Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

ASFA hits AUSTRAC on fuzzy definitions

association-of-superannuation-funds/compliance/disclosure/superannuation-funds/ASFA/

30 January 2014
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

The Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) has been taken to task for how loosely it has sought to identify politicians, senior public servants and senior members of the military for the purposes of superannuation funds undertaking customer due diligence.

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has used a submission on AUSTRAC's draft Anti-Money Laundering/Counter Terrorism rules relating to customer due diligence to warn that some key definitions including those for politicians, senior public servants and high ranking military offices need to be clarified.

The submission goes so far as to tell AUSTRAC that it needs to clarify whether its descriptor "government ministers" includes both Federal and State government ministers, while cautioning that this could significantly increase the workload of one particular superannuation fund.

"In sub-paragraph 1(b) of the definition of politically exposed person, does ‘government ministers' refer to State as well as Commonwealth ministers?" the submission asks. "ASFA considers that this should be clarified. Assuming this is the case, some of our members have advised that this alone would represent a much larger population of PEP members than would otherwise be captured under the old definition (one fund has advised that in their case this would be at least 100 extra PEPs). This would require significant changes to funds' enrolment/on-boarding processes."

The submission similarly points to difficulties with respect to public servants, stating that "in sub-paragraph 1(c), it is unclear what exactly constitutes a ‘senior' government official. In particular, it is not apparent how ‘prominent' they must be or whether this includes senior public servants. Guidance will be necessary as to how to determine who is sufficiently senior or prominent to be included".

The submission also warns that superannuation funds are not equipped to identify "politically exposed" people and that requiring them to do so would require complex changes to their information-collecting capabilities.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 week 1 day ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

2 weeks 1 day ago

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

6 months 2 weeks ago

After last month’s surprise hold, the Reserve Bank of Australia has announced its latest interest rate decision....

1 week 3 days ago

A professional year supervisor has been banned for five years after advice provided by his provisional relevant provider was deemed to be inappropriate, the first time th...

3 weeks 2 days ago

WT Financial’s Keith Cullen is eager for its Hubco initiative to see advice firms under its licence trade at multiples which are catching up to those UK and US financial ...

2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
74.26 3 y p.a(%)
3