Criminal Investigation into ING Bank N.V.

The AML/CTF Act's purpose is to prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

The AML/CTF Act mandates institutions to conduct thorough client due diligence based on a risk assessment.

Institutions must report unusual transactions to the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the Netherlands.

Institutions need to provide regular training to employees on identifying unusual transactions and conducting proper client due diligence.

Institutions must maintain records of the risk assessment, available for regulators upon request.

Customer Due Diligence (CDD) is the process of verifying the identity and background of clients to prevent money laundering and terrorism financing.

The 'Know Your Customer' (KYC) principle is a core element of CDD, emphasizing the importance of thorough client verification.

The AML/CTF Act requires institutions to conduct enhanced client due diligence for higher-risk customers to combat money laundering and terrorism financing.

A principle-based approach where the focus is on achieving specific results rather than outlining detailed procedures.

The process of identifying and verifying the identity of a client, understanding their business and financial activities, and assessing the associated risks.

Enhanced measures required for clients deemed to pose a higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, such as politically exposed persons (PEPs).

The individual who ultimately owns or controls a legal entity, even if they are not directly named on the company's documents.

The process of evaluating the purpose and nature of a business relationship, including the intended activities and transactions.

An ongoing process of monitoring a business relationship and transactions to assess the client's risk profile and identify any suspicious activities.

An individual who holds a prominent public position, potentially vulnerable to bribery or corruption.

The practice of adjusting the level of client due diligence based on the assessed risk of money laundering or terrorist financing.

ING NL's violation of Dutch AML/CTF Act rules, specifically Articles 3, 5, 8, and 16, aimed at preventing money laundering and terrorism financing.

Dutch law that criminalizes money laundering and sets out penalties for those found guilty.

A financial transaction that is suspicious and may be related to money laundering or terrorism financing.

A Dutch law that defines and criminalizes various economic offenses, including violations of the AML/CTF Act.

A special unit that receives reports of suspicious financial transactions and investigates them.

The act of engaging in criminal activity on a regular basis, indicating a pattern of behavior.

The process of disguising the source of illegally obtained funds to make them appear legitimate.

Financial institutions like ING NL are responsible for preventing and detecting financial crimes, such as money laundering, due to their critical role in processing financial transactions.

A systemic bank is a large financial institution whose operations significantly impact the entire financial system.

ING NL, a large Dutch bank, was found to have repeatedly violated money laundering regulations, highlighting significant shortcomings in their compliance policies.

The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the Netherlands, FIOD, utilizes various methods, like media investigation, to identify potential money laundering cases. These findings helped expose shortcomings in ING NL's anti-money laundering efforts.

The Dutch Public Prosecution Service (NPPS) concluded that ING NL's systemic failure to comply with anti-money laundering regulations was a serious violation of the law.

ING NL's failure to enforce their own anti-money laundering policy led to multiple criminal offenses, putting the entire financial system at risk.

The NPPS labeled ING NL's violation of anti-money laundering laws as a serious breach of trust, emphasizing the need for financial institutions to uphold ethical standards.

The NPPS underscores the crucial importance of robust anti-money laundering regulations and policies for financial institutions, particularly systemic banks like ING NL.

ING NL failed to properly implement its Know Your Customer (KYC) policies, leading to missed signals of money laundering.

The investigation revealed numerous instances of ING NL clients engaging in criminal activities, including money laundering.

Due to ineffective KYC practices, ING NL likely missed a significant number of instances of money laundering.

ING NL's failure to comply with anti-money laundering regulations made it possible for criminals to use their accounts without detection.

The investigation revealed numerous signals and indications from various sources, suggesting that ING NL may have been involved in criminal offenses.

ING NL failed to prevent money laundering by its clients, contributing to a considerable amount of potential illegal financial activity.

The lack of proper KYC implementation rendered it impossible to determine the exact amount of money laundered through ING NL accounts.

The investigation focused specifically on money laundering, but other financial crimes could have also been missed due to ING NL's shortcomings.

Focusing on percentage deviations instead of absolute amounts can misjudge the significance of transactions. For example, a large deviation on a small account might be flagged as more suspicious than a smaller deviation on a high-value account, even if the absolute amounts are much higher in the second case.

Analyzing customer activity only at the account level, without considering all accounts held by the same customer, can miss suspicious patterns like 'smurfing' where multiple small transactions are used to mask larger money flows.

ING NL did not regularly evaluate the effectiveness of their transaction monitoring system, nor did they update it to reflect changes in money laundering practices or regulations.

ING NL categorized clients into groups based on their business relationships with the bank. Each group had specific anti-money laundering measures tailored to their activities. However, the bank lacked sufficient control over ensuring clients were accurately placed in the appropriate group.

The process of classifying clients into different groups is based on business criteria.

Each client segment should have its own set of measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. These measures must be appropriate to the type of client and the products they use. This is important for ensuring effective risk management.

It is crucial to make sure clients are classified into the correct client segment based on the proper grounds. Otherwise, the bank's anti-money laundering controls might be ineffective.