Organizations welcome comments on all aspects of this proposed rule. The organizations encourage all interested parties to express their views. Second, FinCEN has explored the possibility of implementing the proposed rule with a $0 threshold for transactions that begin or end outside the United States. FinCEN`s terrorism-related transactional analysis suggests that transactions that may be related to terrorism take place at values below the $250 level. While FinCEN believes that a $0 threshold would result in better benefits in terms of capturing a larger universe of transactions, collecting and verifying transaction information for low-value transactions could place a significant burden on small financial institutions such as small money services companies. Nevertheless, FinCEN will carefully review the comments to determine whether a $0 threshold would be appropriate in a final rule. FinCEN will also examine in a final rule to what extent the burden could be minimized by providing guidance on appropriate verification procedures for lower-value transactions. At the same time, FinCEN has published a separate rule – the „travel rule“ – requiring banks and non-bank financial institutions to transmit information about certain money transfers and money transfers to other banks or non-bank financial institutions involved in the transfer or transfer. [8] The Travel Rule and the Record Keeping Rule are complementary: In general, as noted below, the Record Keeping Rule requires financial institutions to collect and retain the information that the Travel Rule requires to be included in transmission orders, although the Record Keeping Rule also has other applications than ensuring that the information is available and that they can be included in money transfers. FinCEN has issued the travel rule in accordance with the legal authority that allows the Ministry of Finance to require domestic financial institutions or non-financial transactions or companies to comply with appropriate procedures to ensure compliance with the BSA or to protect against money laundering and to establish anti-money laundering programs. [9] Yes. If the transferor and the recipient are the same person and the issuer`s financial institution and the recipient`s financial institution are the same national bank or a domestic securities dealer, the transaction is exempt from the requirement contained in these new rules. Authorities are not aware of any federal regulations that duplicate or conflict with the proposed changes to the registration and travel rules, except that some financial institutions may already collect some of the information required by the proposed amendments as part of the current implementation of their risk-based anti-money laundering programs under the BSA and its implementing rules.

Decrees 13563 and 12866 instruct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is needed, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental and public impacts on health and safety; distributive effects; and justice). Executive Order 13563 stresses the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. This proposed rule was designated as a „significant regulatory measure“ under Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. As a result, the proposed rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget („OMB“). This proposed rule would change both the check-in rule and the travel rule. The registration rule is codified in 31 CFR 1020.410(a) and 1010.410(e) [10] and the travel rule is codified in 31 CFR 1010.410(f). [11] In accordance with its rule-making power in the BSA as amended by Annunzio-Wylie, the Commission proposes the amendments to § 1010.100(ll) and § 1020.410(a) only to the extent that the amendments apply to transfers of funds by insured custodians, and proposes amendments to § 1010.100(EEA) and § 1010.410(e) only to the extent that the amendments would be considered insured custodians for international transfers of funds by other financial institutions. Since the Commission`s Regulation S generally contains references to the parts of the Recordkeeping Rule issued jointly by the Commission and FinCEN, it is not necessary to make amendments consistent with Regulation S. No. Propose. Only transfers of funds of $3,000 or more (or their foreign equivalent) are subject to this rule, whether it is a currency or not.

In addition, transfers of funds subject to the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (Reg E) or made through AUTOMATED Teller Machines or point-of-sale systems are not subject to this rule. (January 1997) The benefits of the proposed rule include improved ability of law enforcement agencies to investigate, prosecute and disrupt the financing of international terrorism and other priority threats to transnational security, as well as other types of cross-border financial crime. The cost of terrorist attacks can be immense. For example, a public report estimated the cost of terrorism worldwide at $33 billion in 2018, although these costs were mostly borne outside the United States. [50] The cost of a major terrorist attack like the September 11 attacks can be as high as tens of billions of dollars. [51] Of course, it is difficult to quantify the contribution of a particular rule to reducing the risk of a terrorist attack. But even if the proposed regime were to result in a very small reduction in the likelihood of a major terrorist attack, the benefits would outweigh the costs. For example, if the proposed rule reduced the annual probability of a major terrorist attack with an economic impact of $30 billion by 0.26%, the benefits would outweigh the costs of the PRA burden described above.

FinCEN estimates that the main cost of complying with the proposed rule is found in its stress estimates Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) („PRA“), which are detailed below and amount to 3,315,844 hours. FinCEN estimated in its recent renewal of the OMB`s control number for SAR requirements that the average labour cost to store SARs and supporting documents weighed against the relevant required labour was $24 per hour. [49] FinCEN considers this to be an appropriate estimate of labour costs for the requirements imposed by this rule. Therefore, a reasonable minimum estimate of the effort required to manage the proposed rule is approximately $79.58 million per year (3,315,844 hours multiplied by $24 per hour). However, the burden of the PRA does not include certain costs, such as .B. the cost of implementing information technology resulting solely from the need to comply with this proposed rule. FinCEN explicitly requests an opinion on the costs associated with the implementation of these requirements. For example, Mrs. A and Mrs. .

B, sisters with different names and addresses, act together as assignor or recipient. In such cases, it may be impossible to transfer all the information required by the travel rule. In this case, the Department of Finance is proposing the following: The proposed amendments to the Recordkeeping Rule and the Travel Rule would apply to all financial institutions regulated under the BSA. [52] However, given that the requirements of the proposed rule are triggered only by money transfers and money transfers, in practice the proposal would focus on banks and money transfers. .