Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Money Laundering and AML Compliance

bitsaboutmoney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 218 posts

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#31

Post by earnesti »

josephcsible wrote: post #27
cmeacham98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common with offshore online casinos: you can deposit and lose your money, but as soon as you try to withdraw winnings the KYC rolls out and you better hope you're not a US citizen because you weren't even supposed to sign up in the first place then.

Why is "if you gambled but we found out you weren't allowed to gamble, we'll take back your winnings but not give back your losses" legal? Shouldn't it have to be either "we'll reset everything back to before you gambled" or "everything you already did stands; you just can't do anymore (and are probably in trouble)"?

It is likely not legal but the gamblers are too lazy to take it to courts I would guess, and the casinos are in jurisdictions where it might be really tedious or expensive.

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#32

Post by exbanker »

The biggest money launderers are close to those who write the AML policies.

One of the most significant money launderers is a famous attorney from Shearman and Sterling in NYC.

From my experience, prominent financial executives attempted to engage in blatant laundering of drug money in BVI. These individuals were connected to the attorney and one is a public official appointed by 4 US Presidents.

This was 20+ years ago and I don’t know what they actually did, but I was in the room when they tried to do it. Outside the room hung a giant photo of George W. Bush golfing with the firm’s CEO.

They offered me $1 million in cash to fly with $100m at a time to Tortola. The financial structure was created by the attorney.

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#33

Post by wolongong942 »

irusensei wrote: post #21
malux85 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also - wait until Ivan has put 10k in your system, then ask for the documents and refuse to give the money back hoping he will abandon it. - Lawful evil AML companies

I think I’ve heard someone calling this shotgun KYC. They will allow you to deposit but as soon as you show signs of using that money they take it as hostage until you prove you are not a criminal.

Sites like Paypal and Skrill did this because they know most people would otherwise just cancel on sign up , and when you've got money locked in you have no choice but to complete verification. Thankfully i haven't had to deal with their crap in the past 4 years due to better options existing.

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#34

Post by tagyro »

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…

The same thing happens in Germany, with N26. Under the pretext of "regulatory requirements", they ask for information like income amount and source, employment status and industry etc. BaFin (the banking supervisory authority) is ignoring this, like they did with Wirecard

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#35

Post by pjkundert »

exbanker wrote: post #30
timerol wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> burdening 8 billion law-abiding Citizens with impossibly complex and arduous KYC/AML requirements TFA notes that "This will affect the typical user of the financial system precisely zero times during their lives." It is very much not a complex and arduous situation in most instances, only in very few edge cases. (Which patio11 wants us to pay closer attention to.) I had occasion to unexpectedly transfer $10k over A…

This is just factually untrue. AML policies unjustly affect millions of Americans. At US Bank, you can’t deposit cash without an ID which is standard post 2018 or so. Yet go to a US Bank in a low income area, deposit $100 in a family member’s account and they will ask for ID, social security number and your job. US Bank has been involved in multiple money laundering scandals leading to deferred criminal prosecution.…

I'm always gobsmacked at the level of ... jawdropping "Let them eat cake!" self-delusion displayed by some wealthy people.

"This hasn't affected me, so it mustn't affect anyone!"

The grinding day-to-day slogging, through the mud of irrelevant and useless regulatory burden experienced by the "lesser" classes of civilization (and anyone actually trying to run a small business) is just astonishing.

Basically, many people just "stop". They can't navigate it, and know they'll never defeat it. So they just cease to try.

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#36

Post by cmeacham98 »

josephcsible wrote: post #27
cmeacham98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common with offshore online casinos: you can deposit and lose your money, but as soon as you try to withdraw winnings the KYC rolls out and you better hope you're not a US citizen because you weren't even supposed to sign up in the first place then.

Why is "if you gambled but we found out you weren't allowed to gamble, we'll take back your winnings but not give back your losses" legal? Shouldn't it have to be either "we'll reset everything back to before you gambled" or "everything you already did stands; you just can't do anymore (and are probably in trouble)"?

It probably isn't, but generally their ToS says you're not allowed to be in the US when you sign up, and they don't operate in the US. So you'd have to go sue them in the jurisdiction of whatever island nation they're operating in (or get the authorities there to care).

Additionally, if you're within the majority of people who deposit money and lose it all you're not going to even know this unless you do some active research about the casino.

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#37

Post by josephcsible »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #36
josephcsible wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is "if you gambled but we found out you weren't allowed to gamble, we'll take back your winnings but not give back your losses" legal? Shouldn't it have to be either "we'll reset everything back to before you gambled" or "everything you already did stands; you just can't do anymore (and are probably in trouble)"?

It probably isn't, but generally their ToS says you're not allowed to be in the US when you sign up, and they don't operate in the US. So you'd have to go sue them in the jurisdiction of whatever island nation they're operating in (or get the authorities there to care). Additionally, if you're within the majority of people who deposit money and lose it all you're not going to even know this unless you do some active…

Why couldn't such a judgment be enforced from a US court, by forbidding any American banks from sending any money to their bank until they pay up?

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#38

Post by tablespoon »

josephcsible wrote: post #27
cmeacham98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common with offshore online casinos: you can deposit and lose your money, but as soon as you try to withdraw winnings the KYC rolls out and you better hope you're not a US citizen because you weren't even supposed to sign up in the first place then.

Why is "if you gambled but we found out you weren't allowed to gamble, we'll take back your winnings but not give back your losses" legal? Shouldn't it have to be either "we'll reset everything back to before you gambled" or "everything you already did stands; you just can't do anymore (and are probably in trouble)"?

> Why is "if you gambled but we found out you weren't allowed to gamble, we'll take back your winnings but not give back your losses" legal?

I don't know the actual law is, but it could be that the customer is the one who committed the crime of illegal gambling. If that's the case, it doesn't matter if keeping his winnings is legal or illegal, if the gambler brings suit he puts himself in legal jeopardy and I don't think the courts will enforce contracts associated with illegal activities (e.g. a hitman can't go to court to force his client to pay).

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#39

Post by miohtama »

coderintherye wrote: post #7

Excellent write-up. Key point is, no one truly looks at the efficacy of AML which makes it more theatre than crime-fighting tool (not that it doesn't fight crime, it just does not do so efficiently nor is it likely the best way to do so, let alone us defining broadly what crime actually is). If these systems were re-designed from the ground up, AML procedures and policies would likely look quite different than they d…

The problem with compliance is that it is pseudoscientific. There is no independent oversight: all regulation and tools are promoted by compliance companies selling those tools. There is no penalty for punishing innocent. There is no reasonable cost. More is always better. There is no court to complain or a channel to opt out.

It's a bit like antivirus on PCs: it is sold to you as a scareware but in practice is snakeoil not really effective against any modern virus or trojan. You stil bear the cost of your PC slowing down 25%.

Here is a good Forbes post by David Birch on the topic:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbirch/2021/05/03/im-anti-t...

Re: Money Laundering and AML Compliance

#40

Post by cmeacham98 »

josephcsible wrote: post #37
cmeacham98 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It probably isn't, but generally their ToS says you're not allowed to be in the US when you sign up, and they don't operate in the US. So you'd have to go sue them in the jurisdiction of whatever island nation they're operating in (or get the authorities there to care). Additionally, if you're within the majority of people who deposit money and lose it all you're not going to even know this unless you do some active…

Why couldn't such a judgment be enforced from a US court, by forbidding any American banks from sending any money to their bank until they pay up?

These sites typically operate using deposits/withdrawals in cryptocurrency.
Post reply on HN