ACAMS CAMS-FCI Dumps

The next best course of action for the investigator is to file a SAR/STR on the account activity in relation to a potential funnel account. This is because a funnel account is a type of money laundering scheme that involves depositing funds from multiple sources into a single account, and then transferring them to another account, often in a different jurisdiction. A funnel account can be used to conceal the origin, ownership, and destination of illicit funds, and to evade currency transaction reporting requirements. The investigator should report the suspicious activity to the relevant authorities and document the findings and actions taken. The other options are incorrect because:

A. Completing the monthly review and noting the activity for next month’s review is not sufficient, as it delays the reporting of a possible money laundering scheme and exposes the financial institution to regulatory and reputational risks.

C. Recommending the account for exit due to frequent global transactions is not appropriate, as it does not address the underlying issue of potential money laundering and may alert the customer of the investigation.

D. No further action is required as the customer is already rated at high-risk and the monthly spending is within expectations is not acceptable, as it ignores the red flags of a funnel account and fails to comply with the anti-money laundering obligations of the financial institution.

References:

Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification | ACAMS, Section 2: Investigating Financial Crimes, page 9

Leading Complex Investigations Certificate | ACAMS, Module 2: Identifying Red Flags, page 5

The investigator should proceed in this situation by conducting the investigation as usual, since the activity in question is not directly connected to the PEP (A) and sending a referral to Sanctions/List Screening, or similar department/responsible individual, to ensure that the customer due diligence information is up to date (D). These actions are appropriate and prudent, as they allow the investigator to continue their analysis of the suspicious activity without being biased by the potential PEP status of the customer’s relative, and they ensure that the FI has accurate and current information about its customers and their associates. According to the ACAMS Advanced Financial Crimes Investigations Certification Study Guide1, “the FI should conduct enhanced due diligence on all parties involved in the investigation, including checking various sources of information, such as watch lists, sanctions lists, negative news, and official registries” (p. 24). The FI should also “update the customer profile with any new information obtained during the investigation” (p. 25).

The other options are not correct. The investigator should not refer the newly identified customer’s account for closure due to the high risk associated with the potential PEP (B), as this could be premature or disproportionate, as well as potentially discriminatory or illegal. The investigator should not file a SAR/STR due to the potential involvement of a PEP (E), as this could also be premature or unnecessary, as well as potentially misleading or inaccurate. The investigator should not use this case as an example to train employees to recognize potential PEPs during their investigation process ©, as this could violate confidentiality or data protection laws, as well as compromise the investigation or alert the customer or their relative of the suspicion.

References: 1: ACAMS Advanced Financial Crimes Investigations Certification Study Guide, available at ACAMS

The main premise for filing a SAR/STR is that the entity is not implementing adequate internal controls according to what is expected, and mishandling of funds could be occurring. This raises suspicion that the entity may be involved in corruption, fraud, or diversion of funds for illicit purposes. Trust service providers are obliged by law to follow government internal controls, as they are subject to AML/CFT regulations and supervision. Cash disbursements are allowed for social welfare programs, but they should be properly documented and verified. Social welfare programs are not necessarily difficult to document, as there are ways to identify and monitor the beneficiaries, such as biometric data or unique identifiers.