Page 96 - Profile's Unit Trusts & Collective Investments - September 2025
P. 96

Chapter 5                                             Legislation and guidelines


                   Money laundering
                   FICA defines money laundering (or money laundering activity) as an activity which has or is
                   likely to have the effect of concealing or disguising the nature, source, location, disposition
                   or movement of the proceeds of unlawful activities or any interest which anyone has in such
          proceeds, and includes any activity which constitutes an offence in terms of FICA or the Prevention of
          Organised Crime Act of 1998.
          Money laundering usually involves three phases. The first is called placement, when a criminal places
          dirty  money  (eg,  cash  from  drug  dealing)  into  the  formal  financial  system. The  second  is  layering
          or concealment, the process by which the criminal attempts to hide the link between the money in
          the financial system and the original unlawful activities, usually by entering into a series of complex
          transactions which move money in and out of various systems. The third is integration or re-entry, when
          money is reintegrated into the formal financial system so that it appears to be clean and legitimate.
          Once the funds are “clean” they can be used for legitimate transactions: property investments, purchase
          of luxury goods, or business investments.
          Money laundering is also often associated with tax evasion.

           R   An obligation to make such records available to the FIC
           R   An obligation to inform the FIC, on request, of the existence of a current or past mandate
           R   An obligation to report suspicious transactions
           FICA stipulates that any person who carries on a business, including a manager or employee, who
         knows or suspects certain transactions may be of a suspicious or unusual nature, is obliged to report
         this to the FIC. Even more burdensome is the obligation to report on a potential transaction even if
         this comes to nothing (ie, where there is an enquiry with an accountable institution but no transaction
         takes place). To complicate the relationship between service providers and clients, there is also in
         the Act a prohibition against disclosure by the reporting person that a report to FIC has been made.
         Risk-based monitoring
           As mentioned above, the FICA amendments promulgated in 2017 have shifted the process of
         monitoring  and  reporting  clients  and  transactions  from  a  rules-based  approach  to  risk-based
         approach.
           Under  the  2003  FICA  Act,  accountable  institutions  were  required  to  establish  internal  rules
         to ensure compliance with the legislation. An entity’s rules included the process of appointing a
         compliance officer, definitions of the information to be recorded and stored in respect of each client,
         staff training regimes, and the steps to be taken in the event of suspicious transactions.
           Following  the  implementation  of  the  amendments,  accountable  institutions  must  now  assess
         the potential risks of each client and every transaction in the context of each account’s history. For
         example, an entity’s rules may have required staff to alert compliance about any large transaction
         above a defined threshold, even though transactions of that size would have been routine for certain
         large clients. The new approach allows accountable institutions to green-flag accounts that follow
         stable patterns, even where large transactions are involved. Conversely, however, an accountable
         institution is now required to red-flag much smaller transactions where they are unusual in terms of
         an account’s history.
           Under the FICA amendments, accountable institutions have to develop, maintain and document
         Risk Management and Compliance Programmes which will replace each organisation’s FICA rules.
         The aims of the amendments are to make the compliance process both more effective and more
         efficient  –  the  risk-based  approach  allows  accountable  institutions  to  simplify  the  due  diligence
         measures applied where they assess money laundering (ML) and terrorist financing (TF) risks to
         be lower. To quote from the FICA’s draft guidance document, “By applying a risk-based approach
         accountable institutions are able to ensure that measures to prevent or mitigate ML/TF risks are
         commensurate with the risks identified. This will ensure that resources are directed in accordance
         with priorities, so that the greatest risks receive the highest attention.”




       94                Profile’s Unit Trusts & Collective Investments September 2025
   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101