Quantcast
BANKTHINK
THE MONETARY FUTURE

Money Laundering Is Financial Thoughtcrime

MAY 7, 2013 12:00pm ET
Print
Email
Reprints
(16) Comments

When people hear the term money laundering today, they envision the most evil of acts, in which gangsters process satchels of cash through a fabricated company to show it as business revenue. Words and semantics are very important in this post-9/11 world, and as far as creating a negative connotation, that parlance has been extremely effective.

At its essence, money laundering is the act of concealing money or assets from the state to prevent its loss through taxation, judgment enforcement, or blatant confiscation. However, as the late J. Orlin Grabbe wrote: "Anyone who has studied the evolution of money-laundering statutes in the U.S. and elsewhere will realize that the 'crime' of money laundering boils down to a single, basic prohibited act: Doing something and not telling the government about it."

Protecting one's wealth is interwoven with the history of trade and banking which has existed since the dawn of commerce. Sterling Seagrave's Lords of the Rim describes how some 2,000 years before Christ, merchants in China would hide their wealth from rulers who would simply take it from them and subsequently banish them. This concealment involved moving the wealth and investing it in remote provinces or outside China.

Part myth, part rumor, the plausible tale of Mafia gangsters running huge amounts of cash from extortion, prostitution, gambling and bootleg liquor through existing Laundromats accounts for the phrase money laundering.

Also during this period, Al Capone was convicted in October 1931 for tax evasion, which is what earned the prosecutor's conviction rather than the predicate crimes that generated his illicit income. Capone's episode inspired Meyer Lansky, the mob's accountant, who structured elaborate international and Swiss financial facilities for safely securing money and vowed never to suffer Capone's fate.

Lansky is credited with designing one of the first real laundering techniques, the use of the "loan-back" concept, which disguised allegedly illegal money within "loans" provided by compliant foreign banks. The money could then be justified as revenue and a tax deduction for interest expense obtained in the process.

Without any method of tracking cash or bank activity, Congress passed the Bank Secrecy Act in 1970, heralding the age of transaction reporting, including the Currency Transaction Report (Form 4789), the Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments (Form 4790), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (Form TD F 90-22.1). In the United States, the Money Laundering Control Act formally made money laundering a federal crime.

Internationally, the elements of the crime of money laundering are set forth in the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Also, the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, founded in 1989 on the initiative of the Group of Seven industrialized nations, is an intergovernmental organization whose purpose is to develop policies to combat money laundering and terrorism financing.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

(16) Comments

SEE MORE IN

RELATED TAGS

 

 
Comments (16)
Disingenuous. It is not 'thoughtcrime', it is 'actual crime'. In this case is the deliberate obfuscation of the source of money by channeling through any number of intermediaries, in violation of the laws governing the transfer of stores of value in a given set of circumstances. A law.

The other side of that argument would be Bitcoin (wiki it). Nothing regulated there, therefore no potential crime regardless of the source of the finances. But your example, "It's like buying a drive-thru donut in a stolen vehicle" is not accurate. The metaphor would be more accurate as "It's like verbally assaulting a drive-thru donut employee in a stolen vehicle." Both parts are against the law.
Posted by callmebeerbaron | Tuesday, May 07 2013 at 12:46PM ET
@callmebeerbaron Certainly, society can make anything a crime. My point with the metaphor was that buying the donut would not have been previously against the law, whereas verbally assaulting donut employee has always been against the law.
Posted by Jon Matonis, The Monetary Future | Tuesday, May 07 2013 at 12:54PM ET
Any person or institution knowingly assisting a drug ring in laundering their money should get the same treatment as the people making and selling the drugs. Without the money laundering the drug cartels or whatever would choke on cash. Anything a bank is holding that represents laundered funds should be confiscated just as the cars, houses, drugs, cash and hopefully freedom of the perpetrators. This article sounds like the throw up the hands and give up attitude that is wrecking the country.
Posted by pusch | Tuesday, May 07 2013 at 1:14PM ET
So your contention is that we "made it a crime" for reasons that do no stand up to scrutiny? In our increasingly convoluted international financial system, are you of the opinion that this particular 'thoughtcrime' is irrelevant? If you are within the rules and regulations surrounding your fiscal behavior, you have nothing to worry about. If you are a crack dealer (or an offshore leveraged buyout vulture - this is not about blue collar/white collar) and have to deliberately hide the source of your money because the money itself is evidence of a crime... I fail to see how your story makes a lot of sense. It is a crime, because it absolutely should be a crime.

Although to be fair, in this age of burgeoning crypto-currencies, I could easily support a thesis on the theme of money laundering laws being increasingly worthless. The intent underlying the law, however, remains relevant.
Posted by callmebeerbaron | Tuesday, May 07 2013 at 1:27PM ET
The actual crime is the crime. Are you suggesting that without money, the crime would not exist? What if the gain was sexual favors or some other non-monetary reward? The fact that full financial transparency is nearly in place will be utilized in an aggressive manner by any presiding regime (in any country), quite possibly against political opponents too. You only have to read history to understand that. A free society would not violate financial privacy in that manner precisely because of the massive opportunity for abuse that it opens up.

I support voluntary financial transparency.
Posted by Jon Matonis, The Monetary Future | Tuesday, May 07 2013 at 1:37PM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.

Email Newsletters

Get the Daily Briefing and the Morning Update when you sign up for a free trial.

TWITTER
FACEBOOK
LINKEDIN
Marketplace
Fiserv is a leading global provider of information management and electronic commerce systems for the financial services industry.
Learn More
Informa Research Services is the premier provider of competitive intelligence, mystery shopping, and compliance testing services to the financial industry.
Learn More
CSC is a leader in private-label, third-party loan servicing with 30+ years of proven experience in delivering effective, cost-effective solutions.
Learn More
Already a subscriber? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.