OTHER THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED – JUNE 27

27th June 2018

BVI: FINANCIAL SERVICES MULL RELOCATING TO CROWN DEPENDENCIES

St Lucia News Online reported on 26th June that, according to the Executive Director of BVI Finance, stakeholders in the BVI services sector are said to be considering Crown Dependent countries such as the Isle of Man, Jersey, and Guernsey to relocate their businesses, because the Overseas Territories have to comply with the UK requirement for a public register of beneficial ownership by December 2020.

https://www.stlucianewsonline.com/bvi-financial-services-workers-mull-relocating-to-crown-dependent-countries/

CENTRAL BANK OF CYPRUS INTENDS TO PUT “SHELL COMPANIES” UNDER SCRUTINY

Asters on 20th June reported that the Central Bank of Cyprus has notified credit institutions of its intention to introduce certain measures targeting the so-called “shell companies“.  Reportedly, such measures are expected to require Cypriot credit institutions to avoid engaging into or renewing business relations with entities that are non-publicly traded, are in the form of a limited liability company, or any other business entities and fulfil any of the criteria detailed in the article.  The Central Bank of Cyprus has reportedly required the Cypriot credit institutions to review their client base in order to identify “shell companies” and inform about the outcome of such review.

https://www.asterslaw.com/press_center/legal_alerts/the_central_bank_of_cyprus_intends_to_put_shell_companies_under_scrutiny/

SPAIN – A BRIEF GUIDE TO MANDATORY INSURANCE FOR YACHTS

Rogers & Co Abogados on 26th June published an article containing the 10-point guideline regarding mandatory insurance cover required under Spanish law.  The requirements apply to all motor-propelled floating craft designed for recreational and sporting navigation, including jet skis and will also apply to those floating vessels that, though they lack any motor propulsion, are over 6 metres in length.  They also apply to foreign yachts sailing in Spanish territorial and interior waters with a point of entry or departure from a Spanish port.

https://www.lexology.com/library/document.ashx?g=ff1760c2-bd67-46b9-8bcd-4c24e7348832

CREDIT SUISSE PAYS $47 MILLION FINE FOR ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION

On 26th June, MME Legal Tax Compliance published an article about Credit Suisse paying a $47 million out of court settlement to the US authorities for allegations of corruption in Hong Kong, after a subsidiary allegedly violated the FCPA with bribery between 2007 and 2013.  The DoJ accused the bank of hiring persons recommended by government and other state-owned entities, very often family members of officials, and in return, the bank benefited from investment banking business and regulatory approvals.

https://www.mme.ch/en/magazine/magazine-detail/url_magazine/credit_suisse_pays_usd_47_million_fine_for_allegations_of_corruption/

ISRAEL ASKS CYPRUS TO CONSIDER SHIPPING ROUTE FOR GAZA

EU Observer on 27th June reported that Israel has asked Cyprus if it would use one of its ports (or a part of it) as a transit point for goods bound for Gaza, which is blockaded by both Israel and Egypt.  Goods could be processed through the facility and sent on, cleared, through the blockade.

https://euobserver.com/tickers/142202

THE NUMBER OF NON-INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICTS DOUBLED IN 2 DECADES

Defence Web on 25th June reported that the number of non-international armed conflicts more than doubled from the beginning of the century, according to data from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).  Not only are there more conflicts, but there are more sides in a conflict and more armed groups have emerged in the last 6 years than in the previous 60, the ICRC said.  The “The Roots of Restraint in War”, a new study has been released by the ICRC.  According to the ICRC, only one-third of conflicts are between 2 parties.  By the end of the war in Libya (in October 2011), 236 separate armed groups were registered in the city of Misrata alone; and the Carter Center counted more than 1,000 armed groups fighting in Syria in 2014.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=52150:number-of-non-international-armed-conflicts-doubled-in-two-decades&catid=113:international-news&Itemid=248

NEW ZEALAND: AIR NZ ORDERED TO PAY A$15 MILLION FOR ROLE IN FIXING CARGO PRICES

Scoop on 27th June reported that Australia’s Federal Court has ordered Air New Zealand to pay A$15 million for its role in a global air cargo cartel through the middle of last decade.  It and PT Garuda of Indonesia were the 2 airlines continuing to protest their innocence in Australia in the long-running price-fixing claim which has spanned multiple jurisdictions in several countries and has been going well over a decade.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1806/S00668/air-nz-ordered-to-pay-a15m-for-role-in-fixing-cargo-prices.htm?src=ilaw

SEIZED CASH AND LUXURY GOODS LINKED TO MALAYSIA’S FORMER PM VALUED AT $273 MILLION

Time on 27th June reported that Malaysian police say the total value of cash, jewellery and hundreds of watches and handbags seized from properties linked to former Prime Minister Najib Razak in a money-laundering investigation amounted to $273 million – described as the largest seizure in Malaysian history.

http://time.com/5323221/malaysia-najib-razak-1mdb/?src=ilaw&xid=homepage

UK: ACTIONS AGAINST BANK ACCOUNT SCAMS

On 26th June, the House of Commons Library published a briefing paper saying that push payment scams are a growing form of financial fraud. The industry, financial regulators and the police are working together to try to reduce its impact.  The briefing outlines some current initiatives.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8350

MALAYSIA’S 1MDB AUDITS FROM 2010 TO 2012 DID NOT GIVE ‘TRUE AND FAIR’ ASSESSMENT, KPMG SAYS

Customs Today on 26th June reported that auditors KPMG have notified Malaysia’s scandal-hit state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) that its audits for 3 years do not provide a “true and fair” assessment of the company.

http://www.customstoday.com.pk/malaysias-1mdb-audits-from-2010-to-2012-did-not-give-true-and-fair-assessment-kpmg-says/

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CANADIAN AML LAWS

Dentons has produced a 3-part guide to changes being proposed to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Regulations (PCMLTFA), as announced by the Department of Finance on June 9th.  Part 1 covers Virtual currency and Canada’s AML framework; Part 2 deals with proposed inclusion of prepaid cards in Canada’s AML regime; and Part 3 contains an overview of other notable amendments to Canada’s AML regime (including CDD, PEP wealth and changes affecting life insurance).

https://www.dentons.com/en/insights/alerts/2018/june/26/virtual-currency-and-canadas-anti-money-laundering-framework

https://www.dentons.com/en/insights/alerts/2018/june/26/proposed-inclusion-of-prepaid-cards-in-canadas-anti-money-laundering-regime

https://www.dentons.com/en/insights/alerts/2018/june/26/overview-of-other-notable-amendments-to-canadas-anti-money-laundering-regime

JAIL FOR LAWYER WHO ‘DID NOT KNOW’ TAX FRAUD WAS ILLEGAL

Accountancy Daily on 27th June reported on the case of a barrister, Peter Moss, 61, who claimed he did not know non-payment of tax was against the law has been jailed for 18 months, following an HMRC investigation.  He was registered as a sole trader since 1985 and failed to submit no less than 26 VAT returns.

https://www.accountancydaily.co/jail-lawyer-who-did-not-know-tax-fraud-was-illegal

https://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/chester-criminal-barrister-jailed-138000-14837627

CONTROLS ON CASH ENTERING AND LEAVING THE EU: NEW DRAFT REGULATION PROGRESSES

On 27th June, the EU reported that the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) has endorsed an agreement between the EU Council and Parliament on a new EU Regulation to amend the regime for the control of cash entering and leaving the EU, replacing the Regulation that has been in use since 2007.  Complementing the Money Laundering Directives, the definition of cash has been extended to cover not only banknotes but also other instruments or highly liquid commodities, such as cheques, traveller’s cheques, prepaid cards and gold, and the Regulation also covers cash that is sent by post, freight or courier shipment.  The declaration will have to be made irrespective of whether travellers are carrying the cash in their person, their luggage or means of transport.  Member States’ authorities will have to exchange information with one another and the Commission where there are indications that the cash is related to criminal activity which could adversely affect the financial interests of the EU.  The Council and the European Parliament will now need to confirm the regulation through a vote, after which it will be published in the EU’s Official Journal.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2018/06/27/controls-on-cash-entering-and-leaving-the-eu-council-endorses-agreement/

FINANCIAL SERVICES LEGISLATION UNDER THE EU (WITHDRAWAL) ACT

On 27th June, HM Treasury issued a publication sets out the UK government’s approach to bringing EU financial services legislation into domestic law under the EU (Withdrawal) Act.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/financial-services-legislation-under-the-eu-withdrawal-act

CYPRUS: THOUSANDS LOST IN TAX OVER MINIBUS IMPORT IRREGULARITIES

The Cyprus Mail on 27th June reported that 65 Mercedes Vitos mini buses were imported into Cyprus and improperly registered as public use minibuses, depriving the state of thousands of euros in tax revenues, an auditor-general report on the road transport department has said.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2018/06/27/thousands-lost-in-tax-over-minibus-import-irregularities/

CROSS-BORDER FRAUD FEARS FOR SCOTTISH BOTTLE AND CAN DEPOSIT RETURN SCHEME
The i News on 27th June reported fears expressed in a consultation paper that a deposit return scheme for drinks containers in Scotland could face “significant financial losses” due to fraudsters illegally cashing in, with bottles and cans brought in from other parts of the UK or abroad by people looking to make a quick profit
https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/cross-border-fraud-fears-for-scottish-deposit-return-scheme/

REPOSSESSED HOMES FRAUDSTERS JAILED

The Bolton News reported on 27th June about 3 men who have been jailed for a committing large-scale fraud which targeted 50 victims 2011-15.   They persuaded their victims to hand over cash by convincing them they were in a position to sell them repossessed properties at knockdown prices.  One often posed as a solicitor with the CPS.

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/crime/16318409.Repossessed_homes_fraudsters_jailed/

US SUPREME COURT: STATES MAY REQUIRE VENDORS WITHOUT PHYSICAL PRESENCE TO COLLECT SALES TAX

On 27th June, Ballard Spahr published an article about the recent decision of the US Supreme Court which opens the way for states to impose sales tax on supplies to their residents by vendors located outside the state.  However, the article says the Court did not delineate a new standard for sales tax nexus, potentially opening up uncertainties in an area that has long had a black-and-white rule.

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/supreme-court-overrules-quill-states-61809/

3 MEN ARRESTED AS “FORGERY FACTORY” RAIDED IN LONDON

A news release from the NCA on 27th June reported that 3 men have been arrested as part of a major investigation into the manufacture and supply of counterfeit ID documents.  The men, a Ukrainian national aged 37, and 2 Latvian nationals aged 33 and 36, were detained on suspicion of Identity Documents Act offences.

http://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/news/1399-three-arrested-as-suspected-forgery-factory-raided-in-north-east-london

USERS OF ILLEGAL WEB TOOLS TARGETED BY UK LAW ENFORCEMENT

A news release from the NCA on 27th June said that users of widely available cyber tools that could be hired to carry out cyber-attacks against victims have been targeted as part of an operation co-ordinated by the NCA and the West Midlands Regional Organised Crime Unit (WMROCU).  The joint law enforcement activity targeted prolific users of ‘off the shelf’ services who had each amassed over 1,000 offences under the Computer Misuse Act.  It explains that the DDos-for-hire services – also known as ‘booters’ or ‘stressers’- could be rented for a small sum in order to launch so-called distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks, in which high volumes of internet traffic are launched at target internet connections to disable websites or individuals’ internet use.  Individuals with little or no technical knowledge used the service to launch crippling DDOS attacks across the world.  This type of software, it says, is often hidden behind a veil of authenticity, claiming to have legitimate use to test the resilience of servers, but in reality, is used by cyber criminals to ‘stress’ systems that causes the disruption to services.  The news release says that investigators believe there were thousands of worldwide victims ranging in scale from large businesses to the general public.

http://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/news/1398-users-of-illegal-web-tools-targeted-in-joint-law-enforcement-activity

OPCW GETS POWER TO ASSIGN BLAME IN CHEMICAL ATTACKS, DESPITE RUSSIA’S OBJECTIONS

Rferl on 27th June reported that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), meeting in The Hague has voted in favour of the proposal to grant the new powers to assign blame for chemical attacks, surpassing the two-thirds requirement needed for passage.  The UK-led motion was supported by the US and EU, but opposed by Russia, Iran, Syria, and their allies.

https://www.rferl.org/a/opcw-gets-power-to-assign-blame-in-chemical-attacks-despite-russia-s-objections/29324058.html

 

REPORT: BRITISH COLUMBIA CASINOS ‘LAUNDROMATS’ FOR PROCEEDS OF ORGANIZED CRIME

The Globe & Mail in Canada on 27th June reported on the long-awaited report from the Attorney General on money laundering through the province.  It describes Vancouver as a hub for Chinese organised crime, but also says that Mexican drug cartel money and funds from Middle East organised crime also flowed through.  The report makes 48 recommendations, including a designated police force and specialized prosecutors to help rein in the problem, and further investigation into allegations of organised crime penetration of real estate, as well as into vulnerability of the luxury car sector and horse racing.  The report is said to have concluded the problem amounted to a collective system failure where “nobody said no”; and that the government has benefited from the cash transactions, as revenue from casino gambling is the largest revenues stream for the province aside from taxes.  There was also a “dysfunctional” regulatory system with the BC Lottery Corporation. and the gaming policy and enforcement branch issuing contradictory directives to casino operators.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-bc-casinos-laundromats-for-proceeds-of-organized-crime-report/

see the news release from the Attorney general’s offices and the full report at –

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018AG0052-001297

UK: EXPORT CONTROLS ON ARGENTINA AMENDED

On 27th June, the Export Control Joint Unit published Notice to Exporters 2018/17, which updates the export control rules for exports of military and dual-use goods and technology to Argentina.  The UK has had national export controls in place in relation to Argentina, the current version being introduced in 2012.  It has been the UK government’s policy not to grant an export licence for any military or dual use goods and technology being supplied to military end users in Argentina, except in exceptional circumstances.  Following an improvement in relations with Argentina, the new general position now will be to continue to refuse licences for export and trade of goods judged to enhance Argentine military capability.  However, the UK may grant licences where it judges that they are not detrimental to the UK’s defence and security interests.  Licence applications for equipment and defence technology which meet the above criteria will still be assessed on a case by case basis against the consolidated EU and national arms export licensing criteria.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/notice-to-exporters-201817-argentina-export-control-policy-updated/notice-to-exporters-201817-argentina-export-control-policy-updated

PODCAST: FIFA’S RED CARD – HOW THE US BLEW THE WHISTLE ON FIFA MISCONDUCT

In the latest TRACE podcast, Ken Bensinger discuss his fascinating book, Red Card, and the decades of misconduct by FIFA eventually uncovered by the FBI.  “Violation bingo” is played as he describes the bribery, self-dealing, conflicts of interest and money-laundering that were business as usual at FIFA.  One thing he is glad to be able to talk about, he says, are MLAT (for mutual assistance).

https://www.traceinternational.org/bribe_swindle_or_steal

OFAC REVOKES SOME JCPOA-RELATED LICENCES, AMENDS IRAN SANCTIONS REGULATIONS AND ISSUES UPDATED FAQ

On 27th June, OFAC issued a news release saying that –

  • It had revoked Iran-related General Licenses H and I, which were issued in connection with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA);
  • Amended the relevant regulations to narrow the scope of the general licences authorising the importation into the US of, and dealings in, Iranian-origin carpets and foodstuffs, as well as related letters of credit and brokering services, re the wind down of such activities by August 6th; and
  • Updated FAQ 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 of its FAQ Regarding the Re-Imposition of Sanctions.

Transactions previously covered by General License I (re activities related to the export or re-export to Iran of commercial passenger aircraft and related parts and services) are to be run down by 6th August, and those previously covered by General License H (authorising certain transactions relating to foreign entities owned or controlled by a United States person) by 4th November.

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20180627.aspx

PROCEEDS OF CRIME TIMELINE

The following table provides an incomplete timeline of the development of the main Acts in the UK concerned with the confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds of crime, to provide an overview and set the current regime in context.  The references are to provisions concerned with England and Wales, and generally speaking the same or corresponding provisions provide for a matching regime in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

UK PROCEEDS OF CRIME TIMELINE

1980 The Operation Julie House of Lords’ decision in a case involving an LSD “factory” where around £750,000 had been traced and thought to be the proceeds of drug trafficking.  A confiscation order had been made under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (MDA).  The provisions in the MDA allowed anything related to an offence to be forfeited.  The order was quashed because the defendants were convicted of conspiracies and not of an offence under the MDA.  The Lords also held that the forfeiture provisions of MDA only applied to physical items used to commit the offence and that choses in action and other intangibles were not caught by the Act
1985 The Hodgson Committee recommends that courts should be empowered to confiscate the proceeds of crimes for which defendants had been convicted.  This led to the DTOA
1987 Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 (DTOA) empowered the High Court to seize the proceeds of drug trafficking
1988 Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA) introduced to extend the powers found in the DTOA to other non-drug related indictable offences[1] plus a small number of summary offences.  The CJA regime was seen to be somewhat less draconian than that under the DTOA (and DTA), although these differences were largely removed in 1995
1991 The Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990 (CJICA) allowed for interest to be added to unpaid confiscation orders, and for a prosecutor to apply for an order to be increased where further property was identified
  CJICA also introduced a power for customs officers to apply to a magistrates’ court for forfeiture of cash linked to drug trafficking and being imported or exported
  1st EU Money Laundering Directive comes into force (implemented from 1994 in the UK).  It applied to financial institutions and required member states to make money laundering a criminal offence.  It was to be incorporated into UK law via the Criminal Justice Act 1991, the Drug Trafficking Act 1994 (DTA) and the Money Laundering Regulations 1993 in 1994
1994 The DTA consolidated and replaced the earlier legislation: the DTOA, as amended, and CJICA.  It also implemented many recommendations of the Home Office Working Group on Confiscation
  EU 1st Money Laundering Directive comes into effect.  The main impact of the Directive was to require financial institutions to verify the identity of all customers opening business relations with them (and to keep records of their identification).  Staff had to be trained in anti-money laundering practices and suspicions of money laundering had to be reported through a designated officer (usually referred to as the money laundering reporting officer or MLRO)
1995 The Criminal Justice Act 1993 and Proceeds of Crime Act 1995 removed many of the differences between the regimes under the DTA and CJA
2000 Cabinet Offices Performance and Innovation Unit report: “Recovering the Proceeds of Crime” concluded that existing legislation not fit for purpose and confiscation orders only made in 20% of drug trafficking cases, and 50% of those not enforced
  Operation Moneypenny took place from September 1999 to February 2000 between the customs authorities of the then 15 Member States of the EU.  It monitored cash movements across the EU’s internal and external borders in excess of €10 000.  It informed a draft EU Regulation and the eventual Cash Control Regulation
  The Terrorism Act 2000, which was intended to reform and extend previous counter-terrorist legislation and put it largely on a permanent basis[2].  Part 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000 criminalises terrorist financing and makes it an offence to: use, possess, or raise funds for the purpose of terrorism, or enter into arrangements to provide funds or property for that purpose
  The Terrorism Act 2000 includes provisions that allow the court, where a person is convicted of a section 15, 16, 17 or 18 offence, to make a forfeiture order; and the court may also order the forfeiture of any money or other property, which wholly or partly, directly or indirectly, is received by any person as a payment (or other reward) in connection with the commission of offences under sections 15 to 18.
  The Terrorism Act 2000 also included cash seizure powers, subsequently replaced by the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, including the power for police, customs officers and immigration officers to seize cash at borders and to seek forfeiture of the cash in civil proceedings (being modelled on provisions in the DTA but also applying to cash being taken from Northern Ireland to Great Britain and vice versa)
2001 The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 replaces the seizure of cash powers in the Terrorism Act 2000 – an authorised officer may seize and detain any cash to which this section applies if he has reasonable grounds for suspecting that it is terrorist cash.  The seizure may be undertaken even if it is not reasonably practicable to seize only that part of the cash believed to be terrorist cash.  The Act also broadened investigative powers and introduced account monitoring orders.  It also provided the power to freeze the assets of overseas residents and includes a mechanism for forfeiture of cash used for the purposes of terrorism, in civil proceedings before a magistrates’ court.

The Terrorism Act 2000 continues to define terrorist property, deal with money laundering, and provide additional powers of forfeiture

  2nd EU Money Laundering Directive comes into force (being implemented in the UK from 2004).  It extended AML obligations to a defined set of activities provided by a number of service professionals, such as independent legal professionals, accountants, auditors, tax advisers and real estate agents. It was incorporated into UK law via POCA and the Money Laundering Regulations 2003
2002 EU Commission “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the prevention of money laundering by means of customs cooperation” provided for a cash detention regime where cash was entering or leaving the EU.  This would be to complement the provisions of the money laundering Directives
2003 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) replaced DTA and CJA; with enhanced powers and a new power to seize cash[3] (n.b. cash might have been liable to seizure as evidence under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)[4]).

POCA extended the range of relevant financial crime and other offences for which confiscation orders could apply.  It also simplified the law, providing for one regime where all hearings conducted in the Crown Court and appeals dealt with in the Court of Appeal and House of Lords (now the Supreme Court).

POCA also introduced a new power of civil asset forfeiture (civil recovery), allowing for civil proceedings to recover the proceeds of crime without a need for a criminal conviction

  The EU 2nd Money Laundering Directive comes into effect.  The main change it brought about was the extension of AML legislation to a wider circle of financial and credit institutions, money services businesses, firms providing legal or accountancy services, casinos, estate agents, and some dealers in high-value goods.
2005 The EU Cash Control Regulation entered into force on 15th December, to take effect from 15th June 2007
  3rd EU Money Laundering Directive comes into force.  It extended due diligence measures to beneficial owners, recognising that such measures can be applied on a risk-based approach, and required enhanced due diligence to be undertaken in certain circumstances.  It was incorporated into UK law by the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 and the Terrorism Act 2000 (Amendment) Regulations 2007 (TACT regulations 2007) and Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Amendment) Regulations 2007 (POCA Regulations 2007) in 2007
  POCA amended by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, amendments include providing for magistrates’ courts to be able to make confiscation orders, for up to £10,000 (anything over that must continue to go to the High Court)
2007 The EU Cash Control Regulation came into effect, requiring declaration of cash of €10,000 or more entering or leaving the EU when being carried or taken in person.  It applied to all EU Member States.  The requirement also applied to cash moving between the UK and the Crown Dependencies, which were outside the EU for the purposes of money laundering[5]
  3rd Money Laundering Directive takes effect in the UK
2012 UK government announces plans to introduce Deferred Prosecution Agreements to help prosecutors combat corporate offending including fraud, money laundering and bribery
2014 Deferred Prosecution Agreements introduced by means of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, being available to SFO and CPS.
2015 EU agrees the 4th Money Laundering Directive, to take effect in 2017
  Further amendment of POCA, this time by means of the Serious Crime Act 2015 to give effect to recommendations of the Serious and Organised Crime Strategy and 2 recommendations on asset recovery made by the Joint Committee on the Draft Modern Slavery Bill in its April 2014 report – that the test for obtaining a restraint order be amended to make it less stringent and stronger sanctions for non-payment of confiscation orders.  Other amendments include those concerned with determination of third party interests, where a defendant absconds before the end of a trial, and providing for compliance orders to secure compliance with a confiscation order
2016 EU Commission proposed new rules for cash detention when entering or leaving the EU, extending controls to unaccompanied cash such as cash sent in postal parcels or freight consignments, precious commodities such as gold, and to allow for action on amounts lower than the declaration threshold of €10,000, provided that there are indications of criminal activity
2017 Criminal Finances Act 2017 (CFA) introduces unexplained wealth orders, permitted applications for the orders, subject to a £50,000 threshold, where are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the known sources of the respondent’s lawfully obtained income would have been insufficient for the purposes of enabling the respondent (who can be a PEP[6]) to obtain the property.

The CFA also contains provisions providing for the seize and forfeit precious metals, precious stones, watches, artistic works, face-value gift vouchers and postage stamps where they have grounds to suspect they are the proceeds of crime; and the government said it planned to amend the existing cash seizure provisions to allow the seizure and forfeiture of gambling chips and ticket-in-ticket-out vouchers.

The CFA also contains provisions dealing with the power to freeze and forfeit the proceeds of crime held in bank accounts

  The 4th EU Money Laundering Directive comes into effect.  Its changes include requiring a register of beneficial owners, a risk-based approach to customer due diligence, enhanced measures for “local” PEP.  The Directive was implemented in the UK via the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017.
2018 EU 5th Money Laundering Directive comes into force, with Member States having until 2019 to implement it.

[1]  Being indictable, rather than summary, offences indicates that the offences involved were the more serious ones.  However, the CJA did extend to a small number of summary offences where the benefit accruing to the defendant were likely to be unusually high.

[2]  But it was amended and supplemented many times, starting with the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.

[3]  Police, customs officers or accredited financial investigators can seize cash in excess of £1,000 if they have reasonable grounds to suspect it is the proceeds of crime or that it would be used in a criminal conduct.  The seizure is, in fact, detention for a limited time (initially 48 hours, with extensions possible), though, on application, a magistrates’ court can order forfeiture if proven, on the balance of probabilities, that the cash is the proceeds of crime or that it would be used in a criminal conduct.  POCA was amended by the Policing and Crime Act 2009 to allow for forfeiture without a court order in uncontested cases.  Note that the cash seizure, detention and forfeiture process is a civil procedure and does not require the suspect to be charged or convicted of a crime, although it can run in parallel with a criminal investigation.

[4]  For example, if the cash has been contaminated with drugs; or if the suspect is arrested for money laundering or in relation to other offences where the money can be shown to be evidence of those offences, e.g. theft or deception.

[5]  The Crown Dependencies introduced corresponding legislation of their own.

[6]  Politically exposed person.