3 ms·

I don’t really understand this. We already run KYC / AML. Is that not good enough for some reason?

by bix6 6mo ago

pjc50 6mo ago
Banks are to be ICE now.
- JuniperMesos 6mo ago
  Basically this. Banks are already deputized into being de facto law enforcement by some of the KYC/AML checks they are mandated to do, and anti-immigrationists want this remit to include checking if someone is in the US illegally trying to use a bank.
gib444 6mo ago
That's covered in the article
- bix6 6mo ago
  Is it really though? > But that doesn’t satisfy Bessent. “Why can unknown foreign nationals come and open a bank account?” To do business obviously. Are you seriously telling me the government, armed with Palantir, can’t already flag money laundering? Why is an “unknown” in the country in the first place given this admin’s extremely hostile view towards immigrants?
busterarm 6mo ago
People seriously underestimate how much easier it is to open a bank account in the US compared to most other countries. Especially with how many states give out government-issued IDs to non-residents/non-citizens (16 states + Washington DC). It's estimated that between $250 billion and 500 billion is laundered through US banks every year, though some portion of that is via correspondent banking and not just individual account money muleing. And this just collects that information. It doesn't actually stop people from opening these accounts or shut them down.
- giantrobot 6mo ago
  The money laundering won't go away. It'll just move to administrations-approved money laundering vehicles like crypto. And needlessly disrupt or ruin the lives of millions. Neat.
  - hrimfaxi 6mo ago
    What's the solution, no laws? Since laws just shift the venue for the crime in your view?
- bonsai_spool 6mo ago
  > It's estimated that between $250 billion and 500 billion is laundered through US banks every year, though some portion of that is via correspondent banking and not just individual account money muleing. The money laundering is not happening through consumer deposit accounts (I've never heard your term money mueling and it's almost definitely not people moving $10,000 at a time if that's what you are suggesting). It is wanton disingenuity to think that the goal of this rule is prevention of money laundering.
  - busterarm 6mo ago
    I didn't say that was the goal. I explicitly said that it wouldn't do anything about it. Just that it happens. And absolutely it happens, particularly with networks of accounts connected to China. Just because you've never heard of it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. FinCEN has been publicly chasing this down for years. Although hawala networks are also a big source of that not mainly personal banking. Also you're missing the forest for the trees here. Money laundering will most often happen through business bank accounts but a large number of business account holders also have personal accounts at the same bank and link them out of convenience. Personal ID is also required to open a business bank account. This requirement will likely apply to those as well.
    - bonsai_spool 6mo ago
      > Also you're missing the forest for the trees here I see what you're saying - I am just trying to convey that the $250 billion dollars being laundered is commercial. It's hard to imagine how anyone can come close to those figures by using consumer accounts, linked or not.
giantrobot 6mo ago
The goal is to de-bank any opposition to the government. It starts with an easy out group like immigrants. Then more and more groups will get de-banked or otherwise disenfranchised.
- cucumber3732842 6mo ago
  It starts with an even easier out group like "actual criminals or other groups that are fairly strongly hated by a lot of people". The groundwork for this crap was laid in the 1870s when they were going after the klan, the 1920s bootleggers, then the 1940s-50s mobsters, 1980s drug traffickers, 2000s terrorists, etc, etc. Every step of the way people cheered. Of course some people looked at the "hurricane cone" of public policy at the time and said that we were not on a good path. Of course they were ignored.
- gadders 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - scuff3d 6mo ago
    Holy crap, it's been a long time since I saw that dopey Obama/tea-party line. Fox News bullshit from the past seems down right quaint by today's standards
    - gadders 6mo ago
      It's a fact though, so label it how you like but it happened.
      - lamasery 6mo ago
        You're gonna want to look into the context and framing. Elements connected to what you claimed are "fact". The framing is very much not.
      - scuff3d 6mo ago
        If you still believe that nonsense after all these years nothing I can say that'll change your mind. This is one of the all time greatest examples of "lying with facts". It's technically correct, the IRS absolutely singled out a bunch of non-profits due to administrative fowl ups, but trying to say Obama "targeted" the Tea Party intentionally was so hilariously stupid I'm amazed anyone bought it.
0xy 6mo ago
It's because certain banks like Bank of America will explicitly take business from undocumented immigrants, knowingly so. As a quick example, I know for a fact they accept expired visas as ID proof to open an account.

I don’t really understand this. We already run KYC / AML. Is that not good enough for some reason?

by bix6 6mo ago

I don’t really understand this. We already run KYC / AML. Is that not good enough for some reason?

pjc50 6mo ago

Banks are to be ICE now.

JuniperMesos 6mo ago
Basically this. Banks are already deputized into being de facto law enforcement by some of the KYC/AML checks they are mandated to do, and anti-immigrationists want this remit to include checking if someone is in the US illegally trying to use a bank.

gib444 6mo ago

That's covered in the article

bix6 6mo ago
Is it really though? > But that doesn’t satisfy Bessent. “Why can unknown foreign nationals come and open a bank account?” To do business obviously. Are you seriously telling me the government, armed with Palantir, can’t already flag money laundering? Why is an “unknown” in the country in the first place given this admin’s extremely hostile view towards immigrants?

busterarm 6mo ago

People seriously underestimate how much easier it is to open a bank account in the US compared to most other countries. Especially with how many states give out government-issued IDs to non-residents/non-citizens (16 states + Washington DC). It's estimated that between $250 billion and 500 billion is laundered through US banks every year, though some portion of that is via correspondent banking and not just individual account money muleing. And this just collects that information. It doesn't actually stop people from opening these accounts or shut them down.

giantrobot 6mo ago
The money laundering won't go away. It'll just move to administrations-approved money laundering vehicles like crypto. And needlessly disrupt or ruin the lives of millions. Neat.
- hrimfaxi 6mo ago
  What's the solution, no laws? Since laws just shift the venue for the crime in your view?
bonsai_spool 6mo ago
> It's estimated that between $250 billion and 500 billion is laundered through US banks every year, though some portion of that is via correspondent banking and not just individual account money muleing. The money laundering is not happening through consumer deposit accounts (I've never heard your term money mueling and it's almost definitely not people moving $10,000 at a time if that's what you are suggesting). It is wanton disingenuity to think that the goal of this rule is prevention of money laundering.
- busterarm 6mo ago
  I didn't say that was the goal. I explicitly said that it wouldn't do anything about it. Just that it happens. And absolutely it happens, particularly with networks of accounts connected to China. Just because you've never heard of it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. FinCEN has been publicly chasing this down for years. Although hawala networks are also a big source of that not mainly personal banking. Also you're missing the forest for the trees here. Money laundering will most often happen through business bank accounts but a large number of business account holders also have personal accounts at the same bank and link them out of convenience. Personal ID is also required to open a business bank account. This requirement will likely apply to those as well.
  - bonsai_spool 6mo ago
    > Also you're missing the forest for the trees here I see what you're saying - I am just trying to convey that the $250 billion dollars being laundered is commercial. It's hard to imagine how anyone can come close to those figures by using consumer accounts, linked or not.

giantrobot 6mo ago

The goal is to de-bank any opposition to the government. It starts with an easy out group like immigrants. Then more and more groups will get de-banked or otherwise disenfranchised.

cucumber3732842 6mo ago
It starts with an even easier out group like "actual criminals or other groups that are fairly strongly hated by a lot of people". The groundwork for this crap was laid in the 1870s when they were going after the klan, the 1920s bootleggers, then the 1940s-50s mobsters, 1980s drug traffickers, 2000s terrorists, etc, etc. Every step of the way people cheered. Of course some people looked at the "hurricane cone" of public policy at the time and said that we were not on a good path. Of course they were ignored.
gadders 6mo ago
[flagged]
- scuff3d 6mo ago
  Holy crap, it's been a long time since I saw that dopey Obama/tea-party line. Fox News bullshit from the past seems down right quaint by today's standards
  - gadders 6mo ago
    It's a fact though, so label it how you like but it happened.
    - lamasery 6mo ago
      You're gonna want to look into the context and framing. Elements connected to what you claimed are "fact". The framing is very much not.
    - scuff3d 6mo ago
      If you still believe that nonsense after all these years nothing I can say that'll change your mind. This is one of the all time greatest examples of "lying with facts". It's technically correct, the IRS absolutely singled out a bunch of non-profits due to administrative fowl ups, but trying to say Obama "targeted" the Tea Party intentionally was so hilariously stupid I'm amazed anyone bought it.

0xy 6mo ago

It's because certain banks like Bank of America will explicitly take business from undocumented immigrants, knowingly so. As a quick example, I know for a fact they accept expired visas as ID proof to open an account.