Tackling Money Laundering - Suspicious Activity Reports: Prescribed Form and Manner
Comments from ACCA
October 2007
ACCA is pleased to comment on the consultation on the above. This matter is important to ACCA since all our members who practise as accountants are subject to the various requirements of the Proceeds of Crime Act and the Money Laundering Regulations, and in particular they are subject to the requirements to report suspicions to SOCA.
Since the extension of the AML/CTF reporting requirements to accountants and others in 2003, one of the main concerns of the expanded reporting sector has been over the effectiveness of these arrangements in the context of the overall drive to identify and prosecute those responsible for criminal acts. Accountants are obliged to comply with their responsibilities as regards AML/CTF matters both by the law and their professional rules, and they take these responsibilities seriously: accountants now represent the second largest reporting sector, after the banks. But many practising accountants remain to be convinced that the substantial financial investment they have hade to make to comply with POCA, and the professional difficulties they face when making the decision to report on clients, are resulting in any substantial difference in the fight against serious crime. If the changes now being proposed help SOCA to increase the speed and effectiveness with which it deals with consent requests and acts upon SARs, then we believe that those outcomes would justify them being made. While the proposals might lead to some increase in costs for those firms for whom the new restrictions would require changes in working practices, we do not envisage that they will be substantial and, as already stated, the whole reporting sector stands to benefit from the achievement of greater efficiencies within SOCA.
Our comments on the specific consultation questions are as follows:
Do you agree with the proposals to prescribe the manner in which SARs must be made?
The proposals for the content of SARs seems reasonable. But we think that SOCA must still issue written guidance on this matter and offer a telephone advisory service for reporters to minimise compliance difficulties and costs.
Is it reasonable to expect hard copy submissions to be typed?
Yes.
Is the cost of implementing a prescribed form and manner of reporting proportionate to your firm/sector?
Yes: for most firms, the major part of their costs lies in the compliance with their obligations, rather than in the act of reporting.
Do the proposals provide sufficient options for your firm/sector to make SARs?
Yes.
Does this document sufficiently reflect the benefits to your firm/sector?
We outlined above the widely-held concerns among accountants (possibly shared by other reporting groups) over the efficiency and effectiveness of the SARs regime. Accountants will welcome any material improvements in efficiency and effectiveness that may flow from these changes.
Do you think that the additional proposals of raising awareness of what constitutes a ‘required' disclosure is necessary/critical to the effective implementation of a prescribed form and manner.
Yes.