FinCEN report to Congress on reporting of cross border wire transfers

[Sniper]

US Dept of the Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network - Press Release

FinCEN Report to Congress states that the reporting of cross-border wire transfer data is technically feasible for the government but requires further collaboration

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network today announced that the Department of the Treasury has delivered a Congressionally mandated report to Capitol Hill stating that the reporting of cross-border wire transfer data by financial institutions is technically feasible for the government and may be valuable to the government’s efforts to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. The report outlines an inclusive and incremental approach to resolving remaining technical and policy issues that relate to whether and how to implement a regulatory requirement for the reporting of cross-border wire transfer data.

“FinCEN is firmly committed to working with the financial services industry and our partners in the regulatory and law enforcement communities to consider the design and implementation of a suitable and efficient potential reporting regime,” said William F. Baity, FinCEN’s Acting Director. “I believe this inclusive, step-by-step approach will allow us to determine the right balance between providing real anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing benefits without imposing a burden and will go a long way in helping our efforts to protect our economic and national security.”

The FinCEN report is the result of an extensive study of the technical feasibility to the government of imposing a requirement that U.S. financial institutions report to FinCEN records that financial institutions currently maintain concerning international wire transfers. FinCEN also began a process of assessing the potential value in collecting such information and evaluated opportunities for combining the data with other Bank Secrecy Act data. In the report, which is required by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, FinCEN proposes an incremental process which includes spending the next year studying and resolving the remaining issues. Specifically, FinCEN will conduct a cost-benefit analysis with the participation of both the financial services industry and law enforcement, to determine and quantify both the benefits to the public of such a system and the costs to all parties affected by any such potential regulatory requirement. FinCEN also will work to ensure that all technical capacity and privacy concerns are addressed. This research will provide the foundation on which policy makers will make a final decision whether to implement such a requirement. If policy makers choose to proceed, that decision would be followed by an administrative rulemaking allowing for public comment.

Section 6302 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 directs the Secretary of the Treasury to study the feasibility of “requiring such financial institutions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to report to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network certain cross-border electronic transmittals of funds, if the Secretary determines that reporting of such transmittals is reasonably necessary to conduct the efforts of the Secretary against money laundering and terrorist financing.”

Link to Press Release

[Sniper]

The first thing I want to point out, is they were asked to do this in 2004... and this release is dated 2006 (which appears to be wrong) on their site its listed as 2007...

[Sniper]

Complete Report - Dated Oct 2006

[Falang]

Can somebody explain what this means to me as an online poker player based in the United States?

[thetruest]

[ QUOTE ]
Can somebody explain what this means to me as an online poker player based in the United States?

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically (i think), they are using terrorism as an excuse, as usual, to protect (control) you from another one of those absolute evils, in this case online poker/gambling. That's why Sniper points out that this was supposed to be done since 2004, out of oh-so-utmost concern for our nations "security", and "financing terrorists"... yet this coincidentally only comes back now off the backburner 2-3 years later when the UIGEA wants to enforce new laws on internet transactions. I guess they finally woke up to the reality that they should really be concerned about how Party Poker was funding Bin Laden, the way weed used to do.

Put another way, someone may have found a way to use this "act" to make money off preventing you from playing at Full Tilt.

There are so many things to analyze in this it's mind boggling. Really, who is behind all this? How could online poker/sports betting have lit this much of a fire up under someones ass? Just trying to think about what all the fuss is about makes you lose hope in the human race. And of course theres someone out there ready AND prepared to come out of the woodwork to be there and whore the situation out. What a circus, it's so pathetic it's funny (i was laughing earlier at this "press release").

[Sniper]

I haven't had a chance to fully digest the full report and the other stuff that was on that site that led to this report...

The primary reason I highlighted the timing, was because there has been alot of emphasis on the 270 days... this is an example of how long things actually can take... and based on a quick review the report basically says they need more time... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I'm sure I will have more to say, as will others, after reviewing this more...

[curious123]

<CnP'd from the NT alt. thread...>

Thx for the link (referring to this post). Digging around the ICBA site I came across this...

[ QUOTE ]
The president also signed legislation outlawing Internet gambling, which prohibits financial institutions and credit card companies from processing Internet gambling payment transactions. ICBA convinced lawmakers to limit the burden on banks by directing the Federal Reserve and Treasury to exempt from the regulations transactions, such as checks and ACH payments, that cannot feasibly be tracked and blocked.

[/ QUOTE ]

In light of recent (well recently discovered, anyway) info, it seems to me the initial not-so-encouraging viewpoints of insiders (including our own Performify's) on the ease of implementing ACH coding were off. In fact, as I understand the FinCEN document I linked in another thread, they talk about not being able to have this in action for another 2 1/2 years or so.

It would be great if Performify, or any others in the banking industry would step in here and clarify/elaborate.

[Lizard King]

So this report concludes that all non US based online poker is doomed but not in the near future?

[Barrin6]

Curious,

That's some really good news. That basically mean e-checks are in the clear then for internet gambling.

Also something that is positive
http://www.icba.org/files/ICBASites/PDFs/IGsummary.pdf

[ekdikeo]

So, Barrin, it appears to be of the general opinion of the banks of the country, then, that the Feds are now considering online gaming as more of a threat to the country than terrorism?

I'd love to see the President make an announcement to that effect.