2 buildings looking up at them
Publication

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) leak: UHNWI’s – the wrong target?

The FinCEN leak will surprise no experienced lawyers advising UHNWIs (Ultra-High Net Worth Individuals) and their professional advisers.  The irony of the disclosure by International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) and the recent BBC Panorama programme is that in most instances the processes used by wealthy people to engage in commercial activity or anonymise their ownership of property and charitable giving are perfectly legal.

It is doubtful whether the TV producers had bothered to read the judgment of Mrs Justice Lang in National Crime Agency v Baker & Ors [2020] EWHC 822 (Admin) (08 April 2020) and specifically para 97:

‘…The use of complex offshore corporate structures or trusts is not, without more, a ground for believing that they have been set up, or are being used, for wrongful purposes, such as money laundering. There are lawful reasons – privacy, security, tax mitigation – why very wealthy people invest their capital in complex offshore corporate structures or trusts. Of course, such structures may also be used to disguise money laundering, but there must be some additional evidential basis for such a belief, going beyond the complex structures used.

If they had considered the judgment it would have been much better focussed and effective.  In Baker, the NCA fell into the same trap of equating opaqueness with deliberate subterfuge to hide criminality.

Rather than have a number of distinguished US and UK AML experts and former prosecutors comment on how suspicious the activity looks, the TV producers would have been much better directing their questions to the UK government.  The laxity of regulation surrounding company incorporation, registered offices and directorships along with the poverty of scrutiny of company accounts is something that has existed for more than twenty-five years.  These weaknesses were exploited by VAT carousel fraudsters on a vast scale (costing UK taxpayers £bns) from the mid-nineties until reverse charging was brought in.  It could be very easily addressed with legislation.  Similarly, the UK government could legislate to make banks’ AML and KYC obligations more stringent – rather than lobbying on their behalf, as George Osborne did, when successfully persuading the US not to remove HSBC’s banking licence, following the exposure of the latter’s involvement in laundering money for drug cartels.  

Richardson Lissack has considerable experience advising UHNWIs and their professional advisers based in the UK and abroad. 

Related

Publications

Buildings

FCA Moves to Streamline Removal of Unused Permissions

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the UK is proactively enforcing the perimeter by urging firms to review and, if necessary, remove unused re...

Building

Reasons for Trading Letter and FCA’s Preliminary Review: Untangling the Regulatory Threads

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) recently issued a “Reasons for Trading Letter” and launched a “Preliminary Review of Trading&#...

Building

Cryptoasset firms must comply with FCA financial promotions regime

As of 8th October 2023, all cryptoasset firms marketing to UK consumers must comply with the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) financial promo...

Building

Bank account closures and CIFAS markers

Transcript of The Which? Money Podcast featuring Tim Thomas. Speaker 1 Welcome to the Which? Money podcast. Your weekly hits of money, news and person...

Building

Understanding Regulatory Investigations

Regulatory investigations can be a daunting experience for businesses and individuals alike. The consequences of non-compliance can be severe, with fi...

tall building

S173 Compelled FSMA Interview: What You Need to Know

In the United Kingdom, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) regulates financial markets and services. As part of its enforcement powers,...

Credit Suisse

The takeover of Credit Suisse

The takeover of Credit Suisse by UBS has more than a flavour of the Lloyds Bank Group ‘shot-gun wedding’ with HBOS in 2009: one financial services...

2 buildings looking up at them

A guide to insider dealing

Insider dealing is a serious charge, one that comes with considerable consequences if an individual is found guilty. It’s a complex area of law whic...

2 buildings looking up at them

CIFAS Markers: Data subject access request (DSAR)

What is a Cifas marker? CIFAS stands for ‘Credit Industry Fraud Avoidance System‘, a not-for-profit fraud prevention membership organisation. It o...

2 buildings looking up at them

What you need to know about CIFAS markers

National Fraud Database CIFAS fraud markers are adverse judgements through which one institution, be it a bank, loan company or an insurer, for exampl...

2 buildings looking up at them

Tim Thomas quoted in Bloomberg in relation to the PCP v Barclays case

Following the release of the judgment in PCP and Barclays, one of our directors, Tim Thomas, spoke to Bloomberg about the potential repercussions for ...

2 buildings looking up at them

The FCA and cannabis: an unlikely pairing?

The recent announcement by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) of guidance for companies in the medicinal cannabis sector, thinking about listing on...

Furloughed Individual

Furlough fraud: what lies ahead?

Furlough fraud claims are on the rise.  Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC) together with whistleblowing organisations are reporting thousan...

Let’s work together

Contact Us

arrow-downarrow-left-greyarrow-leftarrow-right-0c2535 arrow-right-ffffff arrow-right-greyarrow-rightbullet-icon-whitebullet-iconcloseicon-connecticon-cross-double icon-cross-right icon-email icon-nav-lefticon-nav-righticon-phoneicon-pinicon-reachlawyer-linkedin-icon nav-menu-arrow rl-logo-icon social_facebooksocial_googleplussocial_instagramsocial_linkedin_altsocial_linkedin_altsocial_pinterestlogo-twitter-glyph-32social_youtube