3 ms·

There's a fairly high burden on the financial institution, they have to show you're not complying with anti-laundering legislation, but that falls short of prov

There's a fairly high burden on the financial institution, they have to show you're not complying with anti-laundering legislation, but that falls short of proving actual money laundering. So there's a problem. I think the way it would work legally is that a person would automatically regain access to a bank account if they receive welfare, as said welfare would then be income with a known legal origin, but I am not sure about that.

repolfx 8y ago
Not quite. For one individuals don't have to comply with AML rules if they're just behaving as normal individuals, those rules affect companies. For another, banks don't have to show anything. It's risk management, they can close your account if they believe you're high risk, partly because if they didn't they'd get fined by the USA for money laundering. See: HSBC, whose fines were largely due to not closing accounts aggressively enough.