Banking regulators today reiterated that there is no supervisory or Bank Secrecy Act requirement that financial institutions conduct a review of a customer or account after the institution has filed a suspicious activity report, and there is no requirement that institutions file a SAR for a series of transactions from the same source just below the $10,000 reporting threshold.
During a panel discussion at the Financial Crimes Enforcement Conference in Arlington, Virginia, representatives from three agencies pointed to a recent interagency FAQ clarifying SAR obligations for financial institutions. The goal of the FAQ was to ease “industry pain points” in BSA compliance, they said.
“The intent was to provide clarification on regulatory requirements and supervisory expectations, but importantly, where we can assist you in using your limited resources most efficiently,” said Koko Ives, manager of the Federal Reserve’s BSA/AML Policy Section.
In terms of a series of transactions below the $10,000 threshold — known as structuring — banks are only required to file an SAR if the institution knows or has reason to suspect the activity is designed to evade reporting requirements.
“You do file — you just don’t have to manually look through the information if it doesn’t pop up on your automated system,” said Christina Cornell-Pape, acting chief of AML at the FDIC.
Darley Steide, BSA/AML compliance policy specialist at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, said the agencies are conducting an assessment of their examination procedures to address the FAQ. He suggested banks do the same with their internal policies.
“If your policies have language that refers back to the old way — the way that you had been doing — where you were taking an exorbitant amount of time or excessive documentation to address the decision to not file SARs … you need to update your policies,” he said.
