- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
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.
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 Financial Crimes Enforcement Network finalized its beneficial ownership rule, which will require certain reporting companies to file basic information with the agency about who controls their finances.
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.
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.
When the DOJ released its revised Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs, it turned some heads. Tucked into a section on risk assessments was a strongly worded series of questions that appeared to shoulder compliance teams with the responsibility for ensuring the safe use of AI tools by their firms.
The Department of Justice’s Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs has made the importance of artificial intelligence governance frameworks clear, but it didn’t say what role compliance should play. Here’s the answer.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an alert to financial institutions about their obligations to report deepfakes, warning artificial intelligence has given bad actors additional tools in their arsenal.
