anti money laundering - peps

14
POLITICALLY EXPOSED PERSONS ANTI MONEY LAUNDERING Presented by: Besart Qerimi [email protected] 2011

Upload: besart-qerimi

Post on 21-Apr-2017

2.422 views

Category:

Investor Relations


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Anti money laundering - PEPs

P O L I T I C A L LY E X P O S E D P E R S O N S

ANTI MONEY LAUNDERING

Presented by:

Besart Qerimi

[email protected]

2011

Page 2: Anti money laundering - PEPs

SESSION OBJECTIVES

• Defining PEP's

• Basic considerations

• Others associated with PEPs

• Sleeper PEP's

• When does one lose status as a PEP?

• PEPs Risks

• Banks and awareness of the problem

• Can we do business with a PEP?

• State-owned enterprises be considered PEPs?

Page 3: Anti money laundering - PEPs

DEFINING POLITICALLY EXPOSED PERSONS

“Politically Exposed Persons”(PEPs) are individuals who are or have been entrusted

with prominent public functions in a foreign country, for example Heads of State or of

government, senior politicians, senior government, judicial or military officials, senior

executives of state owned corporations, important political party officials. Business

relationships with family members or close associates of PEPs involve reputational risks

similar to those with PEPs themselves. The definition is not intended to cover middle

ranking or more junior individuals in the foregoing categories.”

Financial Action Task Force

Page 4: Anti money laundering - PEPs

SHOULD STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES BE CONSIDERED PEPS?

• State-owned enterprises, including

central banks, should not be considered

PEPs.

• The individuals who manage and run

the state-owned enterprise at senior

levels, however, could qualify as PEP

• All state-owned enterprises are not

necessarily low risk, such entities should

be assessed using appropriate risk

factors.

Page 5: Anti money laundering - PEPs

HOW CAN A PEP OR THEIR “CLOSE FAMILY OR ASSOCIATES” BE IDENTIFIED?

• Making enquiries regarding PEP status

of potential customers during the

account opening process

• Screening potential customers against

a database of such persons. (e.g.

developed internally, provided by an

external service provider-world check,

down jones)

Page 6: Anti money laundering - PEPs

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

• Financial institutions should, in relation to politically exposed persons, should:

• Have appropriate risk management systems to determine whether the

customer is a politically exposed person

• Apply appropriate enhanced procedures and controls

• Obtain senior management approval

• Take reasonable measures to establish the source of wealth and source of funds

• Conduct enhanced ongoing monitoring of the business relationship

• PEPs are a special category of customers, all designated as high risk for money

laundering.

New FATF Recommendation 12

Page 7: Anti money laundering - PEPs

APPLYING A RISK-BASED APPROACH

• It is flexible

• It is effective

• It is proportionate

Page 8: Anti money laundering - PEPs

HOW LONG DOES ONE REMAIN A PEP?

• The Wolfsberg Group provides the

following insight into its interpretation

of the „expiration date‟ on a PEP:

“Rule of thumb“: 1 year after giving up

any political function.

• The latest EU working paper on the

Third Money Laundering Directive

and FATF do not mention any time

limit.

Page 9: Anti money laundering - PEPs

CAN I DO BUSINESS WITH A PEP?

• Of course you can, but with enhanced due diligence and heightened scrutiny.

• UNCAC, Article 52 (entered into force Dec 2005):“to conduct enhanced scrutiny of accounts sought or maintained by or on behalf ofindividuals who are, or have been, entrusted with prominent public functions andtheir family members and close associates.”

No legislation says financial institutions are not allow to open accounts for PEPs

What is the „real‟ reason to carry out effective PEP due diligence?

The answer is simple: REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE

Page 10: Anti money laundering - PEPs

WHY FOCUS ON PEPS?

• Represent a greater money laundering risk because of the possibility that they

will abuse their position and influence to carry out corrupt acts (e.g.,

corruption and bribery, steal assets).

• $1 trillion in bribes each year (World Bank estimate).

• Corrupt PEPs are becoming more effective in hiding their identity through

associates, legal entities, and intermediaries.

• Low numbers of PEP customers are not necessarily indicative of low numbers

of corrupt PEPs.

“Not all PEPs are bad” but all require Enhance Due Diligence

Page 11: Anti money laundering - PEPs

WHY FOCUS ON PEPS?

The FATF consultation paper quoted in point 3 clearly indicates

that a PEP with „something to hide‟ may well choose to

conceal his or her identity by using some form of corporate

structure. This is with the greatest certainty where financial

institutions are most likely to find the skeletons in their closets.

Page 12: Anti money laundering - PEPs

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES?

• Corruption exploitation

• Inadequate regular reviews of high-risk and PEP customers in order to update

CDD

• Keeping AML policies and procedures up-to-date

• Inadequate EDD on family members or close associates of PEPs

• No corrupt PEP activity in banks or in other sectors

• Few PEP STRs

• Few investigations or prosecutions for grand corruption

• Identifying national and international PEPs

Where is the corrupt money?

Page 13: Anti money laundering - PEPs

HAVE YOU TRULY UNDERSTOOD YOUR PEP REQUIREMENTS, IDENTIFIED YOUR

PEP RISK AND HAVE YOU SET OUT TO IMPLEMENT A PEP POLICY THAT WILL

PROTECT YOUR INSTITUTION, ITS REPUTATION AND INDEED, YOUR JOB?

Page 14: Anti money laundering - PEPs

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION