Written by Pekka Dare on Wednesday July 18, 2012
Up to 1 Billion USD$ in fines. Group Head of Compliance David Bagley quits. Huge reputational fallout and remedial action required. A disastrous scenario for HSBC, and a time for all working in anti money laundering to take stock. What are the lessons to be learnt.
First let’s recap some of the key points from the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee Report on US Vulnerabilities to Money Laundering, Drugs and Terrorist Financing: HSBC Case History:
Five points for all engaged in AML:
Anti money laundering should not be viewed as purely a process in discrete elements. Too many regulated firms treat AML as a series of discreet process driven silos. I have trained in many large firms where the AML Compliance Team is too far removed from a more process driven Client On Boarding Team, who in turn are totally removed from the review and monitoring teams and the sales force. Too many Know Your Customer / Customer Due Diligence roles in large firms are undertaken by people who are trained to process application or forms without seeing the being picture or thinking critically.
Effective training and education of all staff involved in AML is essential. Until the salesperson, the Client On-boarding Officer and the AML Compliance team all understand the bigger picture in regards to money laundering and terrorist financing, we will continue to see short term commercial gain prioritised over meaningful Customer Due Diligence and AML controls. Delivery of a once a year computer based training package will not achieve this - practical scenario based information is the key to success.
Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are all about asking the obvious and common sense questions. This message has still not got out there to frontline staff in too many firms. Staff don’t see that it in their interest to report suspicious activity. If they fail to do so they may not have job or a successful employer in the future. Too many firms still treat SARs as a numbers game and an issue to be dealt with by the AML team. I am regularly dismayed when I train sales people or client on boarding staff in firms as to how few of them have ever submitted a SAR.
AML is not a process to keep regulators happy. It is in the best interests of everyone: sales people, senior management, law enforcement, and yes society as a whole. HSBC is tackling these issues through fundamental and dramatic change. Look at the cost, in terms of reputation, share price and time and effort. The Senate Committee subpoenaed a huge amount of evidence, collected over 1.4 million documents and conducted over 75 interviews with HSBC officials.
Regulators need to challenge AML competency and training within firms. Until we have recognition that AML is a profession requiring critical thought, technical knowledge and sound judgement we will continue to see significant failures. Several jurisdictions such as Singapore and Malaysia have begun to prescribe formal qualification for those undertaking AML roles. Where are the rest of the world’s regulators on this issue?
Thank you. Your comment is awaiting moderation and should appear on the site shortly.
Required fields are not completed, please ensure all required fields (*) have been filled in properly.
You can leave the name empty should you wish to remain Anonymous.