- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
JP Morgan C&D Order
Posted on 1/11/13 at 7:52 am
Posted on 1/11/13 at 7:52 am
Another bank in trouble. Regulators are having a field day lately.
Reuters
Banks need to learn that money laundering regs are here to stay and will only get more stict in the future.
Reuters
quote:
A U.S. regulatory probe of JP Morgan Chase & Co is expected to result in an order that the bank correct lapses in how it polices suspect money flows, in an action expected as soon as Friday, people familiar with the situation said.
The action would be in the form of a cease-and-desist order, which regulators use to force banks to improve compliance weaknesses, the sources said.
Banks need to learn that money laundering regs are here to stay and will only get more stict in the future.
2
Posted on 1/11/13 at 7:59 am to MStant1
quote:
Banks need to learn that money laundering regs are here to stay and will only get more stict in the future.
You sound like you don't think banks already believe that.
From your link:
quote:
JP Morgan is not expected to pay a monetary penalty, according to one person familiar with the situation.
Yeah, that will show those crooks!!
Posted on 1/11/13 at 8:40 am to LSURussian
quote:
You sound like you don't think banks already believe that.
I think banks are finally starting to take them more seriously, but I wouldn't say they are there yet. I deal with large banks every day on these matters; many simply don't care or care enough.
quote:quote:
JP Morgan is not expected to pay a monetary penalty, according to one person familiar with the situation.
Yeah, that will show those crooks!!
I'm not saying they are crooks. I know better than most that the AML regulations are ridiculously vague and that the OCC constantly have a moving target with regards to their expectations.
As to JPMC escaping without a fine; I would guess this is due to the fact that there were no highly egregious or blatant violations like with some of the other banks that have been in the news lately.
Posted on 1/11/13 at 8:56 am to MStant1
One of my problems with the AML regs is the ridiculously low limit. It's been $10,000 for how long? 20 years? Maybe longer. I don't remember the reporting limit ever being increased even with multi-decades of inflation.
The FDIC limit went from $100,000 to $250,000 in 2008 yet the AML limit remained at $10,000.
It places a burden on banks and bank customers while doing little to "catch" the money launderers.
The FDIC limit went from $100,000 to $250,000 in 2008 yet the AML limit remained at $10,000.
It places a burden on banks and bank customers while doing little to "catch" the money launderers.
Posted on 1/11/13 at 12:19 pm to LSURussian
quote:
One of my problems with the AML regs is the ridiculously low limit. It's been $10,000 for how long? 20 years? Maybe longer. I don't remember the reporting limit ever being increased even with multi-decades of inflation.
The FDIC limit went from $100,000 to $250,000 in 2008 yet the AML limit remained at $10,000.
It places a burden on banks and bank customers while doing little to "catch" the money launderers.
The problem is that most of the aspects relative true money laundering are all based off the Bank Secrecy Act from the 70's. Even the most recent enhancements that were within the PATRIOT Act focuses more on the perspective of Terrorist Financing rather than true money laundering.
The other problem is that the PATRIOT Act requires multitude of things, but frequently leaves out the details on how it is expected to be done. This leaves it open to however the reg examiner thinks it should be when he walks into the bank's doors. As I said the regulator's expectation is a moving target. The OCC is especially hostile now after being embarrassed by the senate hearings over HSBC in the summer.
Posted on 1/11/13 at 6:18 pm to MStant1
quote:
I'm not saying they are crooks.
In my opinion, JPM is an extremely shady outfit.
Posted on 1/11/13 at 6:33 pm to LSURussian
quote:
One of my problems with the AML regs is the ridiculously low limit. It's been $10,000 for how long? 20 years? Maybe longer. I don't remember the reporting limit ever being increased even with multi-decades of inflation.
Since 1970, and they'll never change it unless they absolutely have to.
Posted on 1/11/13 at 8:46 pm to MStant1
What influence might this have on JPMC stock?
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:59 pm to TxTiger82
Probably little if HSBC or Standard Chartered are any indication.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News