Money Laundering and AML Compliance

Post by Havoc » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 11:52 PM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #18

irusensei wrote: post #4

It is expensive to keep a crime and corruption department on your banking institution. If you are dealing with a millionaire who is related to some oil mogul in Russia you can do your due diligence and Vladimirovich can hire a team of accountants to prove that his business is legit and not at all related to the corporativist oligarchy his uncle runs. Or it might be, but the risk vs reward is good enough to turn a bli…

There’s a really great book called Kleptopia by T. Burgis. It’s about how wealthy oligarchs use the Western legal and banking systems. He points out that the US financial system is squeaky clean. Oligarchs wind up in prison because they think they can pull the crap in New York that they pull in London. But outside the financial sector it’s the 100% opposite. Americas permissive corporate transparency lets assets vani…

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 11:55 PM UTC

notch898a wrote: post #53

btilly wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I appreciate the problems that you're describing, I'm dubious that it violates the 4th amendment. In particular look at the Private Search Exemption. Which says that the 4th amendment does NOT apply to searches done by private parties. And if a private party has voluntarily done the search and reported it to the government, the government may redo the search without a warrant, but can't exceed what the private…

It's not really a private or voluntary search when it's imposed by government. Otherwise I could just make a law saying everybody who walks down X private road has to get searched by private security or turn around, obviously that won't work. The private road owner might never wanted to do it, they're only doing because the gun of the government man is at their head. It is a public search carried with the dirty work…

Post by saurik » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 11:59 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #58

notch898a wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really a private or voluntary search when it's imposed by government. Otherwise I could just make a law saying everybody who walks down X private road has to get searched by private security or turn around, obviously that won't work. The private road owner might never wanted to do it, they're only doing because the gun of the government man is at their head. It is a public search carried with the dirty work…

But the government DIDN'T impose it. Whatever the bank's procedures may be, the regulator can say with a straight face, "We didn't tell them to implement those procedures, and we didn't tell them to take those actions. That was their decision." And, unbelievable as it may seem, the government won't be exactly wrong either.

Post by notch898a » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 11:59 PM UTC

JusticeJuice wrote: post #72

notch898a wrote: post #6

[flagged]

> Ban the US gov from the finance system At the cost of what, cutting of millions of people from benefits? Public servants not getting paid?

Post by csomar » Sat, Feb 11, 2023, 12:08 AM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #18

irusensei wrote: post #4

It is expensive to keep a crime and corruption department on your banking institution. If you are dealing with a millionaire who is related to some oil mogul in Russia you can do your due diligence and Vladimirovich can hire a team of accountants to prove that his business is legit and not at all related to the corporativist oligarchy his uncle runs. Or it might be, but the risk vs reward is good enough to turn a bli…

There’s a really great book called Kleptopia by T. Burgis. It’s about how wealthy oligarchs use the Western legal and banking systems. He points out that the US financial system is squeaky clean. Oligarchs wind up in prison because they think they can pull the crap in New York that they pull in London. But outside the financial sector it’s the 100% opposite. Americas permissive corporate transparency lets assets vani…