- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
Significant investment in systems has not been fully effective in mitigating financial crime risk. A fine of nearly £64 million (then-U.S. $84 million) imposed on HSBC by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority in December is a particularly potent example.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill aims to stem the flow of dirty money coming into the United Kingdom by giving Companies House more power and resources to help combat money laundering.
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority used its powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act to force fintech firm QPay Europe to forfeit £2 million (U.S. $2.5 million) alleged to be linked to a U.S.-based wire fraud conspiracy.
With the similarity of their nature and how they overlap, not to mention how often they are mentioned in the same breath, it can easily lead to confusion when trying to remember which is which between source of funds and source of wealth.
London has long had the dubious reputation of being the world’s money laundering capital and it looks like it’s a title it is likely to retain for some time yet.
The U.K. will struggle to shed its reputation as one of the world’s biggest conduits for dirty money due to a combination of patchy intelligence-sharing and poorly resourced enforcement agencies, experts told Compliance Week.
The U.K. has an ongoing problem with money laundering, but recent changes to economic crime law and corporate registration requirements could bring more cases to court, according to consultancy KPMG.
