CAMS Exam Dumps - ACAMS AML Certification Questions and Answers

 The correct answer is B, as a customer acceptance policy is an essential element of KYC standards according to the Basel Committee’s Customer Due Diligence for Bankspaper1. A customer acceptance policy defines the types of customers that the bank is willing to accept, and the conditions and limitations that apply to such relationships. A customer acceptance policy helps the bank to avoid customers who are likely to pose a higher than average risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, or who are not willing to provide sufficient information for identification and verification purposes1.

 1: Customer due diligence for banks - Bank for International Settlements, page 9.

 Structuring transactions is a common method of money laundering, where cash deposits or withdrawals are broken down into smaller amounts to avoid reporting or record-keeping requirements. Employees who unintentionally assist customers in structuring transactions may not be aware of the legal and regulatory implications of their actions, or may have been misled or coerced by the customers. Therefore, the most appropriate and proportionate response is to provide remedial training to these employees, to ensure they understand the anti-money laundering policies and procedures, the red flags of suspicious activity, and their reporting obligations. Terminating, contacting law enforcement, or transferring these employees may be excessive, premature, or ineffective measures, depending on the circumstances and the level of involvement of the employees.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, page 31.

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, Lesson 2.3: Structuring and Smurfing.

When onboarding a corporate customer, financial institutions mustconduct due diligence to assess potential AML risks.

Option A (Correct):Understanding thenature of the businesshelps identifyhigher-risk industries(e.g.,casinos, cryptocurrency exchanges, cash-intensive businesses).

Option D (Correct):Identifyingsenior managing officials and account signatorieshelps verify thetrue control and ownership of the company.

Option E (Correct):Jurisdictional risk assessmentis key, especially if the company is from aFATF-listed high-risk country.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option B (Incorrect):Theemployment profiles of all employeesarenot relevantunless they have adirect role in financial transactions.

Option C (Incorrect):A company'sbanking history is not always relevant, unless there arered flags of prior financial crime involvement.

Best Practices for Corporate Customer Onboarding:

Verify beneficial ownership structuresto detect potential shell companies.

Conduct enhanced due diligence (EDD) for high-risk industries and jurisdictions.

Ensure ongoing monitoring of corporate customers.

An anti-money laundering officer should coordinate with the human resources department when implementing a new hire screening program. A new hire screening program is a process of conducting background checks and verifying the identity, qualifications, and suitability of prospective employees, especially those who will be involved in the bank’s anti-money laundering (AML) compliance program. The human resources department is responsible for managing the recruitment, hiring, and training of employees, and ensuring that they comply with the bank’s policies and procedures. Therefore, the human resources department is the most appropriate partner for the anti-money laundering officer in developing and executing a new hire screening program that meets the bank’s AML standards and regulatory requirements.

The other options are not relevant or necessary for the implementation of a new hire screening program. The internal auditor is responsible for evaluating the effectiveness and adequacy of the bank’s internal controls, including the AML compliance program, but not for screening new hires. The local financial intelligence unit is a government agency that collects, analyzes, and disseminates financial information related to money laundering and terrorist financing, but not for screening new hires. The institution’s regulator is the authority that supervises and examines the bank’s compliance with the applicable laws and regulations, including the AML requirements, but not for screening new hires.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination (6th Edition), Chapter 4: Developing an AML/CFT Program 1

FFIEC BSA/AML Manual, Assessing the BSA/AML Compliance Program, BSA/AML Training 2

AUSTRAC, Employee due diligence 3

Financial institutionsoperating in the EU must comply with GDPR and AML directives, ensuring a balance betweenprivacy and AML compliance.

Option B (Correct):Data minimization is a key GDPR principle, ensuring that only necessary data is collected and processed.

Option D (Correct):Strict guidelines apply to AI and machine learning models used in AML complianceto prevent bias and ensure transparency.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):FIs cannot use third parties to supplement missing customer identification unless proper KYC measures are followed.

Option C (Incorrect):Customers cannot be informed about ongoing AML investigations due to “tipping off” restrictions under AML laws.

Best Practices for AML Compliance Under GDPR:

Limit data collection to what is necessary for AML compliance.

Ensure AI and machine learning models comply with transparency regulations.

Prevent unauthorized data access through strict internal controls.

A qualified independent party/auditor is the most effective resource to evaluate the effectiveness of an anti-money laundering program. This is because an independent auditor can provide an objective and unbiased assessment of the program, identify any weaknesses or gaps, and make recommendations for improvement. An independent auditor can also verify the compliance of the program with the relevant regulations and best practices, and test the adequacy and functionality of the internal controls, customer due diligence processes, and transaction monitoring systems. An independent auditor can also help an organization prepare for regulatory examinations and audits, and avoid potential penalties or sanctions.

= The main references for this question are the following sources:

The document titled “Frequently Asked Questions Conducting Independent Reviews of Money Services Business Anti-Money Laundering Programs” published by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) in July 2010. You can access it by clicking here.

The document titled “AML Audit: How to Effectively Assess Your Compliance Program” published by Alessa in May 2023. You can access it by clicking here.

The document titled “Mutual Evaluations” published by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). You can access it by clicking here.

Broker-dealers cannot have correspondent accounts with a foreign bank that does not have a physical presence in any country. The USA PATRIOT Act has an extraterritorial effect in that it prohibits broker-dealers from having correspondent accounts with foreign banks that do not have a physical presence in any country. This rule is designed to help prevent money laundering and terrorist financing by making it more difficult for funds to be moved to or through jurisdictions with less stringent anti-money laundering laws.

One of the most common methods of money laundering in the insurance industry is to purchase a policy with illicit funds and then request a refund of the premiums, either partially or fully, before the policy matures. This way, the money launderer can receive a legitimate payment from the insurance company, effectively washing the dirty money. This technique is also known as premium fraud or early surrender12

According to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the most significant money laundering and terrorist financing risks in the insurance industry are found in life insurance and annuity products, because such products allow a customer to place largeamounts of funds into the financial system and seamlessly transfer such funds to disguise their true origin34

Some indicators of potential money laundering through insurance products are: 12

The customer pays the premiums with cash, cashier’s checks, money orders, or other anonymous or unusual payment methods.

The customer overpays the premiums or makes multiple payments in excess of the required amount.

The customer cancels the policy during the free-look or grace period and requests a refund to a different account or a third party.

The customer purchases a policy that is inconsistent with their income, age, or risk profile.

The customer shows little interest in the benefits or terms of the policy, but is more concerned about the cancellation or surrender options.

1: AML in Insurance: How to Detect & Combat Money Laundering, ComplyAdvantage, 2022

2: Anti Money Laundering (AML) In Insurance Industry In 2021, Financial Crime Academy, 2023

3: Money laundering in the insurance industry, Insurance Commission, 2022

4: Money laundering in the insurance industry, Atty. Dennis B. Funa, Business Mirror, 2016

[5]: Anti-Money Laundering Requirements: FAQs for Insurance Companies, FinCEN, 2005

The USA PATRIOT Act of 20011 is a comprehensive anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering legislation that grants various powers and authorities to the US government to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. Among its provisions, Title III of the Act, also known as the International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 20012, specifically addresses the issue of correspondent banking and the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing through foreign banks that maintain accounts with US banks. Section 319 of Title III3 authorizes the US Attorney General or the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a subpoena or summons to any foreign bank that maintains a correspondent account in the US, and to request any records relating to such account, including records maintained outside the US. Furthermore, Section 319(b) of Title III4 allows the US authorities to seize the funds of the foreign bank held with the US bank, if the foreign bank fails to comply with such a subpoena or summons, or if the US authorities initiate a civil forfeiture action against the funds in the correspondent account. Therefore, the USA PATRIOT Act is the correct answer, as it enables the US authorities to seize the funds of the foreign bank held with the US bank, if the correspondent account is found to have facilitated a transaction involving tainted funds.

When assessing and managing money laundering risks while operating in foreign jurisdictions different from that of the head office, an effective AML monitoring program should conform to the foreign jurisdiction policies to align with the head office policies. This ensures that the organization's AML/CFT risk management remains consistent across all jurisdictions, while allowing local compliance staff to assess and manage the risks specific to their jurisdiction. Additionally, the program should be tailored to the higher of standards between the jurisdictions, and should be consistent with the head office audits. Providing all foreign jurisdiction reports to the head office for approval is not necessary, as long as the program is consistent with the head office policies.

 The best option for the compliance officer is to follow the financial institution’s established STR reporting policy, which should include procedures for reporting suspicious activity involving senior management or board members. This would ensure that the compliance officer acts in accordance with the bank’s internal controls and governance, and avoids any potential conflicts of interest or breaches of confidentiality. The other options are not advisable because they could either compromise the integrity of the STR filing, expose the compliance officer to legal or reputational risks, or alert the subject of the investigation.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination, 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 1401

ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 4, Lesson 22

ACAMS CAMS Certification Practice Exam, Question 843

While this behavior may warrant scrutiny in certain circumstances, it is not inherently suspicious or indicative of money laundering. In contrast, the other behaviors listed (living beyond one's means, excessive unresolved exceptions, and using company resources for personal gain) may suggest that an employee is engaging in or facilitating money laundering activity.

TheFATF Grey Listconsists of countries withAML/CFT deficienciesthat havecommitted to reforms.

Option C (Correct):Grey-listed jurisdictionsare underincreased monitoringand mustaddress identified deficiencieswithin a set timeframe.

Option A (Incorrect):Yellow noticesare used byINTERPOL, not FATF.

Option B (Incorrect):Red noticesrefer toINTERPOL arrest warrants, not FATF monitoring lists.

Option D (Incorrect):FATF doesnot maintain a "white list"of compliant jurisdictions.

This is a common red flag of money laundering that involves layering, which is the process of moving funds through multiple accounts or entities to conceal their origin and ownership. Layering often involves cross-border transfers, especially to high-risk jurisdictions, and rapid movement of funds to avoid detection or tracing. A compliance officer should prioritize this red flag for investigation, as it may indicate a complex money laundering scheme or the financing of terrorism or proliferation.

AML Red Flags – What are the Top 10 Indicators? - ComplyAdvantage, section “Red flags related to transaction patterns”

AML 101: The 10 Most Common Red Flags - KYC-Chain, section “Red flag indicators related to geographical risks”

Anti-money laundering red flags, page 2, bullet point 5

SAR information ishighly sensitive, and institutionsmust follow strict confidentiality rulesto protect investigations and avoid “tipping off” customers.

Option D (Correct):Statistical summaries (e.g., the number of SARs filed, trends, typologies)help the Board monitor AML riskswithout disclosing confidential details.

Option A (Incorrect):Providingall possible detailsmay violateSAR confidentiality laws.

Option B (Incorrect):Sharing full SAR copieswith non-compliance staff isnot permittedunder AML regulations.

Option C (Incorrect):Naming specific customers under SAR reviewrisks"tipping off"or leaking confidential information.

Best Practices for SAR Reporting to the Board:

Provide anonymized statistics on SAR trends.

Highlight emerging AML risks and compliance effectiveness.

Avoid disclosing specific cases or customer names.

Bringing $15,000 worth of chips into the casino is a red flag because it could indicate that the customer is trying to avoid the currency transaction reporting (CTR) requirement for cash transactions over $10,0001. Requesting a wire transfer to an unrelated third party is another red flag because it couldindicate that the customer is trying to conceal the source or destination of the funds, or transfer them to a high-risk jurisdiction2.

1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 3: Casinos and Gaming, Section 3.1: Regulatory Requirements, Slide 8 2: ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 3: Casinos and Gaming, Section 3.2: Money Laundering Methods and Red Flags, Slide 11

According to the Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition) resources, the institution should develop a system to monitor all the activity of the customer’s accounts to mitigate the risk associated with these accounts. This is because the customer’s behavior and profile may indicate some red flags of money laundering, such as:

Operating an import-export business, which is a common sector for trade-based money laundering, where trade transactions are used to disguise the movement of illicit funds, either by over- or under-invoicing, misrepresenting the quantity or quality of goods, or falsifying documents1.

Receiving funds from a jurisdiction perceived as highly corrupt, which may increase the risk of the funds being derived from bribery, embezzlement, fraud, or other predicate offences2. Transparency International is a global civil society organization that publishes an annual CorruptionPerceptions Index, which ranks countries by their perceived levels of public sector corruption based on expert assessments and surveys3.

Making frequent transfers among the accounts, which may indicate a layering technique, where funds are moved through multiple accounts, institutions, or jurisdictions to obscure the audit trail and the source and ownership of the funds4.

Preferring to manage the accounts separately, which may indicate a lack of transparency or an attempt to avoid detection or reporting by the institution.

By developing a system to monitor all the activity of the customer’s accounts, the institution can:

Identify and verify the identity and beneficial ownership of the customer and the parties involved in the transactions.

Obtain and verify information on the nature and purpose of the business relationship and the source and destination of the funds.

Conduct a risk assessment of the customer and the transactions based on the customer’s profile, behavior, and geographic locations.

Apply enhanced due diligence and ongoing monitoring measures for higher-risk customers and transactions, such as obtaining additional information, documentation, or approval, or conducting more frequent or in-depth reviews.

Detect and report any suspicious or unusual transactions or activities to the relevant authorities.

The other three options are incorrect because:

File a suspicious transaction report is not the best answer, as it is a reactive measure that should be taken after the institution has identified or suspected money laundering or terrorist financing activity, not before. The institution should first conduct due diligence and monitoring of the customer and the transactions, and then file a report if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the activity is suspicious or unusual.

Diminish the importance of the subjective Transparency International rating is not the best answer, as it is a complacent and irresponsible attitude that may expose the institution to legal, regulatory, reputational, or operational risks. The Transparency International rating is not subjective, but based on credible sources and methodologies, and it is widely used as a reference by governments, businesses, civil society, and the public to assess the level of corruption in different countries3. The institution should not ignore or downplay the rating, but rather use it as one of the factors to evaluate the risk of the customer and the transactions.

Conduct a trade-price manipulation analysis is not the best answer, as it is a specific and technical measure that may not be sufficient or appropriate to mitigate the risk associated with these accounts. A trade-price manipulation analysis is a method of detecting trade-based money laundering by comparing the prices of goods or services in a transaction with the market prices or other benchmarks, and identifying any significant discrepancies or anomalies. However, this measure may not be feasible or effective if the institution does not have access to reliable and comparable data, or if the goods or services are not standardized or homogeneous. Moreover, this measure may not address other aspects of the risk, such as the identity, ownership, or behavior of the customer and the parties involved in the transactions.

1: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 108 2: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 107 3: Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index, 3 4: ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 106 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 103 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 103 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 104 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 105 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 105 : ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 5, p. 109

AML controls should bemeasured for effectivenessusingquantifiable metrics.

Option D (Correct):Thetrue positive/false positive ratioassesses theefficiencyof AML detection.

Option A (Incorrect):Thenumber of alerts alonedoes not measureeffectiveness, as many could befalse positives.

Option B (Incorrect):Client exitsdo not indicate whether an AML program isworking properly.

Option C (Incorrect):High-risk customer onboardingmust bemonitored, but it does not indicate AML effectiveness.

A suspicious transaction report (STR) is a document that financial institutions must file with the relevant authorities when they detect or suspect any activity that may be related to money laundering, terrorist financing, or other criminal offences. An STR should include the details of the customer, the transaction, the reason for suspicion, and any other relevant information.

One of the indicators of suspicious activity is the use of financial instruments, such as checks, money orders, or cashier’s checks, that are drawn on other institutions and deposited in amounts under the currency reporting thresholds. This may suggest that the customer is trying to avoid the detection and reporting of large cash transactions, which is a technique known as structuring or smurfing. Structuring is illegal and may indicate that the customer is laundering money from illicit sources or evading taxes.

Another indicator of suspicious activity is the use of financial instruments that are sequentially numbered, meaning that they have consecutive serial numbers. This may suggest that the customer has obtained the instruments from the same source or issuer, and that they are using them to launder money or finance illegal activities. Sequentially numbered instruments may also indicate that the customer is involved in fraud, such as check kiting or counterfeit checks.

Therefore, if a bank conducts a quarterly review on a retail customer’s account and finds that the customer has made a number of large deposits of financial instruments drawn on other institutions in amounts under the thresholds, and that the instruments were sequentially numbered, the bank will most likely file an STR. This is because this activity does not fit the customer’s historical profile, and it raises a high level of suspicion that the customer is engaged in money laundering or other criminal activities.

CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2, page 108

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations, Question 5, page 7

Anti-money laundering – handling suspicious activity, Section 6.3, page 3

Tell us about suspicious activity that may be linked to money laundering, Section 3, page 1

According to the CAMS Study Guide, page 191, “Reloadable open-loop prepaid cards are a high-risk product for money laundering because they can be used to store and move large amounts of funds anonymously. They can also be used to access cash at ATMs or through cash-back transactions at merchants.” Therefore, option B is a red flag that may indicate money laundering, as a non-bank customer who regularly loads large amounts of cash onto several prepaid cards may be trying to avoid identification, verification, or transaction reporting requirements.

CAMS Study Guide, page 1911