Non-compliance with AML Legislation can result in fines and penalties, negative publicity, damaged banking relationships, and defeat crime prevention objectives.
Avoid Fines & Penalties
FINTRAC can issue on-the-spot penalties of up to $500,000 for not filing a suspicious transaction report, and pursue criminal charges carrying jail sentences for reporting entities and their directors, officers, agents, and employees.
To date, FINTRAC, has reported dozens of non-compliance referrals to law enforcement – with convictions. These non-compliance offenses can result in jail sentences of up to 5 years and fines of up to CAD 2 million. Officers, directors and agents of Reporting Entities can be liable for conviction on the described punishments if they directed, authorized, assented to, acquiesced, or participated in its commission (even if the Reporting Entity itself is not convicted).
Beginning on December 30, 2008, FINTRAC was granted the alternative to address non-compliance with monetary penalties (known as Administrative Monetary Penalties, or “AMPS”). The AML legislation act allows for maximum penalties of up to $100,000 for individuals and $500,000 for entities per violation. Penalties can be reduced by up to half by entering into and satisfying a compliance agreement with FINTRAC. If a Reporting Entity pays the fine, or enters into a compliance agreement with FINTRAC, they are deemed to have committed the violation, foregoing the right to appeal, and permitting FINTRAC to make public the Reporting Entity’s violation and the amount of the penalty imposed.
Due diligence is a legislated defense to criminal offenses and administrative violations.
Click here to see a complete listing of fines imposed and published by FINTRAC to date.
Avoid Damage to Reputation
Published fines and penalties can alert clients, competitors, correspondents, and even criminals to control weaknesses. Directors and their designated managers are mandated to protect their businesses reputation from such incidents.
Establishment & Maintenance of Banking Relationships
Authoritative international standards, and state laws designed to meet them, compel traditional and non-bank financial institutions to conduct initial and ongoing due diligence of the clients to which they provide services, and other financial institutions with which they correspond. Due diligence is critical to protect the reputation of those providers from the potential taint of the lax regimes of their current or would-be clients. Accordingly, Reporting Entities seeking to establish and maintain relationships with other financial institutions must be capable of demonstrating their ongoing effective efforts to money laundering detection, deterrence and legislative compliance.
Payment Providers
Correspondent Banking
Crime Prevention
Studies have suggested that money laundering undeterred: fuels further crime and socio-economic harms (violence, illicit drugs); undermines the legitimacy of the private sector through criminal price subsidies; destabilizes the integrity of financial markets because of irrational and unpredictable investments and fund flows; complicates economic policy decisions, and impacts international relations.
Non-compliance with AML Legislation can result in fines and penalties, negative publicity, damaged banking relationships, and defeat crime prevention objectives.
Avoid Fines & Penalties
FINTRAC can issue on-the-spot penalties of up to $500,000 for not filing a suspicious transaction report, and pursue criminal charges carrying jail sentences for reporting entities and their directors, officers, agents, and employees.
To date, FINTRAC, has reported dozens of non-compliance referrals to law enforcement – with convictions. These non-compliance offenses can result in jail sentences of up to 5 years and fines of up to CAD 2 million. Officers, directors and agents of Reporting Entities can be liable for conviction on the described punishments if they directed, authorized, assented to, acquiesced, or participated in its commission (even if the Reporting Entity itself is not convicted).
Beginning on December 30, 2008, FINTRAC was granted the alternative to address non-compliance with monetary penalties (known as Administrative Monetary Penalties, or “AMPS”). The AML legislation act allows for maximum penalties of up to $100,000 for individuals and $500,000 for entities per violation. Penalties can be reduced by up to half by entering into and satisfying a compliance agreement with FINTRAC. If a Reporting Entity pays the fine, or enters into a compliance agreement with FINTRAC, they are deemed to have committed the violation, foregoing the right to appeal, and permitting FINTRAC to make public the Reporting Entity’s violation and the amount of the penalty imposed.
Due diligence is a legislated defense to criminal offenses and administrative violations.
Click here to see a complete listing of fines imposed and published by FINTRAC to date.
Avoid Damage to Reputation
Published fines and penalties can alert clients, competitors, correspondents, and even criminals to control weaknesses. Directors and their designated managers are mandated to protect their businesses reputation from such incidents.
Establishment & Maintenance of Banking Relationships
Authoritative international standards, and state laws designed to meet them, compel traditional and non-bank financial institutions to conduct initial and ongoing due diligence of the clients to which they provide services, and other financial institutions with which they correspond. Due diligence is critical to protect the reputation of those providers from the potential taint of the lax regimes of their current or would-be clients. Accordingly, Reporting Entities seeking to establish and maintain relationships with other financial institutions must be capable of demonstrating their ongoing effective efforts to money laundering detection, deterrence and legislative compliance.
Crime Prevention
Studies have suggested that money laundering undeterred: fuels further crime and socio-economic harms (violence, illicit drugs); undermines the legitimacy of the private sector through criminal price subsidies; destabilizes the integrity of financial markets because of irrational and unpredictable investments and fund flows; complicates economic policy decisions, and impacts international relations.