finance
monthly
Personal Finance. Money. Investing.
Contribute
Newsletter
Corporate

Money laundering is a pan-European problem, with 90% of the continent’s biggest banks having been sanctioned for money laundering offences, new research by anti-money laundering (AML) experts Fortytwo Data shows.

The firm found that at least 18 of the 20 biggest banks in Europe - including five UK institutions - have been fined for offences relating to money laundering within the last decade, many of them within the last few years - an indication of how widespread money laundering has become.

Recent crises at the likes of ING, Danske Bank and Deutsche Bank only reinforce this impression, demonstrating how no bank is immune to money laundering sanctions, no matter how large.

All 10 of the biggest banks in Europe are known to have fallen foul of the AML authorities - HSBC, Barclays and Lloyds from the UK, French quartet BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole Group, Société Générale and Groupe BPCE, Germany’s Deutsche Bank, Santander of Spain and Dutch bank ING.

Others to have been fined in recent years are the British banks RBS and Standard Chartered, Italy’s Intesa Sanpaolo SpA, UBS Group and Credit Suisse of Switzerland, Spain’s Banco Bilbao, Dutch institution Rabobank, and Nordea Bank of Sweden.

All five major UK banks - HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds, RBS and Standard Chartered - have been fined for money laundering offences. Earlier this year, Donald Toon, director of prosperity at the National Crime Agency, admitted in a Treasury Meeting that money laundering in the UK is “a very big problem” and estimated that the amount of money laundered here each year has now risen to a staggering £150 billion.

Banks and financial services companies have faced an uphill struggle to move onto more advanced AML platforms as they often attract a price tag running into tens of millions of pounds, potentially hundreds of millions once the cost of integration, operation and maintenance have been factored in.

More advanced augmentation platforms have moved the conversation on in the last few years, creating opportunities for companies to improve the efficiency of their AML processes at vastly reduced cost, while still using data stored in legacy systems.

Julian Dixon, CEO of Fortytwo Data, comments: “It is clear Europe’s largest banks are collectively struggling having problems when it comes to anti-money laundering standards. The increasing sophistication of the money launderers makes this an ever more difficult task.

“Money should not be laundered on their watch. However, standards must be maintained. The fact that almost all of Europe’s 20 biggest banks are known to have failed to comply with AML regulations is a troubling finding.

“These days, there are effective solutions to be found. Technology has reached a level where it can vastly improve the efficiency of suspicious activity detection and all major banks have a responsibility to embrace 21st Century solutions to this problem, rather than continuing with outdated legacy systems.

“The UK has an opportunity now to lead the way and set a higher benchmark for others. That £150 billion is known to be laundered here every year is a problem that needs to be addressed and if we can clean up our act, others will be compelled to follow our example.”

(Source: Fortytwo Data)

There’s nothing so gratifying about the way democracies are run as when national politics influences public policy because of an outburst of public anger. Here Julian Dixon, CEO of Fortytwo Data, expresses his thoughts on the challenges of confronting issues of clarity in the reporting of events such as the Paradise Papers leak.

So it is a little unnerving to find such a muted response to the Paradise Papers data dump.

When the scandal’s predecessor - the story of the Panama Papers - broke with disgusted headlines around the globe, people actually took to the streets.

There has been no such outpouring of rage this time around. And that’s because people just don’t get it. But, it’s got less to do with the current revelations and more to do with what happened after Panama.

People take their cue from other public mishaps. They remember similar headlines during the MPs’ expenses scandal. And then they remember the (ex) MPs going to jail.

It was a public hanging of Westminster’s dirty washing, the likes of which we had never seen. Then, in the wake of the Panama Papers, the public also expected justice and change.

They didn’t get it, although the similarities are obvious. The amount of information disclosed in the cases of the Panama and Paradise Papers was similarly grand. It touched on many public figures. And in the reporting, the significance of the leaks was billed as equally earth-shattering.

So where are the prosecutions?

Yes, some politicians lost their jobs within days of the Panama Papers story breaking but that was politics. They weren’t departures that resulted from the considered response of prosecutors.

“The difference between illegal tax evasion and legal tax avoidance is as clear as mud”

Having been promised blood and justice for all, it all appeared to fizzle out.

This is how tax avoidance is a story without an ending. People are destined to relive the public-spirited angst that makes each data dump newsworthy, without the satisfaction of seeing real change. And there is one reason for this - bad laws.

To the average person on the street, the difference between illegal tax evasion and legal tax avoidance is as clear as mud. The public feel unable to ask for change because they cannot clearly see what is broken. And this confusion bleeds into the authorities’ response.

Google media reports of ‘Britons being charged with criminal offences in light of the Panama Papers’ and you find nothing.

Misleadingly, many of the reports carrying headlines cite appalling tax avoidance.

Even relatively sophisticated journalists don’t know where ‘avoidance’ ends and ‘evasion’ begins.

If people are to have faith in the system, then they need to see the authorities acting on tip offs and bringing prosecutions that live up to the hype.

My suspicion is that much mean-spirited behaviour is not criminal - but it should be. However, as the law stands now, the difference needs to be explained clearly to those not wealthy enough to need offshore accounts.

It is no small irony that just like fast cars and expensive watches, if you need to ask how much tax avoidance costs, you can’t afford it. It shouldn’t be this way.

While this confusion reigns, the country is doomed to a vicious cycle that results only in growing public disquiet. People know they should be angry about something, they just can’t quite put their finger on it.

Hysterical reporting of offshore banking becomes a distraction. Politicians relax when it turns out what people are doing is legal. Instead, they should be asking the question ‘shouldn’t it be illegal?’

Accusing people of wrongdoing just because they bank offshore is unhelpful. There are many legitimate reasons why people do it and it’s not all about avoiding tax.

But there are just too many ways offshore tax rules can be legally exploited by people who just want to avoid paying their fair share.

You must be wondering by now why a guy like me who helps banks and others hunt down money launderers is that bothered about the tax affairs of a financial elite.

In our business, you can have the smartest computer in the world capable of identifying money laundering in vastly complex webs of transactions. But if you have millions of dollars being moved by thousands of transactions into dozens of offshore locations, that hide behind complex legal frameworks, it’s worthless.

As these transactions happen offshore - and, we as a species, are naturally hostile to the opaque nature of overseas financial centres and tax havens - it would be better if they were reduced and made more transparent.

If most forms of tax avoidance (not evasion) are wrong - as everyone seems to agree they are - I see the criminalisation of much tax avoidance as our best hope of being able to properly enforce the law in sheltered jurisdictions.

Clarity and a proper public, political debate that doesn’t just act as a smokescreen seems to be all that stands in our way.

About Finance Monthly

Universal Media logo
Finance Monthly is a comprehensive website tailored for individuals seeking insights into the world of consumer finance and money management. It offers news, commentary, and in-depth analysis on topics crucial to personal financial management and decision-making. Whether you're interested in budgeting, investing, or understanding market trends, Finance Monthly provides valuable information to help you navigate the financial aspects of everyday life.
© 2024 Finance Monthly - All Rights Reserved.
News Illustration

Get our free monthly FM email

Subscribe to Finance Monthly and Get the Latest Finance News, Opinion and Insight Direct to you every month.
chevron-right-circle linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram