Currency Reporting and Money Laundering Flashcards
Currency Reporting Crimes - Bank Secrecy Act
Title II CFTRA (currency and foreign transactions recording):
- Knowingly importing or exporting monetary instruments ($10,000 trigger for reporting to Customs)
- For criminal side, gov. must prove two mental states: knowingly transporting, and that failure to report was willful
-US v. Forty-Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Dollars in Canadian Currency
- Willfully violating – does not require knowledge of statute/reporting requirement (for civil forfeiture at least)
Civil forfeiture
drafted broadly to reach virtually any property that is related to or involved in the underlying criminal conduct (don’t need to know failure to report is illegal, although that is true for criminal cases)
US v. Bajakajian -
Money not declared was not used for any illicit purpose, so full forfeiture would be excessively harsh
Distinction between criminal forfeiture (in personam) and civil (in rem) and that criminal is usually punishment for an underlying crime (not present here)
Domestic Currency transactions reporting - Ratzlaf v. US (1994)
went to 10 different banks to avoid reporting over 10k - holding - willfully violating applies to illegality of act, not the reporting requirement, conviction overturned (a year later, congress made it clear that knowledge of reporting requirement sufficed)
§ 6050I of IRC
Any person engaged in a trade or business must report transactions >$10,000
-includes law firm fees - US v. Goldberger & Dubin (can’t try to hide client, that person could go to another lawyer)
Money Laundering Control Act
Requires proof of collateral criminal intent. The actor must intend:
1) “to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity”; or (2) to commit tax evasion or fraud.
• Alternatively, the actor must know that the financial transaction is designed: (1) to “conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity”; or (2) to avoid federal or state currency reporting requirements, including those imposed by the Bank Secrecy Act.
US v. Tencer
chiropractor’s false insurance claims. somewhat broad definition of intent to conceal. here, used different address.
Prima Facie Case for money launderinf
government must prove that the defendant 1) conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction, 2) which the defendant knew involved the proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, 3) with the intent to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of the proceeds of unlawful activity
US v. Campbell - mens rea?
willful blindness fulfills knowledge requirement
US v. Johnson - definition of “proceeds of specified unlawful activity”
intent can be proven from surrounding circumstances.
Holding: court affirms conviction b/c “intent to promote…unlawful activity” satisfied by paying mortgage since he used his “aura” of legitimacy to further his ponzi scheme
- but transfer of funds not necessarily violation of
US v. Kennedy
o All that is required to violate § 1956 is a transaction meeting the statutory criteria that takes place after the underlying crime has been completed. Thus, the central inquiry in a money laundering charge is determining when the predicate crime became a “completed” offense
Anti-Bribery Part of FCPA
makes it an illegal practice, “in order to assist . . . in obtaining or retaining business,” for a covered person corruptly to give or offer “anything of value” to any foreign official, politician, political party, or agent for the purpose of influencing an official act or omission, inducing such a person to influence a foreign government decision, or to secure “any improper advantage.
what counts as a thing of value?
“anything of value” – no de minimis exception (usually not enforced for things like coffee or splitting a cab)
mens read for FCPA
willful blindness or conscious disregard suffice