Live data from Hacker News

Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

nytimes.com

181–190 of 901 posts

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#181
> The goal is to crack down on fraud, terrorism, money laundering, human trafficking and other crimes.

Estimated yearly cost of KYC/AML worldwide: $180 bn. Money actually frozen (frozen doesn't even mean it's going to eventually seized): $12 bn. 15x less. Complete, total and utter failure.

Basically these KYC/AML rules are profoundly unjust and overwhelmingly only affect honest people who did exactly nothing wrong.

The situation is so bad that there even the EU is now trying to rectify things a bit.

Here's a recent article I read (in French):

https://paperjam.lu/article/liste-contacts-ouvrir-compte-b

The article says this:

"ABBL a échangé avec la Commission de surveillance du secteur financier (CSSF) pour que la réglementation AML/KYC s’applique de manière proportionnée, en conformité avec les textes. L’obligation de diligence variera dans son intensité selon les risques effectifs que peut représenter une structure."

Basically: discussions are ongoing to make sure banks use proportionated KYC/AML rules and all the while staying within the letter of the law.

For the situation has gotten so out of hand that it's an issue for startups and individuals trying to open bank accounts and it's beginning to have a noticeable effect on the economy.

Basically 180 billions, worldwide, burnt yearly in nothing productive: only pointless administrative work. It's not helping poor people. It's not helping the economy. It's helping nobody. It's leeches leaching all the while making everybody suspicious and scared that their accounts are going to be closed.

An example: the association of parents at my kid's school wanted a bank account. We're talking about a non-profit with a yearly budget of few thousand dollars. Due to crazy KYC/AML they couldn't.

That is not "proportionate". And some of the demands were likely not in accordance with the law.

For example I've had sites, to verify my identity, which asked me to film myself while speaking (AirBnB "conciergerie" / high-end thinggy IIRC. Not sure but that "videos of yourself talking" happened to me on several sites).

I'm not sure that the EU directives regarding KYC/AML allow the collect of information including videos of people talking.

When speaking about things needing to stay proportionate, I've had a notary ask me to trace the source of funds up until 2014. Seriously WTF: there should be a limit as to how many years they can go back in time.

I bought an apartment in 2001 and I now want to sell but I'm concerned because I don't have any trace of the money anymore: it's from nearly a quarter of a century ago. I'm concerned that, before the sale, the notary (who's forced to snitch btw) is going to ask me the source of the funds used to buy that apartment in 2001 (nothing shady: I was writing computer books but I don't have any trace of any royalties payment. I don't even remember through which bank I bought it).

Another example: I did cancel a private insurance. All that was needed was a proof I moved to another country. Or so I thought. They gave me the full KYC/AML... For cancelling an insurance! Why? I take it because I moved and went living to another EU country: if you move from one country to another, you automatically become someone suspicious.

Now where it becomes really vicious: these KYC/AML always go back further and further in time but banks do not allow you to go back more than 8 or 10 years (when you want to check older statements). They then bill you hundreds of EUR, per account, per year, to give you your older bank statements. Which is adding insult to injury: the very same clique that is making your life miserable with KYC/AML is making money for the very bank statements they're asking (well, technically it's bank B asking your statements of bank A... But for another person it's going to be bank A asking that person's statements at bank B).

It's so bad I now have a Git-versioned folder only for KYC/AML with proofs of everything. Any wire transfer of more than 10 K EUR I now save and archive for posterity.

Another big issue is that none of this KYC/AML nonsense is centralized: so you basically have to do the same fucking paperwork for your insurance, banks, brokers, notary, etc.

Fuck KYC/AML. Just fuck it. This horrible, pointless waste of time and energy is bane of my existence and needs to die.

These laws/rules reflect the sick mind of those who wrote them and those who voted them (and they're badly failing at actually freezing and seizing drug/terrorist/trafficker' money).

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#182
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just discussed this on the occasion of SBF being convicted as a fraudster: all crypto is a scam. Them being negative sum games makes them so. Whether the scam is a ponzi, a pyramid scheme or something novel is a matter of debate. That it's a scam is not in debate, that's a plain mathematical fact. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitco... https://prestonbyrne.com/2017/12/08/bitcoin_ponzi/ htt…

We as in "Socialist Party of America"? I did not have a chance to contribute to this "discussion". What happens when this unbanking is practiced en-masse or when the US defaults on its foreign debt, with USD failing as the global reserve currency? The second one is imminent, and not only in my opinion.

That second one had better happen before 2030, because after that the US and one south american country being the only nations with net positive birth rates - and therefore populations that aren't aging out of productive work - coupled with the fact that it will take the rest of the world a couple of centuries to catch up to our military, means that the U.S. just needs to not be stupid for another 6 years or so.

So really, it probably is imminent; what with fighting 2 (and maybe up to 5 or 6) proxy wars and letting corporations continue to erode the tax law and environment to the detriment of the average taxpayer.

I was told the US was the greatest country in the history of countries and i should be proud i was accidentally born here...

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#183
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. But now hand someone that lives in a different state or country some cash. Oh wait, you can't easily do that. There are trade-offs in everything.

I can't easily give people bitcoin in my own country, because almost nobody I transact with accepts it.

Yes, we are in the early stages of Bitcoin and not a lot of people are using it. But we are talking about the properties it has inherently and by design. It is designed to be permissionless, everyone is allowed and able to use it. The current situation with regards to use/adoption are not the end game

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#184
post #162

I'm somewhat surprised no one here views this as an automated decisionmaking problem It's increasingly clear that automating important decisions like this is causing a lot of harm while removing most forms of recourse available to those affected. Coupled with the way automated decisions are used to perform and then launder fraud on a massive scale, maybe we should target laws at the automation itself: Require decisio…

Wholeheartedly agree. If you don't want to pay customer service people, do not enter or build a business that requires serving customers at scale.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#185
post #162

I'm somewhat surprised no one here views this as an automated decisionmaking problem It's increasingly clear that automating important decisions like this is causing a lot of harm while removing most forms of recourse available to those affected. Coupled with the way automated decisions are used to perform and then launder fraud on a massive scale, maybe we should target laws at the automation itself: Require decisio…

I don't have Cash App, Venmo, Zello or any of those other micro payment apps because every single time that I sign up for one, I get automatically blocked on my 1st transaction. Zello is even offered directly by my bank so it's automatically linked to my banking info. Calling customer service leads nowhere. It all works out for me in the end because if I can't Apple Pay or Paypal someone I probably don't need their product or service anyway.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#186
post #162

I'm somewhat surprised no one here views this as an automated decisionmaking problem It's increasingly clear that automating important decisions like this is causing a lot of harm while removing most forms of recourse available to those affected. Coupled with the way automated decisions are used to perform and then launder fraud on a massive scale, maybe we should target laws at the automation itself: Require decisio…

Yeah we need strong anti-Kafka laws so that individuals can always find out what they've been "charged" with and that there always need to be an "appeal" process and businesses are strictly denied the ability to claim that they can't reveal their methods.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#187
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehm. No. Innocent until proven guilty, not guilt until proven innocent. Being de-platformed from financial infrastructure is tantamount to being economically jailed and instantly forced into life altering poverty. This isn’t some silly app you’re getting banned from… Banks shouldn’t be allowed to ban anyone. They should need a court order to lock up/ban someone from access/mobility of their own property. That said, t…

The government is the prime culprit when it comes to financially de-platforming people, if you want more secure access to banking, the solution is lighter regulation of banks, not more. Anti-money-laundering (AML) and so-called risk management regulations make it unprofitable and complicated to provided a mount services to many people. The government (and its regulatory bodies) use this ‘flexibility’ to achieve their…

> the solution is lighter regulation of banks,

Seriously? Nope. Nope. Nope. No.

Remember 2008.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> letting the police search your vehicle. Good idea to decline those

They will then bring in a drug sniffing dog they've trained to notify the police officer of a presence of drugs on command, and voila, there's reasonable grounds to search your vehicle. This has been going on for a very, very long time: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/drug-search-trekies-s...

"One of my in-laws was EOD in the US Army, and has rode in this vehicle. You need to find a dog that will not signal on explosives of any kind. Furthermore, the clock on this stop, per , is starting to run a bit long. Here is my attorney's card."

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#189
> Banks dislike any patterns that look like scams and will shut down behavior that seems suspicious.

Yet, Chase did not do anything against Bernie Madoff for decades [1]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-jpmorgan-madoff-deal-idUS...

central banks suck. rich get the benefit of doubt. everyone else gets rugged capitalism treatment.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#190
post #162

I'm somewhat surprised no one here views this as an automated decisionmaking problem It's increasingly clear that automating important decisions like this is causing a lot of harm while removing most forms of recourse available to those affected. Coupled with the way automated decisions are used to perform and then launder fraud on a massive scale, maybe we should target laws at the automation itself: Require decisio…

Cory Doctorow has talked about how "they" test these kinds of things on captive "audiences" - mainly children and prisoners - before expanding to the rest of us. I tend to add marginalized groups to that list. Even when a person can nominally be held accountable, it doesn't matter if you can't reach them, protected by an administrative or institutional barrier of some kind.

Standardized testing and remote learning monitoring, automated sentencing software, and any number of social programs are examples, if you were wondering.

So, part of the problem is the signalling that the tolerating of these practices when they happen to those less able to defend themselves presents to companies. "Go ahead, do it, you'll get away with it." I tend to think: because the people with the power to stop it benefit from it.

Post reply on HN