Security minister reveals knowledge of football money-laundering investigation

Ben Wallace says the sports industry “is as susceptible as anything else” to being used to hide the source of dirty money.

New York Red Bulls made the play-offs by beating Montreal on Saturday evening
‘I know of (a) professional football club or clubs under investigation,’ Mr Wallace said

A professional football club or clubs are being investigated over allegations of money laundering, a minister has said.

Security minister Ben Wallace told the treasury select committee that the sports industry “is as susceptible as anything else” to being used to hide the source of dirty money.

Committee member and Labour MP John Mann asked Mr Wallace: “When it comes to money laundering, how many professional football clubs have been deemed as requiring investigation currently?”
Ben Wallace arrives at Downing Street
The minister said it can take years for money laundering investigations to finish

The minister replied: “I know of (a) professional football club or clubs under investigation.

“I couldn’t reveal how many and what they are, for that is an operational matter.”

When he was pushed to give the number involved, Mr Wallace said: “There are live investigations that go on all the time and to expand any more could threaten investigations.

“The sports industry is as susceptible as anything else to dirty money being invested or their organizations being used as a way to launder money.”

Mr Wallace told the MPs it can take years for investigations into money laundering to be finished.

He said suspicious activity reports, a means of giving information to police about potential criminal activity by customers or clients, should be made “by anyone” and not just banks.

“Not enough” had been reported by the football authorities, Mr Wallace told the committee.

A National Crime Agency spokeswoman said: “We do not routinely confirm or deny the existence of investigations.”

“We have not charged any professional football clubs with money laundering, and there are none currently in the court process.”

https://news.sky.com/story/security-minister-reveals-knowledge-of-football-money-laundering-investigation-11540039

Bitcoin [BTC] worth $5.84 million stolen from MapleChange; Binance CEO gives his insight

MapleChange, a Canada-based cryptocurrency exchange, recently announced that their platform was hacked. The exchange platform took to their Twitter handle to provide clarity on the situation, stating that they could not refund the stolen cryptocurrencies.

According to their official post, a bug on the platform enabled a group of hackers to withdraw funds remotely. The platform reported that 913 Bitcoins [BTC] were stolen and that they cannot refund any of the funds until a “thorough investigation” was conducted.

Another controversial aspect was that the “thorough investigation” resulted in the exchange platform realizing that they did not have funds for repaying its users. Furthermore, they stated that the platform would not function anymore and that they would soon deactivate their social media channels. Their official post stated:

“We have sustained a hack, and we are investigating the issue.”

On their official Twitter handle, the exchange stated that they had not “disappeared”, but had temporarily turned off their accounts to think of a solution.

In addition, they could not refund “everyone with all their funds”, but would soon open wallets in order to allow its users to “hopefully” withdraw whatever funds were left on the exchange. They added:

“We CANNOT refund any BTC or LTC funds unfortunately. We will try our best to refund everything else.”

Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange in terms of trading volume, was surprised by the hack and stated that a procedure was required to rank exchanges based on their wallet storage. He added that users had to avoid using exchange platforms which did not have anything in their cold wallets.

Maplechange’ed, a platform dedicated to find, take down and expose maplechange.com, with the help of members from the Lumeneo [LMO] telegram channel, allegedly found that Glad Poenaru, a service technician at American Piledriving Equipment, could have been responsible for the hack.

Joseph Young, a cryptocurrency investor and analyst, stated:

“A small crypto exchange pulled off an exit scam, taking all customer funds. There is no incentive for using small exchanges. Use established exchanges that are regulated, & transparent. Small exchanges also focus on maximizing profitability, not security or investor protection.”

MapleChange further added:

“We are sending all of the coin developers the wallets containing the coins we have left. So far, LMO and CCX have been handed over the funds.”

https://ambcrypto.com/bitcoin-btc-worth-5-84-million-stolen-from-maplechange-binance-ceo-gives-his-insight/

How The Unexplained Wealth Order Combats Money Laundering

The UK is a haven for dirty money; more than £90 billion is estimated to be laundered through the country per year. The size of the UK’s financial and professional services sector, its open economy and the attractiveness of the London property market to overseas investors all make it unusually exposed to international money laundering risks. As part of new measures to tackle asset recovery and money laundering, the UK government introduced Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs) in January, which are being hailed as the cure to Britain’s dirty money problem.

What is an Unexplained Wealth Order?

UWOs require the owner of an asset worth more than £50,000 to explain how they were able to afford that asset. Introduced primarily to target Russian and Azerbaijan laundromats, UWOs have wide-ranging applications to all situations where the National Crime Agency (NCA) believes wealth was acquired illicitly, including tax evasion.

The game-changing nature of UWOs lies in the power they give UK law enforcement to prosecute. Formerly, little could be done to act on highly suspicious wealth unless there was a legal conviction in the country of origin. In cases where the origin country is in crisis or the individual holds power within a corrupt government, this is unlikely to be achieved. Where previously law enforcement agencies needed to prove in court that an asset was purchased with laundered funds, UWOs shift the burden of proof away from prosecutors and on to the asset’s owner.

Preventing Financial Crime with Unexplained Wealth Orders

The first successful use of a UWO since its implementation is the recent case of Zamira Hajiyeva, who owns millions of dollars in properties in London through offshore companies. Her husband, Jahangir Hajiyev, was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison for fraud and misappropriation of public funds, and authorities were able to identify a clear disparity between his income and the couple’s apparent wealth.

With corruption watchdog Transparency International estimating that £4 billion of UK property has been purchased with the proceeds of crime, it is hoped that this successful implementation of a UWO will herald a clampdown on overseas criminals laundering via the property market.

The success of this UWO has been fundamental in beginning to reduce the appeal of the UK as a destination for illicit income. In June, mortgage brokers were already reporting that Russian purchases of prime real estate in London had slowed as a result of both government pressure and a tightening of anti-money laundering rules.

There are, however, reasons to be wary of perceiving the introduction of UWOs as a cure-all for the UK’s money laundering problems. These court orders are ineffective as soon as a defendant can provide an explanation for the source of their wealth. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, they then win the argument. Legal difficulties and costs are other factors that can lead to delays in the UK’s fight against money laundering, while information obtained via a UWO cannot be used in criminal proceedings against the respondent. For UWOs to have credibility, authorities will need to ensure the first uses of them continue to be successful in order to serve as a useful deterrent going forward.

Further, money laundering covers a wide range of criminal activity and consequently can’t be solved by a single approach. Fragmented supervision and anonymous ownership of property in British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies are just two areas where Transparency International is still advocating for change to improve the UK’s asset recovery and anti-money laundering regime.

How Can We Continue to Fight Money Laundering?

It is clear that UWOs have the potential to act as powerful tools for law enforcement but are not yet being used frequently enough— more action is required if real change is to come. We need further action from the government to restrict property ownership and levy realistic local taxes.

With UWOs beginning to lead to the identification of criminals, questions will be asked of the financial institutions who facilitated the individual’s money management. To better equip themselves for the fight against money laundering, banks need to overhaul outdated AML systems to suit the complexity of the schemes perpetrated by criminals. They need to combat problems by employing entity resolution and network analysis techniques to understand vast data networks and identify hidden money.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/vishalmarria/2018/10/25/how-the-unexplained-wealth-order-combats-money-laundering/#26a904a54703

Capital One Bank Fined $100 Million Over Money-Laundering Controls

Capital One Financial Corp. COF -1.69% has paid a $100 million fine over regulatory deficiencies in its anti-money-laundering program, federal regulators said Tuesday.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency levied the fine, saying the bank had several weaknesses in its compliance programs and risk assessment and failed to file some suspicious activity reports flagging potentially problematic transactions. The civil penalty came after the OCC initially cited deficiencies at Capital One in July 2015.

The bank has paid the fine to the U.S. Treasury, according to the OCC.

A Capital One spokeswoman said that the issue resulting in the fine was related to “prior banking relationships with certain check cashing service providers.” The bank said it left the business in 2014. The fine is part of resolving the consent order, she said.

“Since that time, we have worked diligently with our bank regulators to strengthen our processes and internal controls to ensure we address any concerns” regarding compliance with federal anti-money-laundering laws, the Capital One spokeswoman said.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/capital-one-fined-100-million-over-anti-money-laundering-program-1540318983

How Binance is Legitimizing the Crypto Market by Eliminating Money Laundering

Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, has voluntarily engaged in an initiative to eliminate money laundering on its platform.

For years, despite the inherent lack of privacy measures on major public blockchain networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum that discourage the settlement of illicit transactions, a widely pushed narrative against crypto has been the suspected usage of digital assets by criminals.

Eliminating Easily Refutable Claims

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, Bitcoin Cash, EOS, and many other major cryptocurrencies are not anonymous by nature. With Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) systems integrated by cryptocurrency exchanges, it is extremely difficult for criminals to utilize digital assets to settle the transfer of illegal proceeds.

Authorities and government agencies across the globe are well aware of the non-anonymous characteristic of blockchains, which could have motivated governments like the US, Japan, and South Korea to legitimate and recognize the cryptocurrency market.

This week, Binance has started to cooperate with Chainalysis, a leading blockchain analysis company that evaluates suspicious transactions and addresses, to improve its AML system and to further legitimize the cryptocurrency sector.

binance cryptocurrency exchange

“Cryptocurrency businesses of all sizes face the same core challenge: earning the trust of regulators, financial institutions and users. We expect many to follow Binance’s lead to build world-class AML compliance programs to satisfy regulators globally and build trust with major financial institutions,” said Jonathan Levin, co-founder and COO of Chainalysis.

In 2018, some of the world’s most influential banks were cracked down for money laundering. Danske Bank laundered $243 billion from criminal groups, and as CCN reported on October 20, Nordea Bank, the largest financial group in the Nordic countries, is said to have taken several illicit payments from banks in the Baltic region.

With the institutional market of cryptocurrencies growing exponentially, the tightening of AML systems employed by public exchanges is expected to solidify cryptocurrencies as a recognized asset class and the digital asset market as a well-regulated sector.

Wei Zhao, the CFO at Binance, said that maintaining the firm’s vision of increasing the freedom of money globally, the exchange will continue to adhere to regulatory mandates in the countries it operates in.

“By working with Chainalysis, we are able to continue building a foundational compliance program that enables the next phase of our growth. Our vision is to provide the infrastructure for a blockchain ecosystem and increase the freedom of money globally, while adhering to regulatory mandates in the countries we serve.”

Importance of Compliance

The cryptocurrency sector is entering a new phase of development and growth, as Zhou explained.

During the 2017 bull market in which the valuation of the cryptocurrency market surged to $800 billion, the asset class obtained significant mainstream awareness in both countries that support crypto and regions that have established impractical regulatory frameworks to prevent local blockchain markets to flourish.

In a period in which governments are introducing increasing efforts to embrace crypto and blockchain businesses as a part of the fourth industrial revolution, voluntary initiatives by companies like Binance to legitimize the industry will ease the process of governments in regulating and acknowledging the global market.

https://www.ccn.com/how-binance-is-legitimizing-the-crypto-market-by-eliminating-money-laundering/

Dark Web Dealer ‘OxyMonster’ Forfeits $700,000 in Crypto with 20-Year Prison Term

US District Judge Robert Scola has imposed a 20-year prison sentence on 36 year-old Gal Vallerius also known as “Oxymonster” on the dark web drug hub Dream Market.

In June, CCN reported that the French-Israeli citizen was apprehended by police at Atlanta airport in 2017 while attending the World Beard and Moustache Championship in Austin Texas. He will now start his prison term in Southern Florida after being convicted of money laundering and narcotics trafficking.

Huge Crypto Seizure

In his plea agreement, Vallerius admitted to selling drugs like oxycodone, heroin, cocaine, fentanyl and Ritalin in exchange for cryptocurrencies including bitcoin and bitcoin cash on the dark web. More than 100 BTC and 121.95 BCH – equivalent to over $700,000 – seized from him as proceeds of illicit activity will now be forfeited to the government.

For many, the big question following the forfeiture is: “What becomes of this huge amount of crypto in the hands of the U.S. government?”

A development of this nature is not new. In 2015, after Silk Road creator, Ross Ulbricht was given a life sentence, the government took possession of 144,336 BTC found on his laptop. At a time when the price of one bitcoin was just over $300, the government realized a total of over $48 million selling to multiple auctions. Some later criticized the government’s hasty sale which prevented it from earning far more.

With his plea agreement, sources say Vallerius would have to “provide all necessary passwords” to enable the government gain access. It remains uncertain if the government will take similar action to that taken of Silk Road, or delay auctions till prices show upward movement. The rarity of this situation makes it hard for analysts to predict what decision the government will make.

Earlier this week, Irish native Gary Davis pleaded guilty to conspiring to sell drugs on the Silk Road under the alias Libertas. In 2017, the District Court in California also seized over $8 million worth of cryptocurrency from Alexandre Cazes who committed suicide in Thailand after being accused of running a dark web market AlphaBay. With more cases related to crime which might ultimately lead to similar forfeitures, the U.S. government might just be dealing with crypto auctions more regularly.

Some have however suggested that at a time when the U. S. Justice Department is investigating the possible manipulation of cryptocurrency prices, crypto acquired through the legal system is somewhat unlikely to last in the custody of government for long.

https://www.ccn.com/dark-web-dealer-oxymonster-forfeits-700000-in-crypto-with-20-year-prison-term/

Bitcoin Hedge Fund and CEO Slapped With $2.5 Million Penalty for Ponzi Scheme

A New York federal court has ordered cryptocurrency hedge fund Gelfman Blueprint, Inc. (GBI) and its CEO Nicholas Gelfman to pay over $2.5 million for operating a fraudulent Ponzi scheme, according to an official announcement published Oct. 18.

GBI is a New York-based corporation and denominated Bitcoin (BTC) hedge fund incorporated in 2014. As stated on the company’s website, by 2015 it had 85 customers and 2,367 BTC under management.

The order is the continuation of the initial anti-fraud enforcement action filed by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) against GBI in September 2017. The CFTC charged GBI for allegedly running a Ponzi scheme from 2014 to 2016, telling investors that it had developed a computer algorithm called “Jigsaw” which allowed for substantial returns through a commodity fund. In reality, the entire scheme was a fraud.

Per the announcement, GBI and Gelfman fraudulently solicited over $600,000 from at least 80 customers. Moreover, Gelfman set up a fake computer “hack” to conceal the scheme’s trading losses. It eventually resulted in the loss of almost all customer funds.

The current order charges GBI and Gelfman to pay over $2.5 million in civil monetary penalties and restitution. GBI and Gelfman are ordered to pay $554,734.48 and $492,064.53 in restitution to customers and $1,854,000 and $177,501 in civil monetary penalties, respectively.

James McDonald, the CFTC’s Director of Enforcement, said that “this case marks yet another victory for the Commission in the virtual currency enforcement arena. As this string of cases shows, the CFTC is determined to identify bad actors in these virtual currency markets and hold them accountable.”

Last month, the CFTC filed a suit with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas against two defendants for the allegedly fraudulent solicitation of BTC. Per the suit, defendants Morgan Hunt and Kim Hecroft were running two fraudulent businesses and misleading the public to invest in leveraged or margined foreign currency contracts, such as forex, binary options, and diamonds.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-hedge-fund-and-ceo-slapped-with-25-million-penalty-for-ponzi-scheme

Stolen UI Employee Data Used To Commit Money Laundering

By: Hillary Ojeda

A woman pleaded guilty to money laundering charges involving more than $200,000 after she submitted false tax returns using University of Iowa employees’ data, on Oct. 11 in Davenport.

Nadine Nzuega Robinson entered into a plea agreement at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

She waived her right to a jury trial and the district court will decide the verdict on or at the date of sentencing, scheduled for Feb. 22, 2019, according to court documents.

Starting in 2013, or earlier, Robinson and her partner Patrick Koloko opened a check cashing business in a suburb of Atlanta, Georgia. Located in Doralville, the name of the business was Azalea USA, LLC and Robinson was identified as the CEO and 85 percent owner, according to court documents.

Robinson agreed with Koloko and others to carry out illegal financial transactions to make a profit and hide unlawful wire and mail fraud.

Then, in early 2015, Robinson created checking accounts at Bank of America in Georgia under the name of Azalea.

Court documents say in late February and early March of 2015, false tax returns for tax year 2014 were being submitted electronically to the Internal Revenue Service using the names, addresses, occupations and social security numbers of University of Iowa employees.

The court documents did not detail how that data was acquired by Robinson or others.

Following an investigation, it was found that the suspects committed wire fraud and mail fraud, according to court documents. The stolen identities were used to apply for state and federal income tax returns. The fraudsters also provided debit card account numbers for the IRS to authorize payment of the returns to be distributed onto the debit cards.

The IRS processed the fraudulent returns leading  to U.S. government money being transferred electronically onto those debit cards.

The debit cards were then used to buy hundreds of money orders that were converted to cash in the Atlanta, Georgia area. False payee names were used and the cash was distributed to Robinson and other criminal companions.

Court documents say hundreds of money orders obtained through similar means continued to be deposited by Robinson into the Azalea accounts.

Robinson deposited money orders totaling $215,464 from fraudulent tax returns using University of Iowa employees data, according to Azalea-Bank of America accounts records from March and April of 2015.

If convicted, Robinson faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a maximum fine of $500,000.

Court documents show Robinson was originally arrested on Oct. 12 last year in Atlanta, Georgia, before a court order moved her case to the United States District Court Southern District of Iowa in Davenport.

https://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/2018/10/17/stolen-ui-employee-data-used-commit-money-laundering/1663905002/

European countries have been ‘oblivious’ in fighting money laundering, says Latvian minister

By Silvia Amaro

European countries have failed to address financial crime and it is time to take action, the Latvian finance minister told CNBC Wednesday.

The Latvian ABLV, the Danish Danske Bank and the Dutch ING have all recently been involved in scandals over money laundering and financial crime. Dana Reizniece-Ozola, finance minister of Latvia said that these cases have “opened a Pandora’s box” and asked banks do to more to prevent such situations.

“Countries in the European Union have been oblivious in fighting financial crime,” the finance minister told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe.”

“Something has to be done, not only at the national level but also at the European level, like probably strengthening the EBA (European Banking Authority),” she suggested.

In the case of ABLV, the U.S. Treasury accused the bank earlier this year of “institutionalized money laundering,” including allowing its clients to conduct business with parties connected to North Korea, which would violate sanctions imposed by the United Nations on the country. At the time, ABLV said the accusations were based on assumptions and information that was then unavailable to the bank.

When the scandal emerged earlier this year, European institutions were criticized for not having the means to oversee and prevent money laundering in the financial system.

This issue has been under further scrutiny after the head of the Danish lender, Danske Bank, resigned last week following a money laundering investigation into the bank. Earlier this month, ING agreed to pay 775 million euros ($910.20 million) in penalties for failing to stop several companies to allegedly launder money over a six-year period.

Separately, German regulators on Monday ordered Deutsche Bankto take internal actions to prevent money laundering.

“The game cannot be won only by one side playing, only by the government playing. The private sector, namely banks themselves have to participate and demonstrate a strong dedication,” Reizniece-Ozola said, adding that “this is the right time” to take action.

Russia-Linked Money-Laundering Probe Looks at $150 Billion in Transactions

By Bradley Hope, Drew Hinshaw, and Patricia Knowsmann

Denmark’s largest bank is investigating whether companies with ties to Russia used it to launder money, examining $150 billion in transactions that flowed through a tiny branch in Estonia, according to people familiar with the matter.

The $150 billion figure, covering a period between 2007 and 2015, has been presented to the bank’s board of directors and would equal to more than a year’s worth of the corporate profits for the entire country of Russia at the time. The flows would have stayed in the branch for only a short time before leaving Estonia, according to a person familiar with the investigation, so they might not show up in deposit statistics, which reflect the balance at the end of month and not from day to day.

“Any conclusions should be drawn on the basis of verified facts and not fragmented pieces of information taken out of context,” Danske Bank Chairman Ole Andersen said in a statement. “As we have previously communicated, it is clear that the issues related to the portfolio were bigger than we had previously anticipated.” The bank says the results of its probe are being finalized.

Shares in the bank fell as much as 7% on Friday after The Wall Street Journal reported on the size of the amounts involved.

The U.S. has paid close attention to the ways Russia’s wealthy have taken money out of the country, according to U.S. officials, especially since sanctions imposed during the invasion of Crimea in 2014. Sanctions were strengthened following determinations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and again earlier this year.

Washington has watched illicit money flows channeled through European-regulated banks to the West. In February, the Treasury Department declared Latvia’s ABLV bank an “institutionalized money laundering” operation where weapons dealers and corrupt politicians from former Soviet Union countries sent their money into Europe. ABLV denied knowingly laundering money and later collapsed.

In 2017, Deutsche Bank agreed to pay nearly $630 million to settle investigations by U.K. and New York regulators into Russian equity trades that transferred $10 billion out of that country in violation of anti-money-laundering laws.

Since last year, NATO has positioned troops in three former Soviet Union republics—Estonia and its neighbors Latvia and Lithuania, all bordering Russia. In return, the U.S. has asked those governments to crack down on illicit Russian money flowing into the West through their banks, according to U.S. officials. That understanding was hammered out after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea.

Danske’s Estonian branch is the subject of criminal investigations in Denmark and Estonia, prosecutors in the countries said. The Danish Financial Supervisory Authority reprimanded the bank for weak controls in May and ordered Danske to hold about $800 million more in capital, but didn’t issue a fine.

Shell companies, including many registered in the U.K., controlled most of the accounts in question, and many of the accounts had links to people in Russia and former Soviet Union countries, people familiar with the matter said. The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority isn’t probing the bank, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Danske Bank’s Estonian office in Tallinn.
Danske Bank’s Estonian office in Tallinn. PHOTO:INTS KALNINS/REUTERS

Estonia, a former Soviet Republic of 1.3 million people, became a European Union member in 2004 and joined the euro in 2011. Like its Baltic neighbor Latvia, it quickly became a way station for funds from other former Soviet states. The $150 billion figure is a substantial sum considering Estonia’s entire banking system reports total deposits of €17 billion ($19 billion).

At Danske, clients would typically move funds among several companies with accounts at its Estonia branch before transferring the money to accounts in banks in Turkey, Hong Kong, Latvia, the U.K. and other countries, one of the people familiar with the investigation said.

Danske’s management dragged its feet dealing with the issue, according to a report filed by Danish regulators this year, ignoring complaints from internal whistleblowers and correspondent banks, which made international payments and transfers on its behalf.

Estonian regulators complained to Danish counterparts as early as 2012 and compiled a 200-page report in 2014 detailing the local branch’s extensive failures to ask even basic questions about the source of its clients’ income.

“There were many red flags,” said Kilvar Kessler, chairman of the management board of Estonia’s banking supervisor, the Finantsinspektsioon.

It was only after another bank refused to deal with Danske’s Estonian unit that the bank shut down “nonresident” Estonian accounts in 2015.

Danske Chief Executive Thomas Borgen was in charge of international banking—including in Estonia—during part of the period under investigation. He was promoted to run the bank in 2013. He declined to comment.

Denmark’s Berlingske newspaper earlier reported around $8 billion of illicit money went through the Estonian branch. The Financial Times reported this month that some $30 billion flowed through the Estonian branch in the year 2013. In both instances, Danske said it needed time to look into the reports.

Danske’s investigation is overseen by the bank’s legal counsel and assisted by forensic accountants at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and consultants at Ernst & Young LLP. Both firms didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. Promontory Financial Group, a unit of International Business Machines Corp. , and Palantir Technologies Inc. are also helping in the probe and declined to comment.

Such large sums were able to slip by European regulators’ watch for years largely because of a series of design flaws in the Continent’s anti-money-laundering systems, said James Oates, the founder of Cicero Capital, a financial adviser in the Estonian capital of Tallinn.

“Everybody was looking the other way because they thought they were covered, and it turns out they weren’t,” said Mr. Oates.

Danske Bank’s Estonia branch isn’t directly supervised by the European Central Bank, which in any case lacks the authority to investigate money-laundering cases. Estonian authorities, meanwhile, say that because Danske operated as a branch—and not a subsidiary with a legal entity based in Estonia—they had limited authority and incomplete information.

Parent bank Danske said in a September 2017 statement that the Estonia branch “operated very much as an independent unit, with its own systems, procedures and culture regarding anti-money-laundering measures.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/danske-bank-money-laundering-probe-involves-150-billion-of-transactions-1536317086

© Copyright 2018. The Anti-Money Laundering Association. All Rights Reserved