|
Home > News & Events > Speeches and Testimony |
|||
|
Speeches and Testimony |
||
|
Christie Sciacca Associate Director Division of Supervision Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation on the Bank Secrecy Act and Bank Reporting Requirements Joint Hearing before the Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee and the General Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Committee on Banking and Financial Services U.S. House of Representastives 2:00 p.m. April 20, 1999 2128 Rayburn House Office Building
Thank you, Chairwoman Roukema, Chairman King, Ranking Members Vento and Sanders,
and members of the Subcommittees. I appreciate the opportunity to testify on
behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation on the Bank Secrecy Act
and the bank reporting requirements. The FDIC insures the nation’s 10,483 commercial
banks and savings institutions and is the primary federal supervisor of 5,853
state-chartered banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System. My
statement first provides some background on the Bank Secrecy Act itself, and
the FDIC’s role in its enforcement. Next, I will address the question of reporting
by the banking industry. The FDIC is well aware of the sometimes competing public policy issues raised
between financial privacy and combating financial crimes by statutory requirements
that the banking system report suspicious activity. Our recent experience with
the "Know Your Customer" proposal was strong evidence that the American public
values its financial privacy. The public is rightfully skeptical of the government
employing efforts to attack the problem of illegal financial activity through
rules that may infringe upon the privacy of all individuals. We confirmed through
the "Know Your Customer" rulemaking process that the public's relationship with
financial institutions is based on trust, and the government must be cautious
about adopting rules that might upset that trust. The integrity of the nation's banking system is also rooted in confidence.
Confidence between a financial institution and its customers is what enables
banks and other financial institutions to attract and retain legitimate funds
from legitimate customers. Illegal activities, such as money laundering, fraud,
and other transactions designed to assist criminals in illegal ventures pose
a serious threat to the integrity of financial institutions and, therefore,
the public's confidence in the banking system. Maintaining confidence in the
nation’s banking system is the mission of the FDIC. Highly publicized cases
involving money laundering demonstrate the importance of federal supervision
and bank vigilance in this area. While it is impossible to identify every transaction
at an institution that is potentially illegal or involves illegally obtained
money, financial institutions must take reasonable measures to identify such
transactions in order to ensure their own safe and sound operations. In October 1970, Congress enacted the statute commonly known as the Bank Secrecy
Act, or BSA. The BSA authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to require banks
to report cash transactions over $10,000 to the Department of the Treasury.
In addition, the BSA requires financial institutions to keep records that are
determined to have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, and regulatory
matters, and to implement programs and compliance procedures to counter money
laundering. Vigorous enforcement of the BSA requirements beginning in the early
1980s, coupled with the criminalization of money laundering by the Money Laundering
Control Act of 1986, have resulted in the filing of a large number of currency
transaction reports, or CTRs. In 1992, the Annunzio-Wylie Money Laundering Act
broadened the reporting requirements by authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury
to require any financial institution, and its officers, directors, employees
and agents, to report any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible violation
of law or regulation. As a result of the legislation, the Treasury Department
issued regulations requiring financial institutions to file Suspicious Activity
Reports, or SARs. Among other things, the regulations eliminated the existing
requirement to file CTRs alleging suspicious activity. One purpose of the change
was to draw a distinction between routine large cash transactions and those
that are considered suspicious. This increased the amount of useful information
available to investigators in a reasonable period of time and effectively separated
the reporting of apparent illegal activity from that associated with the normal
conduct of a commercial business enterprise. Pursuant to authority in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the BSA as amended
by the Annunzio-Wyle Money Laundering Act, the FDIC, along with the other federal
financial institution regulatory agencies, adopted regulations requiring banks
and savings institutions to establish and maintain procedures to monitor their
compliance with the BSA. Institutions are required to establish a compliance
program that will provide for, at a minimum a system of internal controls to
assure ongoing compliance, independent testing for compliance, the designation
of an individual to be responsible for coordinating and monitoring day-to-day
compliance, and training for appropriate personnel. Failure to comply with the
regulations may result in a supervisory action against the institution. Interagency examination procedures were developed for examiners to determine
bank compliance. At each safety and soundness examination, FDIC examiners review
a bank’s BSA program and compliance procedures. Based on our experience with
state-chartered non member banks, compliance with the BSA has substantially
improved in the last ten years. Although some isolated violations have been
detected, most appear to be technical in nature. Many of these violations appear
to result from a misunderstanding of the CTR reporting exemption rules. Recently
introduced amendments to these rules further simplify the exemption process
for the banks and should eliminate a number of the technical violations of the
BSA that are currently noted by examiners. We do not believe that filing CTRs has created an undue burden on financial
institutions. Most computer systems readily identify transactions that may be
subject to the reporting requirements, and many systems automatically generate
CTRs that are ready for filing. All those institutions have to do is review
the CTRs generated by the system to determine which of the reports require filing.
Banks also have the option of reducing paperwork by filing magnetically or by
following exemption procedures to eliminate filings on qualified businesses
and government agencies that routinely deal in large volumes of cash. The BSA is a vital component of the United States’ anti-money laundering efforts.
The statute and its implementing regulations work because of the necessary cooperation
between the government and financial institutions. It would be almost impossible
to construct an effective system for detecting money laundering and preventing
criminals from using the financial system without participation by financial
institutions. For over a decade, institutions have filed reports that have been
effective tools in the detection, investigation and prosecution of illegal activity
that can damage communities, ruin lives, and cause considerable financial losses
to institutions. While the BSA has not completely eradicated money laundering
or other financial crimes, it has been a deterrent to large-scale money laundering
activity in covered financial institutions. Money launderers are well aware of the BSA and are constantly seeking ways
to avoid its reporting requirements. For example, breaking large currency transactions
into several smaller transactions to avoid CTR’s, commonly known as "structuring",
was successful for several years. However, since financial institutions have
developed systems to detect this type of activity and promptly report it on
SARs, the effectiveness of "structuring" as a means of hiding illegal cash has
been greatly diminished. One recent success story for CTRs and SARs was the arrest and prosecution of
about 20 people in connection with a 1997 robbery of an armored car company
in North Carolina, where the perpetrators netted approximately $17 million in
cash. A number of banks reported unusual and suspicious cash transactions that
helped lead law enforcement authorities to several suspects who, in turn, implicated
others involved in the robbery and laundering of the money. In summary, the FDIC strongly supports the BSA and other federal anti-money
laundering efforts. The integrity and reputation of the United States financial
sector depends on the continuing cooperation among financial institutions, law
enforcement agencies and the federal financial institution regulators. Over
the past 15 years, these organizations have formed a vital partnership to fight
financial crime. We must continue to be vigilant and to balance the legitimate
concerns of institutions, the privacy rights of law abiding citizens with the
needs of the government to ensure continued public confidence in our nation's
banks. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to present the FDIC's views on these
issues and would be happy to answer any questions you might have. |
Last Updated 06/25/1999
communications@fdic.gov