day, the repository is created, open and available to the public. There is no need to be scared, you are able to comment and make suggestions without knowing how to code at all. If you can’t figure out how to provide commentary in GitHub, send it to use via email at info@outliercanada.com with the subject line “GitHub Feedback.”

The Power of Collaboration

The (not so) gentle nudge meshed well with one of Outlier’s core beliefs: that information should be free. By collecting the information, housing it in GitHub, and making it available to anyone, we are able to provide free information to everyone who wants it. By making information free and public, it gives others the opportunity to make suggestions, add content, and improve the quality of the information.

What Happens When We Work Together?

By sharing this open-source project with the world, we are looking to empower anyone willing to be empowered. From the client who is interacting with the world of AML for the first time. To the seasoned-veteran who is looking for helpful resources. To the person who wants to provide their customer with a helpful resource. Take the information and do what you wish with it. If you would like to attribute Outlier, awesome! If not, that’s ok too. Our only request is this should never be provided for a fee.

Have a Question?

If you looked at the resource and are curious about how to make a contribution, please feel free to contact us anytime. Contributions can include anything from corrections and suggestions, to the addition of different jurisdictional definitions, specifically the European perspective.

This is not a solicitation (but we do get this request often), should you want to provide a tip in BTC or ETH, our addresses are listed below.

To open a channel with our Lightning Node, our address is: 03acb418d5b88c0009cf07d31ec53d0486814bc77917c352bd7e952520edf7bf3c@99.236.76.38:9735

or you can use Tippin.Me.

bitcoin ethereum
33CdqJTw6jMWVBAveT9Ue3rPym8HPKKPow 0x03CDF23a2Eb070F2c79De5B2E6FB90671D3c70fE

Canada’s Proposed AML Changes for MSBs

What’s Old is New Again, Well Updated

On June 9th, 2018, draft amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA) and its enacted regulations (there are five separate regulations that we’re going to collectively call regulations here for simplicity’s sake). This article is intended to give a high-level summary of the proposed amendments as they relate to Money Services Businesses (MSBs).

This article should not be considered advice (legal, tax or otherwise). That said, any of the content shared here may be used and shared freely – you don’t need our permission. While we’d love for content that we’ve written to be attributed to us, we believe that it’s more important to get reliable information into the hands of community members (meaning that if you punk content that we wrote, we may think you’re a jerk but we’re not sending an army of lawyers).

Finally, we want to encourage the community to discuss the proposed changes and submit meaningful feedback for policy makers. The comment period for this draft is 90 days. After this, the Department of Finance takes the feedback to the bat cave and drafts a final version of the amendments. From the time that the final version is published, the draft indicates that there will be 12 months of transition to comply with the new requirements.

♬The Times Regulations Are Changing♬

Foreign MSBs

Currently, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) has issued a policy interpretation (PI-5594) in August of 2013, which states that a “real and substantial connection” to Canada must be present for an entity to be required to register as an MSB with FINTRAC.  A “real and substantial connection” was defined in the interpretation as having one or more of the following:

  • Whether the business is incorporated in Canada;
  • Whether the business has agents in Canada;
  • Whether the business has physical locations in Canada; and/ or
  • Whether the business maintains a bank account or a server in Canada.

The draft amendments introduce a new definition, which is “Foreign Money Services Business” that means anyone serving Canadian customers or entities in Canada is now subject to all Canadian requirements no matter where they are located.  Throughout the proposed changes, where there is a reference to money services businesses, there is also a reference to foreign money services businesses.  This will be significant to MSBs who operate non-face-to-face in the online marketplace and do not reside in Canada.

Non-Face-To-Face Customer Identification

Currently, there is a requirement that when customers are identified using the dual process method, the document and/or data that you collect is in its “original” format. This has been interpreted to mean that if the customer receives a utility bill in the mail, they must send you the original paper (not scanned or copied) document. The word “original” will be replaced with “authentic” (meaning that so long as you believe that the utility bill is a real utility bill for that person, it doesn’t need to be the same piece of paper that they received in the mail).

In addition, there are provisions that would allow reporting entities to rely on the identification conducted previously by other reporting entities. If this method is used to identify a customer, the reporting entity must immediately obtain the identification information from the other reporting entity and have a written agreement in place requiring the entity doing the identification to provide the identification verification within 3 days of the request.

Reporting EFTs of $10,000 or More

If you conduct international remittance transactions at the request of your customers, the requirement to report transactions of $10,000 or more will now be your responsibility, not your financial services provider.

The proposed change removes the language commonly known as the “first in, last out” rule.  This means that the first person/entity to ‘touch’ the funds for transactions incoming to Canada or the last person/entity to ‘touch’ the funds for a transaction outgoing from Canada had the reporting obligation (as long as the prescribed information was provided to them).

The update will change the reporting obligation to whoever maintains the customer relationship. So if you initiate a transaction at your customer’s request (outgoing transaction) or provide final receipt of payment to your customer (incoming transaction), it will be your obligation to report that transaction to FINTRAC.

For example, if the flow of the instructions for payment were as follows:

Currently, the reporting obligation of the outgoing EFT would fall to the bank in Canada.  With the draft updates, the reporting obligation would now fall to the MSB in Canada, because they have the relationship with the customer initiating the transaction.

 

Third Party Determination

Currently, the obligation to determine whether a third party is involved in a transaction relates to Large Cash Transactions.  The proposed changes would include the obligation to make a third party determination for all EFTs of $10,000 or more.  This would also require similar record keeping obligations as a third party determination under the current Large Cash Transaction records.

Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Currently, if a reporting entity has reasonable grounds to suspect that a transaction or attempted transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, a report must be submitted to FINTRAC within 30 days of the date that a fact was discovered that caused the suspicion. This change appeared in the last round of amendments that came into force last year, and the proposed new wording would be another significant change:

The person or entity shall send the report to the Centre within three days after the day on which measures taken by them enable them to establish that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the transaction or attempted transaction is related to the commission of a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence.

This means that a report would be due three days after the reporting entity conducts an investigation or does something that allows them to reach the conclusion that there are reasonable grounds to suspect.

Information Included In Reports to FINTRAC

Certain information is required in reports to FINTRAC. Even where information is marked as being optional, if a reporting entity has the information, it becomes mandatory to include it. Some of the additional proposed data fields are:

  • every reference number that is connected to the transaction,
  • type of device used by person who makes request online,
  • number that identifies device,
  • internet protocol address (IP address) used by device,
  • person’s user name, and
  • date and time of person’s online session in which request is made.

These fields may require significantly more data to be included in reports, especially for transactions that are conducted online.

Ongoing Compliance Training

Currently, there are five required elements of a Canadian AML compliance program, but there is soon to be a sixth.  Before you get too worried, it’s not that major.  The change is specific to your ongoing compliance training obligations, which says you must institute and document a plan for your ongoing compliance training program and the delivery of the training.  Basically, in your AML compliance program documentation, you need to provide a description of your training program for at least the next year and how the training will be delivered. Many MSBs have already implemented this best practice.

Risk Assessment Obligations

With the recent addition of the “New Technologies and Developments” category to the Risk-Based Approach requirements, the next logical progression has be added.  The updates include the obligation to assess the money laundering and terrorist financing risk of any new technology before implementation.  Meaning, if you are looking to take your business online and are going to use this fancy, new non-face-to-face ID system, you had better take careful inventory of where your risks are and be sure the appropriate controls have been put in place before going live. Much like the training plan, many MSBs have already implemented this best practice.

Virtual Currency

The draft updates also include major changes related to virtual currency. “Dealers in virtual currencies’ would be regulated as MSBs. New record keeping and reporting obligations would apply to all reporting entities that accept payment in virtual currency, or send virtual currency on behalf of their customers.

For more information on updates specific to virtual currency, please check out our full article.

What Next

If you’ve read this far, congratulations and thank you!

We hope that you will contribute your thoughts and comments. You can do this by contacting the Department of Finance directly. Their representative on this file is:

Lynn Hemmings

Acting Director General

Financial Systems Division

Financial Sector Policy Branch

Department of Finance

90 Elgin Street

Ottawa, Ontario

K1A 0G5

Email: fin.fc-cf.fin@canada.ca

If you would like assistance drafting a submission, or have questions that you would like Outlier to answer, please get in touch!

If you are interested in sharing your comments with the Canadian MSB Association (and we highly encourage you to do so) please email luisa@global-currency.com. She will have more information on the industry group’s submission and consultation process.

Don’t Panic: June 2018 AML Update for DPMSs

As you may have heard, in 2018 the Department of Finance released draft updates to Canada’s anti-money laundering (AML) and counter terrorist financing (CTF) legislation. If you’re the type that likes to read the original legislative text, you can find it here.

For the rest of us, we’ve summarized the proposed updates and what they might mean for your business below.

Why is it a draft?

Publishing proposed amendments as a draft provides reporting entities like dealers in precious metals and stones (DPMSs), our industry associations like the Canadian Jewellers Association (CJA) and members of the general public, the opportunity to read the draft and suggest changes. There is a 90-day window from the original June 9th, 2018 publication date during which comments are accepted (meaning that comments should be submitted to the Department of Finance by early September).

After this, the Department of Finance will take the comments, synthesize them, request additional clarification where needed, and draft a final version of the amendments. The final version is likely to look fairly similar to the draft, with some changes. From the date that the final version is published, we expect that reporting entities will have 12 months to adjust their compliance programs and operations.

Practically speaking, this means that you should start thinking about what this means to you and your business now. However, while it can be useful to start teeing up resources (especially if you think that your IT systems need to be updated), it often makes sense to wait until the final version has been published to make changes. If you have thoughts on the proposed changes, it also means that you should consider submitting these, either independently or through an industry association. CJA members should contact Carla Adams (carla@canadianjewellers.com).

What does it mean for my business?

While there are quite a number of proposed changes (the draft is about 200 pages in length), some are likely to have more of an impact on DPMSs than others. We’ve summarized the changes that we expect to have the most impact here.

Large Virtual Currency Transaction Reporting

If you accept payments using virtual currencies like bitcoin, these will be treated similarly to cash payments. For any payments valued at CAD 10,000 or more made by or on behalf of the same person or entity in a 24-hour period, you will need to identify the customer and submit a report to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC).

Non-Face-To-Face Customer Identification

Currently, there is a requirement that when customers are identified using the dual process method, the document and/or data that you collect is in its “original” format. This has been interpreted to mean that if the customer receives a utility bill in the mail, they must send you the original paper (not scanned or copied) document. The word “original” will be replaced with “authentic” (meaning that so long as you believe that the utility bill is a real utility bill for that person, it doesn’t need to be the same piece of paper that they received in the mail).

In addition, there are provisions that would allow reporting entities to rely on the identification conducted previously by other reporting entities. If this method is used to identify a customer, the reporting entity must immediately obtain the identification information from the other reporting entity and have a written agreement in place requiring the entity doing the identification to provide the identification verification within 3 days of the request.

Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Currently, if a reporting entity has reasonable grounds to suspect that a transaction or requested transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, a report must be submitted to FINTRAC within 30 days of the date that a fact was discovered that caused the suspicion. This was changed in the last round of amendments that came into force last year, and the proposed new wording would be another significant change:

The person or entity shall send the report to the Centre within three days after the day on which measures taken by them enable them to establish that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the transaction or attempted transaction is related to the commission of a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence.

This means that a report would be due three days after the reporting entity conducts an investigation or does something else that allows them to reach the conclusion that there are reasonable grounds to suspect.

Information Included In Reports to FINTRAC

Certain information is required in reports to FINTRAC. Even where information is marked as being optional, if a reporting entity has the information, it becomes mandatory to include it. Some of the additional proposed data fields are:

  • every reference number that is connected to the transaction,
  • every other known detail that identifies the receipt (of cash for large cash transactions),
  • type of device used by person who makes request online,
  • number that identifies device,
  • internet protocol address (IP address) used by device,
  • person’s user name, and
  • date and time of person’s online session in which request is made.

These fields may require significantly more data to be included in reports, especially for transactions that are conducted online.

New Products & Delivery Channels

One of the deficiencies identified in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) review of Canada was not having a requirement to assess new technologies before their launch. A proposed amendment would require all reporting entities to assess the risk related to assess the risk of products and their delivery channels, as well as the risk associated with the use of new technologies, prior to their launch.

This has been a best practice since the requirement to conduct a risk assessment came into force, but this change would make this a formal requirement.

Defining a DPMS

The proposed amendments would change the definition of a DPMS slightly to read:

(1) A dealer in precious metals and precious stones, other than a department or an agent or mandatary of Her Majesty in right of Canada or of a province, that buys or sells precious metals, precious stones or jewellery for an amount of $10,000 or more is engaged in an activity for the purposes of paragraph 5(i) of the Act. A department or an agent or mandatary of Her Majesty in right of Canada or of a province carries out an activity for the purposes of paragraph 5(l) of the Act when they sell precious metals to the public for an amount of $10,000 or more.

(2) The activities referred to in subsection (1) do not include a purchase or sale that is carried out in the course of or in connection with manufacturing a product that contains precious metals or precious stones, extracting precious metals or precious stones from a mine or polishing or cutting precious stones.

(3) For greater certainty, the activities referred to in subsection (1) include the sale of precious metals, precious stones or jewellery that are left on consignment with a dealer in precious metals and precious stones. Goods left with an auctioneer for sale at auction are not considered to be left on consignment.

Neither the PCMLTFA nor the Regulations define consignment. This may need to be addressed, as the understanding of the term can vary.

Exempt Low Risk Activities

Certain activities are currently exempt from the DPMS designation, including manufacturing jewellery, extracting precious metals or precious stones from a mine, and cutting or polishing precious stones. The exempt activities would be expanded to capture other types of manufacturing processes that may also involve the use or consumption of precious metals and stones (e.g. diamonds used to manufacture drill bits). This is described as being consistent with the original policy intent.

What’s next?

If you would like to make a comment about the proposed changes to the Department of Finance during the comment period (which closes in early September), the contact person is:

Lynn Hemmings

Acting Director General

Financial Systems Division

Financial Sector Policy Branch

Department of Finance

90 Elgin Street

Ottawa, Ontario

K1A 0G5

Email: fin.fc-cf.fin@canada.ca

If you would like to submit comments via an industry association, and you are a member of CJA, please contact carla@canadianjewellers.com.

If you have questions about AML & CTF compliance generally, please feel free to contact us.

Proposed AML Updates for Credit Unions (2018)

Today’s guest blogger is Jonathan Krumins, Vice-President, AML Risk & Compliance, at vCAMLO Solutions Inc. vCAMLO provides anti money laundering (AML) and counter terrorist financing (CTF) support to Canadian credit unions. You can learn more about vCAMLO at www.vcamlo.ca.

Background

On June 9, 2018, draft amendments to Canada’s AML regulations, including the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations (PCMLTFR) were published in the Canada Gazette.

These changes are not yet in force, and are open to public comment until September 9, 2018.

They will come into effect 12 months after the finalized amendments are published (date to be determined).

The proposed changes are based on requirements set out by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an inter-governmental body that sets out international standards for combating money laundering and terrorist financing, as well as from certain amendments made to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA) made through the Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1 and the Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1.

From a practical standpoint, you should consider what changes will be required to your record keeping, reporting processes, and IT systems once the amendments come into effect, and what resources would be required. It would be prudent to discuss this with your board of directors as well. While it can be useful to start allocating resources (particularly if your IT systems need to be updated), it makes sense to wait until the final version of the changes has been published.

If you have thoughts on the proposed changes, you should consider submitting these either directly to the Ministry of Finance, or through your Credit Union Central.

Why Do These Changes Matter to Credit Unions?

The proposed changes will have a direct impact on a Credit Union’s AML obligations, including reporting, record keeping, and member identification. They will require additional training of staff, changes to record keeping and Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) reporting processes. They will likely require changes in your IT systems to ensure that all necessary information is available to be included in FINTRAC reports, particularly those involving online transactions.

FINTRAC Reporting

This round of changes to AML regulations has a much greater focus on reporting, including shorter a deadline for reporting STRs, changes to the contents of the reports themselves changes to calculation of 24 hour large cash reports, and the introduction of new reporting requirements for transactions involving virtual currencies such as bitcoin.

STR Filing

The proposed changes will shorten considerably the filing period for a Suspicious Transaction Report. The current filing deadline for STRs is within 30 days:

“after the day on which the person or entity or any of their employees or officers detects a fact respecting a financial transaction or an attempted financial transaction that constitutes reasonable grounds to suspect that the transaction or attempted transaction is related to the commission of a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence.”

This will be changed to a new standard of 3 days:

“3 days after the day on which the reporting entity completes the analysis that establishes that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the transaction was related to the commission of a money laundering or terrorist activity financing offence”

Report Contents

Many additional pieces of information will be required to be collected and submitted to FINTRAC. You should begin to evaluate where this information is stored (ex: banking system, other databases such as lending software, reports provided by your banking system provider or Credit Union Central, or paper file).

A comparison of current and proposed FINTRAC report fields can be found here: Download Table

These changes include information that was not previously required to be collected by credit unions, such as:

  • “Purpose of transaction” (for LCTRs),
  • “Purpose of electronic funds transfer” (for EFTRs), and
  • Source of cash or source of funds.

For transactions that are performed online, additional fields will be required in EFTRs and STRs:

  • Type of device used by person who makes request online,
  • Number that identifies device,
  • Internet Protocol address used by device [mandatory field],
  • Person’s user name, and
  • Date and time of person’s online session in which request is made [mandatory field].

Additional “Know Your Client” information will be required in all reports (if on file). A selection follows:

  • Personal accounts: reports will include fields for alias, e-mail address, and name, address and phone number for the member’s employer.
  • Business accounts: reports will include fields for type and number of document or information used to identify an entity, information respecting ownership, control and structure of the entity, name of each beneficial owner, name, address, e-mail address and phone number for each director.
  • Trust accounts: reports will include fields for name, address, e-mail address and phone number of each trustee, name and address of each settlor of trust, name, address, e-mail address, and telephone number of each beneficiary of trust.

The 24-Hour Rule

The formula for calculating 24 hour reports for Large Cash Transaction Reports is being changed. If you use software to automatically detect these types of transactions, you should begin discussions with your IT department or software provider to determine the time and resources that would be required to update the detection process.

Currently, a Large Cash Transaction Report must be submitted either for single transactions of $10,000 (or more) or for multiple transactions of less than $10,000 each that add up to $10,000 or more in a 24 hour period. This can result in situations where 2 reports are filed for transactions taking place in a 24 hour period.

For example:

 

Cash deposit of $12,000 cash – LCTR #1 for $12,000

Cash deposits of $5,000 and $6,000 cash – LCTR #2 for $11,000

The new calculation will consider all cash deposits that add up to $10,000 or more in a 24 hour period to be included in a single report.

 

Using the same example above, under the new rules we would have:

Cash deposits of $12,000, $5,000 and $6,000 – Single LCTR for $23,000

Virtual Currency Reporting

If you offer (or plan to offer) accounts that hold virtual currencies such as bitcoin, you will be required to report the receipt or the sending of amounts of $10,000 or more in a virtual currency to FINTRAC in two new report types; “Report with Respect to Receipt of Virtual Currency” and “Report with Respect to Transfer of Virtual Currency.”

Third Party Determinations

Similar to the existing requirement to conduct a Third Party Determination during an LCTR, you will need to make a similar determination when you are required to report an incoming Electronic Funds Transfer or Receipt of Virtual Currency.

If you have separate fraud and AML teams, it may be worth considering whether or not the AML team should alert the fraud team to third parties, particularly where these don’t make sense, or where it appears that your member may be a victim of fraud.

Training Program

The amended regulations have introduced a requirement to institute and document a plan for ongoing compliance training. This differs from the current requirement to develop and maintain a written training program.

In practice, this means that in addition to documenting all of the training that has already been completed, you will need to clearly document future training plans.

Risk Assessment Updates

One of the deficiencies identified in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) review of Canada was not having a requirement to assess new technologies before their launch. A proposed amendment would require credit unions to assess the risk related to assess the risk of products and their delivery channels, as well as the risk associated with the use of new technologies, prior to their launch.

This has been a best practice since the requirement to conduct a risk assessment came into force, but this change would make this a formal requirement. This may require closer cooperation between compliance officers and other teams involved in the development of new products or services.

Identification Methods

The range of identification methods that can be used will be broadened. This is good news, especially for credit unions that are using non-face-to-face identification methods.

Currently, there is a requirement that when members are identified using the dual process method, the document and/or data that you collect is in its “original” format. This has been interpreted to mean that if the member receives a utility bill in the mail, they must send you the original paper (not scanned or copied) document. The word “original” will be replaced with “authentic” (meaning that so long as you believe that the utility bill is a real utility bill for that person, it doesn’t need to be the same piece of paper that they received in the mail).

In addition, there are provisions that would allow a credit union to rely on the identification conducted previously by other reporting entities. If this method is used to identify a member, the credit union must immediately obtain the identification information from the other reporting entity and have a written agreement in place requiring the entity doing the identification to provide the identification verification within 3 days of the request.

Public Comments

Public comments about the proposed changes will be accepted by the Ministry of Finance until September 9, 2018. They must be submitted in writing, as follows:

Attention: Lisa Pezzack

Director General, Financial Systems Division

Department of Finance

90 Elgin Street

Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0G5

Email: fin.fc-cf.fin@canada.ca

If you have thoughts on the proposed changes, you should consider submitting these either directly to the Ministry of Finance, or through your Credit Union Central.

Need a Hand?

If you would like someone to look over your submission before you make comments to the Department of Finance, you can get in touch with us free of charge. We will look over your submission and make suggestions, without any cost to you. If you need a hand, please feel free to contact vCAMLO or Outlier.

 

Canada’s AML Rules for “Virtual Currency”

On June 9th, 2018, draft amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA) and its enacted regulations (there are five separate regulations, that we’re going to collectively call regulations here for simplicity’s sake). While not all of the proposed amendments are related to virtual currency, many are (the term virtual currency comes up 304 times in about 200 pages). This article is intended to give a high-level summary of the proposed amendments as they relate to virtual currency for businesses in that industry (exchanges, brokerages, etc.).

This article should not be considered advice (legal, tax or otherwise). That said, any of the content shared here may be used and shared freely – you don’t need our permission. While we’d love for content that we’ve written to be attributed to us, we believe that it’s more important to get reliable information into the hands of community members (meaning that if you punk content that we wrote, we may think you’re a jerk but we’re not sending an army of lawyers).

Finally, we want to encourage the community to discuss the draft and submit meaningful feedback for policymakers. To this end, we’re going to be posting, hosting and attending community events. We’ve also set up a survey that can be completed without submitting any personal information (though you may choose to do so). If you would like one of our compliance nerds at your event, please get in touch. If you’re already having a related event that benefits the community, let us know or post it in the comments.

The comment period for this draft is 90 days. After this, the Department of Finance takes the feedback to the bat cave and drafts a final version of the amendments. From the time that the final version is published, the draft indicates that there will be 12 months of transition to comply with the new requirements.

What to expect when you’re expecting (to be regulated)?

While we acknowledge that our sample is biased (people that talk to compliance geeks), we know that many businesses such as brokerages and exchanges have expected to be regulated as money services businesses (MSBs) since Bill C-31 was passed in 2014. Many of these businesses already have in place the required elements of an anti-money laundering (AML) compliance regime, including:

  1. The appointment of a Compliance Officer;
  2. Written policies and procedures;
  3. A documented risk assessment;
  4. Training; and
  5. Effectiveness testing (like an audit, but for compliance).

In addition, many have been voluntarily reporting suspicious activity to the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC), the body under which they expect to be regulated for AML.

The proposed amendments would formalize compliance program requirements, as well as create new requirements specific to businesses “dealing in virtual currency” (which would now be considered MSBs). While “dealing in virtual currency” itself is not defined, the text of the regulations implies that it will include exchanging, sending, and receiving virtual currency on behalf of other people or entities. Such entities would be required to register as MSBs if they are serving Canadian customers (whether or not they are located in Canada).

There are a number of thresholds that are proposed, including identification (at CAD 1,000) and reporting (at CAD 10,000). In each case, specific information must be collected and recorded. The identification methods that are available in these circumstances are relatively prescriptive, although the proposed amendments do make some headway towards supporting a broader array of identification methods by requiring that documents be considered “authentic” rather than requiring documents in their original format. Of course, as with any complex issue, guidance from FINTRAC will be required before we’re certain how this will be interpreted by the regulator (It’s good news; we’re just not sure how good, yet).

As always in compliance, the devil is in the details. What follows is a few of those key details, as well as some of the issues that we anticipate. We encourage you to conduct your own analysis and to join the conversation.

What’s In A Definition?

Definitions are generally not very interesting. When was the last time that you read the dictionary? (Sidenote: if you are a serious scrabble geek and do this on the regular, you will enjoy this section more than most)… In this case though, definitions matter. Definitions will make a difference in terms of the businesses and activities that are regulated, and how they are regulated. Fortunately, our community includes a number of engineers, debaters, and other individuals with a penchant for the precise – and your skills are needed here. We encourage you to carefully consider the following and to submit feedback on how they can be improved.

authorized user means a person who is authorized by a holder of a prepaid payment product account to have electronic access to funds or virtual currency available in the account by means of a prepaid payment product that is connected to it.

funds means

(a) cash and other fiat currencies, and securities, negotiable instruments or other financial instruments that indicate a title or right to or interest in them; or

(b) information that enables a person or entity to have access to a fiat currency other than cash.

For greater certainty, it does not include virtual currency. (fonds)

fiat currency means a currency that is issued by a country and is designated as legal tender in that country.

large virtual currency transaction record means a record that indicates the receipt of an amount of $10,000 or more in virtual currency in a single transaction and that contains the following information:

(a) the date of the receipt;

(b) if the amount is received for deposit into an account, the name of each account holder;

(c) the name, address and telephone number of every other person or entity that is involved in the transaction, the nature of their principal business or their occupation and, in the case of a person, their date of birth;

(d) the type and amount of each virtual currency involved in the receipt;

(e) the exchange rate used and the source of the exchange rate;

(f) the number of every other account that is affected by the transaction, the type of account and the name of each account holder;

(g) every reference number that is connected to the transaction;

(h) every other known detail that identifies the receipt; and

(i) if the amount is received by a dealer in precious metals and precious stones for the sale of precious metals, precious stones or jewellery,

(i) the type of precious metals, precious stones or jewellery,

(ii) the value of the precious metals, precious stones or jewellery, if different from the amount of virtual currency received, and

(iii) the wholesale value of the precious metals, precious stones or jewellery.

prepaid payment product means a product that is issued by a financial entity and that enables a person or entity to engage in a transaction by giving them electronic access to funds or virtual currency paid to a prepaid payment product account held with the financial entity in advance of the transaction. It excludes a product that enables a person or entity to access a credit or debit account or one that is issued for use only with particular merchants.

prepaid payment product account means an account that is connected to a prepaid payment product and that permits

(a) one or more transactions that total $1,000 or more to be conducted within a 24-hour period; or

(b) a balance of funds or virtual currency available of $1,000 or more to be maintained.

virtual currency means

(a) a digital currency that is not a fiat currency and that can be readily exchanged for funds or for another virtual currency that can be readily exchanged for funds; or

(b) information that enables a person or entity to have access to a digital currency referred to in paragraph (a).

virtual currency exchange transaction means an exchange, at the request of another person or entity, of virtual currency for funds, funds for virtual currency or one virtual currency for another.

virtual currency exchange transaction ticket means a record respecting a virtual currency exchange transaction — including an entry in a transaction register — that sets out

(a) the date of the transaction;

(b) in the case of a transaction of $1,000 or more, the name, address and telephone number of the person or entity that requests the exchange, the nature of their principal business or their occupation and, in the case of a person, their date of birth;

(c) the type and amount of each of the funds and virtual currencies involved in the payment made and received by the person or entity that requests the exchange;

(d) the method by which the payment is made and received;

(e) the exchange rate used and the source of the exchange rate;

(f) the number of every account that is affected by the transaction, the type of account and the name of each account holder;

(g) every reference number that is connected to the transaction; and

(h) every other known detail that identifies the transaction.

Diving Deeper – Obligations and Potential Issues

1 – Do the definitions capture unintended parties?

We were surprised to see that there were not specific carve-outs for certain types of tokens, including securities, and tokens intended specifically for gaming. The definition, as it’s currently written seems capable of encompassing both tokenized security offerings and gaming tokens.

In addition, the second part of the definition that includes “information that enables a person or entity to have access to a digital currency referred to in paragraph (a).” has the potential to open the definition even more broadly. For instance, if I have stored a copy of a seed phrase or a hardware device with a vault service – have they received virtual currency? Are they sending virtual currency to me if the contents of my vault are couriered to me?

 2 – What about peer-to-peer, decentralized applications, and smart contracts?

The amendments as they are presented appear to take the view that transactions have intermediaries. There are no specific carve-outs for peer-to-peer transactions (though we expect that previous guidance could be applied here), decentralized applications, and smart contracts. This may be a particularly contentious issue in the case of an exchange from one “virtual currency” to another – especially where such an exchange is initiated or completed without any human intervention. Similarly, questions arise for wallet service providers. For instance, what if a wallet provider does not have access to private keys, but connects to applications that permit users to initiate transactions that would be considered to be exchange transactions under the current definition?

That said, there are some astute exclusions, including the following activities which are explicitly not covered:

(a) a transfer or receipt of virtual currency as compensation for the validation of a transaction that is recorded in a distributed ledger; or

(b) an exchange, transfer or receipt of a nominal amount of virtual currency for the sole purpose of validating another transaction or a transfer of information.

Nonetheless, it is difficult to determine where the policymakers intended to draw the line, and where the regulator will later enforce it…

3 – Jurisdiction doesn’t matter; foreign money services businesses (MSBs) are covered.

While not specific to virtual currency, it is noteworthy that the proposed amendments expand the definition of an MSB to include any business that is providing prescribed services in Canada. As we’ve seen in the case of the NY BitLicense, badly drafted legislation can drive away business and lead to a lack of service providers willing to do business in a region.

While we’re not suggesting that the proposed amendments are nearly as ill-conceived as the NY BitLicense, it is important to consider whether or not these will affect Canadians’ ability to access services, and the attractiveness of the Canadian market generally for innovative international businesses. While we do not expect this particular amendment to be altered, we would encourage businesses located outside of Canada that serve Canadians to comment.

What Next?

If you’ve read this far, congratulations and thank you!

We hope that you will contribute your thoughts and comments. You can do this by contacting the Department of Finance directly. Their representative on this file is:

Lynn Hemmings

Acting Director General

Financial Systems Division

Financial Sector Policy Branch

Department of Finance

90 Elgin Street

Ottawa, Ontario

K1A 0G5

Email: fin.fc-cf.fin@canada.ca

If you would like assistance drafting a submission, or have questions that you would like Outlier to answer, please get in touch!

You can also answer specific questions in our survey, or join us at a community event.

Canada’s 2017 Budget & PCMLTFA Updates

Greetings fellow compliance geeks!

As you may know, Canada’s latest budget bill contains a number of amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA). We’ve created a marked up version of the PCMLTFA to help you work through and understand the changes, and you can access it using the link below with this caveat: you are welcome to use and share this markup, but you may not charge money for access to it. Information should be free.

Yes, I get it, give me access!

If you prefer a copy of the markups in Microsoft Word, please contact us.

Analysis Notes

The biggest takeaway from these amendments is related to section 5 (e.1), which adds “trust companies incorporated or formed by or under a provincial Act that are not regulated by a provincial Act” as being federally regulated entities. This has been a loophole in Canadian legislation for a long time, and was called out in Canada’s most recent mutual evaluation by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). If you’re company falls into this category, it’s time to start thinking about anti money laundering (AML) compliance. If you have business arrangements (clients, suppliers, etc.) that are unregulated provincial trusts, there are a few early steps that you might want to consider:

  • Re-assess the AML risk that these provincial trust companies pose;
  • Reach out to ask if they have a Compliance Officer and an AML program (in some cases, you will be pleasantly surprised); and
  • Consider whether or not additional controls are required to mitigate the risk posed.

The additional information that’s changing includes a lot of items that most us would consider housekeeping, like changing foreign country to foreign state in a number of places, and adding bullet points to what is considered “prescribed information:”

  • the name, address, electronic mail address and telephone number of every trustee and every known beneficiary and settlor of a trust referred to in paragraph (a);
  • the name, address, electronic mail address and telephone number of each person who owns or controls, directly or indirectly, 25 % or more of an entity referred to in paragraph (a), other than a trust; and
  • information respecting the ownership, control and structure of an entity referred to in paragraph (a).

The only piece there that will be new (at least in terms of requirements) is the “electronic mail address” (email) for beneficial owners. If you’re not already collecting this information, it’s time to think about how to get started. If you’re collecting the email address, but its optional, consider making it a required field.

The modifications also give the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) the ability to share information with the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces where there are reasonable grounds to believe that there is a threat. Presumably, this would include contexts like a terrorist attack on Canada. It’s somewhat surprising that this was not already in place.

There have also been changes to the things about which “the Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Minister, make any regulations that the Governor in Council considers necessary for carrying out the purposes and provisions of this Act, including regulations…” These are interesting in thinking about what may be next in line for additional regulation:

  • respecting dealing in virtual currencies;
  • respecting the keeping of records referred to in section 6;
  • respecting the verification of the identity of persons and entities referred to in section 6.1; (d) respecting the reports to the Centre referred to in section 7 and subsections 7.1(1) and 9(1);
  • respecting the determination of whether a person is a person described in any of paragraphs 9.3(1)(a) to (c);
  • respecting the measures referred to in subsections 9.3(2) and (2.1);
  • respecting the measures referred to in subsection 9.4(1);
  • respecting the program referred to in subsection 9.6(1);
  • respecting the special measures referred to in subsection 9.6(3);
  • respecting the registration referred to in sections 11.1 to 11.2;
  • respecting the reports referred to in subsection 12(1); and
  • prescribing anything that by this Act is to be prescribed.

The only truly interesting point here is dealing in virtual currency, which also came up in Bill C-31 which passed in 2014. This bill, also called the Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1, has not been fully implemented. Some of its provisions (including those specifically related to including dealing in virtual currency under the definition of money services businesses) are also being amended. In the markups, these changes are highlighted in blue rather than in yellow to distinguish between the two.

Finally, there is a change to the definition of a head of an international organization. This one seems a bit nitpicky to me, but if you’re in the process of updating your documentation for the changes that are coming into force in June of this year, you might want to consider this as well. Head of an international organization (HIO) means a person who, at a given time, holds — or has held within a prescribed period before that time — the office or position of head of an international organization that is established by the governments of states or the head of an institution of any such organization.

We’re Here To Help

If you have questions about these changes, the changes coming into force in June of this year, or AML compliance in general, please contact us.

Would You Recognize Real Estate Red Flags?

Rodney_FINTRACOn November 14th, 2016 FINTRAC released a brief for all reporting entities who may be involved in real estate transactions.  The briefing is intended as guidance to provide some examples of indicators that may be present in transactions that may suggest they are linked to money laundering or terrorist financing.  The indicators described have been taken from transactions suspected of being related to money laundering or terrorist financing reported internationally.  The briefing focuses on the potential risks and vulnerabilities within the real estate industry and provides suggestions on how to ensure reporting entities are sufficiently meeting suspicious transaction reporting obligations.

The briefing is meant to provide operational guidance given the small overall number of suspicious transactions that have been reported to FINTRAC by the Real Estate industry.  The briefing states that these indicators will be used by FINTRAC to assess compliance with your reporting obligations.  If you are a reporting entity that interacts with the real estate industry in one form or another, the indicators and scenarios outlined in this brief should be considered when updating your Risk Assessment and training materials.

To put things into perspective, though the actual size of the real estate market is difficult to determine precisely, CMHC has produced some statistics.  CMHC suggests that between 2003 and 2013 over $9 trillion of mortgage credits were negotiated and roughly 5 million sales took place through Multiple Listing Services (MLS).  In contrast, FINTRAC received only 127 Suspicious Transactions Reports (STRs) from real estate brokers, agents and developers and 152 by other types of reporting entities, such as banks and trust/loan companies.  To go a step further, in FINTRAC’s 2015 Annual Report, between April 1, 2014 and March 31, 2015, a total of 92,531 STRs were filed across all reporting entities.

 

re-strs-filed-vs-sales

This evidence supports FINTRAC’s assertion that operational guidance for the real estate industry is needed.

The indicators and examples covered in the brief outline numerous scenarios that may suggest that a transaction is related to a money laundering or terrorist financing offense.  It also speaks to how the appearance of legitimacy obfuscates the clarity of suspicious transactions and requires more than a just “gut feel”.  What is required is the consideration of the facts related to the transaction and their context.  Does the transaction with all the known factors, positive or negative, make sense?

 

What This Means to Your Business? 

First off, FINTRAC will be using the indicators provided to assess your compliance with reporting obligations.  This has a couple different applications.  The first being, does your AML compliance program documentation make reference to the suspicious indicators that are provided.  Basically, are staff aware of the elements that may be present in a transaction that would suggest money laundering or terrorist financing may be occurring?

Secondly, is there an oversight process to ensure if there are transactions that contain one or more of these indicators where an STR was not submitted, is reviewed?  If so, does the process ensure supporting evidence that the Compliance Officer reviewed the transaction and determined there were not reasonable grounds to suspect its relation to money laundering or terrorist financing?  When you encounter a transaction involving any of the indicators provided, it is very important that you collect as much information as possible to assist the Compliance Officer with their determination of whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a transaction, or attempted transaction, may be related to money laundering or terrorist financing.  Alternatively, even if none of the indicators provided by FINTRAC are present but we still feel there is “something off” about our customer’s transaction, speak with your Compliance Officer.  They will be able to provide some insight on additional information that may assist our decision.  Once you have collected any additional information you may still not feel comfortable, but this does not mean you cannot complete the transaction, but that you must be sure your Compliance Officer is provided with all the information, which includes our reason for the escalation, so that they can decide whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect it may be related to a money laundering or terrorist financing offense.  The Compliance Officer will document their decision and, if necessary, submit an STR to FINTRAC.

Need a Hand?

If you are a reporting entity that interacts with the real estate industry and would like assistance updating your AML compliance program documentation or simply have some questions, please contact us.

Return to Blog Listing


PROCESSING...