ACAMS CAMS-FCI - Advanced CAMS-Financial Crimes Investigations

The threat of US sanctions against foreign individuals and entities continues to exist despite the absence of a US nexus. This is stated in the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) manual on page 591, which states: “It is important to note that the threat of US sanctions against foreign individuals and entities continues to exist even when there is no direct US nexus (i.e., no US persons or assets involved).”

A more robust supervisory approach is needed by regulators when overseeing small- and medium-sized MSBs compared to larger MSBs for combatting TF because small- and medium-sized MSBs are more at risk of allowing transactions linked to TF due to the lack of skilled compliance resources. Small- and medium-sized MSBs may face challenges in implementing effective AML/CFT controls, such as conducting risk assessments, applying customer due diligence measures, monitoring transactions, detecting suspicious activities, and reporting to the authorities. They may also have limited access to training, guidance, and tools to enhance their compliance capabilities. Therefore, regulators need to provide more supervision and support to small- and medium-sized MSBs to ensure that they comply with the AML/CFT requirements and mitigate the TF risks.

References:

Sustainable Growth for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises … - MDPI

Lessons on Resilience for Small and Midsize Businesses - HBR

The correct answer is C and E. The investigator should provide additional information to the LE upon receiving a formal request, and gather all the information that would be useful for LE and recommend filing a SAR/STR. These steps are consistent with the best practices of conducting financial crime investigations and reporting suspicious activity. The investigator should not close the customer’s accounts or the investigation, as this may interfere with the ongoing LE inquiry and violate the FI’s policies and procedures. The investigator should also not contact local LE directly, as this may compromise the confidentiality of the investigation and the FIU’s authority. References:

Advanced CAMS-FCI Study Guide, Chapter 4: Reporting Suspicious Activity, pages 40-411

Advanced CAMS-FCI Study Guide, Chapter 5: Governance of an AFC Investigations Unit, pages 48-491

Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification | ACAMS

The investigator should document the investigation process and retain all relevant documents in the case management system. This is because documenting the investigation process is a good practice to ensure the quality and consistency of the investigation, as well as to facilitate the review and audit of the investigation. Retaining all relevant documents is also important to support the evidence and findings of the investigation, as well as to comply with the record-keeping requirements of the relevant authorities. The other options are incorrect because:

A. Excluding any open-source information from record-keeping is not advisable, as open-source information can provide valuable insights and context for the investigation, and may not be easily retrievable in the future.

B. Adding all of the information the FI has about the subject, their account(s) activity, research results, KYC information, etc. to the SAR/STR is not necessary, as the SAR/STR should only contain the essential information that is relevant and material to the suspicious activity. Adding too much information may obscure the main points and make the SAR/STR less effective.

D. Not documenting the investigation process if a SAR/STR is not filed is not acceptable, as the investigation process should be documented regardless of the outcome. Documenting the investigation process can help justify why a SAR/STR was not filed, and also provide a reference for future investigations involving the same subject or activity.

References:

Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification | ACAMS, Section 3: Reporting Suspicious Activity, page 14

Leading Complex Investigations Certificate | ACAMS, Module 4: Documenting Your Investigation, page 4

A country that does not have strong predicate offenses and is lax in prosecuting AML cases could suffer increased organized crime and corruption as a social/economic consequence. "Weaknesses in the AML/CFT regime can lead to a range of economic and social consequences, including...increased crime and corruption." (CAMS Manual, 6th Edition, page 32)

If the investigator uncovers evidence that foreign nationals are involved in this activity, they should also note the possible presence of human smuggling (D). This is because human smuggling is the illegal movement of people across borders, often facilitated by criminal networks that exploit vulnerable migrants. According to the FATF and Egmont Group report on Financial Flows from Human Trafficking2, “human smuggling can be closely linked to human trafficking, as smuggled migrants may become victims of trafficking along their journey or at their destination” (p. 9). The report also states that some indicators of human smuggling are similar to those of human trafficking, such as:

Frequent cash deposits or withdrawals in different locations

Use of false or fraudulent identification documents

Expenses related to travel and accommodation

Involvement in online platforms that advertise sexual services

The other options are not as relevant or specific as option D. Tax fraud (A) is the evasion of taxes by individuals or businesses, which may or may not be related to human trafficking or smuggling. Black market peso exchange (B) is a money laundering scheme that involves exchanging illicit proceeds in one currency for another currency at a discounted rate, which is more commonly associated with drug trafficking or trade-based laundering. Trade-based laundering © is the manipulation of trade transactions to disguise the origin and ownership of illicit funds, which is also more likely to be linked to drug trafficking or other types of fraud.

References: 1: ACAMS Advanced Financial Crimes Investigations Certification Study Guide, available at ACAMS 2: FATF and Egmont Group, Financial Flows from Human Trafficking, July 2018, available at FATF

A product of analysis is a conclusion or inference that is derived from facts or judgments, using analytical techniques or tools. Option B is a product of analysis because it implies that the investigator has used a tool or technique, such as a threshold analysis, to identify a pattern of structured cash deposits that may indicate an attempt to evade reporting requirements. The other options are facts or judgments that can be verified by evidence or observation.

References: Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification Handbook, page 23.

One of the actions that is part of the enhanced due diligence process is collecting beneficial ownership details regarding the client’s account. This is important to identify the natural persons who ultimately own or control the client, and to assess the potential risks associated with them. According to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), beneficial ownership information should include1:

The name, nationality, and country of residence of each beneficial owner.

The date of birth or incorporation of each beneficial owner.

The nature and extent of the beneficial interest held by each beneficial owner.

The means by which the beneficial ownership or control is exercised.

References:

FATF Guidance on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership

Retail banks typically have a high inherent risk of money laundering due to their provision of cash services. This is because cash is a preferred medium of exchange for criminals and terrorists, and retail banks provide a convenient way for them to move large sums of money without detection. Retail banks are also vulnerable to money laundering through the use of false identities and other deceptive practices. (CAMS Manual, 6th Edition, Page 8).

An investigator should avoid escalating a suspicious event to the chief compliance officer if there is a potential conflict of interest, such as when a close family member of the officer is involved in the transaction. In such a case, the investigator should pursue other channels, such as reporting to a higher authority or an independent committee. The other options do not present a conflict of interest and should be escalated to the chief compliance officer as part of the normal procedure.

References: Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification Handbook, page 18.