Posted by Brian Monroe - email@example.com 07/06/2021
Austrac faces parliamentary inquiry over AML effectiveness, financial institution oversight ‘failings’
Anatomy of an inquiry: what did you miss, why and for how long?
But those moves are not assuaging, nor dissuading, leery lawmakers, who set out key points of emphasis in the country’s fincrime countermeasures inquiry.
Some of the areas of focus include Austrac’s overall responsiveness to potential problems, proactivity and reactivity to find AML gaps, ability to arm law enforcement with data and gauge the harm of sectors not covered with compliance rules, like lawyers and other gatekeepers.
The full parliamentary review of Australia’s AML regime covers:
Austrac responsiveness, problem finding, solving
The extent to which the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre:
- responds to and relies upon reporting by designated services, and
- identifies emerging problems based on this reporting;
Bolstering AML to find small problems before they become big ones
The extent to which Australia’s AML/CTF regulatory arrangements could be strengthened to:
- address governance and risk-management weaknesses within designated services, and
- identify weaknesses before systemic or large-scale AML/CTF breaches occur;
Being effective at being less attractive – to bad guys that is
The effectiveness of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (the Act) to prevent money laundering outside the banking sector;
the attractiveness of Australia as a destination for proceeds of foreign crime and corruption, including evidence of such proceeds in the Australian real estate and other markets since the enactment of the Act;
Does stronger compliance with FATF mean measurable reputation, foreign investment gains?
Australia’s compliance with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations and the Commonwealth Government’s response to:
- applicable recommendations in applicable FATF reports, and
- the April 2016 Report on the statutory review of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 and associated rules and regulations;
the extent to which adherence with FATF recommendations prevents systemic and reputational risks to Australia, the Australian economy, and Australia’s capacity to access international capital;
the regulatory impact, costs and benefits of extending AML/CTF reporting obligations to designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs or ‘gatekeeper professions’), often referred to as ‘Tranche two’ legislation;
Can we capture non-bank financial professions, gatekeepers with suggested, already in place professional standards? Or do we need a full AML update?
The extent to which:
DNFBPs take account of money laundering and terrorism financing risks, and the existing professional obligations on DNFBPs are compatible with AML/CTF reporting obligations; and any other related matter.
See What Certified Financial Crime Specialists Are Saying
"The CFCS tests the skills necessary to fight financial crime. It's comprehensive. Passing it should be considered a mark of high achievement, distinguishing qualified experts in this growing specialty area."
KENNETH E. BARDEN
"It's a vigorous exam. Anyone passing it should have a great sense of achievement."
(CFCS, Official Superior
de Cumplimiento Cidel
Bank & Trust Inc. Nueva York)
"The exam tests one's ability to apply concepts in practical scenarios. Passing it can be a great asset for professionals in the converging disciplines of financial crime."
(CFCS, Royal Band of
"The Exam is far-reaching. I love that the questions are scenario based. I recommend it to anyone in the financial crime detection and prevention profession."
(CFCS, CAMS Lead Compliance
Trainer, FINRA, Member Regulation
Training, Washington, DC)
"This certification comes at a very ripe time. Professionals can no longer get away with having siloed knowledge. Compliance is all-encompassing and enterprise-driven."
CFCS, CAMS, CFE, CSAR
Director, Global Risk
& Investigation Practice
FTI Consulting, Los Angeles