« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
Treasury is not seeking summons authority to obtain a bank
customer's records, but rather to obtain records and testimony
relating to the Bank Secrecy Act compliance of the financial institution itself. The summons authority proposed in H.R. 2785
As we testifed, this authority is especially needed with respect
to the 3000 miscellaneous non-bank financial institutions such
as casinos, foreign currency brokers, transmitters of funds and sellers of travelers checks for which examination responsibility
has been delegated to the Internal Revenue Service.
depends on the voluntary cooperation of these institutions in the
examination process and has no means
to compel cooperation.
In the case of a non-bank institution, the summons
would be used when Treasury had information regarding
non-compliance or when cooperation was inadequate in the
with respect to banks, we expect that
we would most frequently use
summons when a bank was
being uncooperative or unforthcoming in a civil penalty case
to follow up on information regarding noncompliance developed in a bank examination. We have not drafted any
specific written criteria for use in advance of the
As set forth above, the focus of the summons is not
the bank customer.
We do not believe that there is undue
potential for abuse of the legitimate customer's privacy rights any more than is the case with any bank examination
2. Since June of last year, we have assessed civil penalties against sixteen banks or bank holding companies. A number of other cases are under review and should be announced over the course of the next several months. The nature and extent of the
violations var ied, as is reflected in the dollar range of the
$4.75 million in the case of Bank of America to
$112,000 in the case of Barnett Banks of Florida.
for which penalties have been assessed are of three general
types: 1) failure to report currency transactions with foreign correspondent banks and domestic foreign currency brokers,
2) improper exemption of customers, and 3) general non-reporting
of currency transactions unrelated to exemption list problems.
Some of the banks had all three types of violations, some only one
The violations of some of the banks have been found
throughout the banks unit or branches.
In others, the violations
were limited to one unit or department.
Treasury takes many factors into consideration in assessing
civil penalties, including the nature and number of the viola
tions, the degree of cooperation Treasury has received from the
bank in developing the scope of the bank's liability, the size of
the bank, the adequacy of the bank's past compliance program and
to a lesser extent, the financial condition of the bank.
every effort to treat similarly situated banks in a similar
manner, but have no set formula.
The dollar amount of the penalty
is generally keyed to the number of non-filings.
As we have testified and reported to the Committee earlier,
after a series of meetings with the supervisory agencies, Treasury
has developed standard Bank Secrecy Act examination procedures and
disseminated those procedures to the supervisory agencies.
attached). Common past compliance problems such as the failure to
report currency transactions with foreign banks were also
By the end of this month, we hope to disseminate exemption
guidelines to the bank regulatory agencies.
This should be very
helpful, not only in the examiner's identification of exempt list
violations, but in assisting the examiners to explain proper
exemption procedures to the institutions they examine.
The new IRS Form 4789 will not be in use until July 1, 1986.
The form will improve financial institutions accountability by requiring two signatures--one of the financial institution employee who prepares the form and one by a reviewing official.
(A copy of the new form is attached.)
The form also has been revised in many ways to improve the quality
and use of the information received.
o The new revised form provides more complete line-by-line
instructions for the financial institution to use in
completing the form.
The new form provides a space (line item 13) for the financial
institution to indicate why an individual is not identified in
The new form will contain a space (line item 19.b. of
Part II) to indicate whether the organization for whom the
Part IV has been changed to provide for more types of cash
transactions and to indicate if a transaction is "cash in" or
This will provide for better analysis of the data
for targeting purposes. It will especially provide a basis for monitor ing cash transactions with foreign financial
Part v of the form provides a better way for a financial
institution to indicate what type of institution it is.
this information, summary reports of Bank Secrecy Act information can be provided to the supervisory agency that regulates the specific type of financial institution. A special code number (in box 36a.) will indicate who the
The IRS has been delegated authority to examine compliance by
casinos and to monitor the agreement with the State of Nevada
whereby Nevada casinos report currency transactions to the State
which in turn reports the information to Treasury.
IRS has not
advised Treasury of any major problems with respect to casino
compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act.
We receive and review excerpts of the examination reports
relating to Bank Secrecy Act compliance that the supervisory
agencies give to the examined institutions. We can review the underlying wor kpapers on request. We have not had an occasion to evaluate how the examiners document the examination process.
The model examination procedures direct examiners to review
activities of all bank cash areas, not just teller transactions.