October 2004 – The Intl Bank of Miami, N.A. / OCC Consent Order

January 2005 – Eagle National Bank / OCC Cease and Desist Order

February 2005 – Banco de Chile, S.A. / OCC New York and Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Miami Office issue Cease and Desist Orders

June 2005 – Continental National Bank of Miami / OCC Cease and Desist Order

July 2005 – Gulf Bank Corp., FinCEN Civil Money Penalty ($700,000)

August 2005 – Arab Bank, N.Y. Branch / FinCEN and OCC Civil Money Penalty ($24 Million Penalty)

October 2005 – Banco de Chile / FiCEN Civial Oney Penalty ($3 Million)

October 2005 – Deutsche Bank Trust Company (Agreement with Federal Reserve and New York Banking Department

December 2005 – ABN AMRO Bank / FinCEN Civil Money Penalty ($80 Million)

December 2005 – Pacific National Bank / OCC Consent Order

December 2005 – Pine Bank / OCC Consent Order

April 2006 – BankAtlantic / FinCEN – OTS Civil Money Penalty ($10 million) along with an OTS Cease and Desist

May 2006 – Liberty Bank of New York / FinCEN, FDIC, NYSBD Civil Money Penalty($600,000)

May 2006 – Great Eastern Bank of Florida / FDIC Cease and Desist Order

A System Assessment should include:

• Analysis of the data integrity and transfer process from the core; 
• Analysis of the system’s methodology for establishing and applying expected activity/ profiles or filtering criteria;
• Analysis of the transaction codes used by the core to include recommendations for changes to current structure;
• Analysis of the filtering criteria to determine if they appear reasonable (including ad-hoc reports and alerts);
• Analysis of the suspicious activity reporting systems to determine if it includes an evaluation of the research and referral of unusual activity. 

A Systems Assessmetn should not be designed as nor is it intended to be a full formal audit of the Bank’s BSA/AML program.  The Bank and its management retain sole responsibility for the Bank’s actual implementation of a BSA/AML System, including any policies, procedures and systems.

An OFAC Risk Assessment should not be designed to be a full formal audit of the Bank’s OFAC Compliance program.  The OFAC Risk Assessment should not involve any transactional testing of any kind and should relied solely on the information obtained from the Bank.A fundamental element of a sound OFAC program is the Bank’s assessment of its specific product lines, customer base, and nature of transactions and identification of the high-risk areas for OFAC transactions.  In evaluating the level of risk, the following indicators should be considered.

• International Funds Transfers
• Nonresident alien accounts.
• Foreign customer accounts.
• Cross-border automated clearing house (ACH) transactions.
• Commercial letters of credit.
• Transactional electronic banking.
• Foreign correspondent bank accounts.
• Payable through accounts.
• International private banking.
• Overseas branches or subsidiaries.

Another consideration for the OFAC Risk Assessment is account and transaction parties.  Are new accounts are compared with the OFAC lists prior to being opened?  During the interview process with the Bank, it should be determined if all account beneficiaries, guarantors, principals, beneficial owners, shareholders (over 10% ownership) as well as all authorized signers and individuals named in the corporate documents (articles of incorporation) are checked against the OFAC list. 

While almost any type of account is potentially vulnerable to money laundering or terrorist financing, certain customers, products or services may pose specific risks. Regulators are working together to provide uniform guidance to address high risk activities. FFIEC examination guidelines identify certain activities as high risk, including:

* Private banking
* Payable through accounts
* International correspondent bank relationships
* Electronic banking
* Significant and International funds transfer activity
* Non-bank financial institution relationships
* Deposit broker activity
* Special use/concentration accounts (more…)