- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aaron Nicodemus2022-02-09T20:14:00
Comment letters submitted to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network regarding its proposed beneficial ownership registry rule express concerns related to compliance costs, implementation timelines, and more.
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.
Annual Membership best value
Subscribe now for $365
Our lowest price ($1 per day) for one year.
Determining the ultimate beneficial owner of individuals and companies your firm does business with can be a tricky thing. The most efficient investigations require an understanding of your firm’s risk appetite and appropriate technology to automate searches.
As financial institutions continue to face enhanced public scrutiny and potential regulatory attention, it is important they allocate competent resources to their AML programs regarding beneficial ownership.
FinCEN’s proposed rule for a new beneficial ownership registry was released as part of the U.S. government’s efforts to pull back the veil on anonymous shell companies used to launder illicit profits from corruption, money laundering, and other financial crime activities.
The U.S. Supreme Court extended the statute of limitations for businesses attempting to challenge some federal regulations, allowing regulated entities a longer timeline to appeal a decision.
The Supreme Court of the United States overturned a long-held precedent in which courts deferred to federal agencies in interpreting complex or ambiguous regulations–a decision that could make thousands of federal regulations more vulnerable to legal challenges.
Financial institutions would be required to conduct more thorough risk assessments on their anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism programs under a new rule proposed by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
