The Reserve Bank has issued a formal anti-money laundering warning to Citibank saying it failed to provide originator information, obtained through its capacity as an intermediary bank from about 64,000 international wire transfers, to beneficiary institutions.
Providing originator information is required by the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act (AML/CFT Act). This requirement, the Reserve Bank says, aims to ensure the identification of the originator of a ‘wire transfer,' a transaction carried out by electronic means, and provision of that information throughout the payment chain.
The obligation exists to hinder the anonymous use of wire transfers by money launderers and financiers of terrorism, the Reserve Bank says. The transactions took place between January 2017 and July 2020, and between November 2021 and April 2022.
Citibank describes itself as New Zealand’s preeminent banking partner for corporate, investor and public sector clients with cross-border needs. It has been a banking service provider to the NZ Government since 2015. Its contract was renewed in July for four more years, after a Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment all-of-government tender for banking services, and extended to include online merchant acquiring, alongside providing corporate card and foreign exchange payment services.
"The failures stemmed from Citibank NZ’s control deficiencies and failure to adequately apply and test control measures relating to automated payment rules which, for around 64,000 affected transfers, failed to pass on the true identity of the originators. This meant the banks ultimately receiving those funds were unable to see their true origin," Reserve Bank Director of Enforcement and Resolution Kerry Beaumont says.
"This formal warning to Citibank NZ highlights the importance of payment transparency where there are multiple parties involved in a payment chain and the importance of systems assurance to test systems on an ongoing basis before issues become systemic," adds Beaumont.
"The wire transfer identity requirements are important to mitigate the ML/TF risks posed by international wire transfers. It is vital that all parties involved in wire transfers accurately pass on the originator information they obtain. Citibank NZ did not do so for the affected transfers."
The Reserve Bank says Citibank's failures weren't a deliberate attempt to evade AML/CFT Act obligations, and related to complex legal obligations.
"Upon being alerted to the issues, Citibank NZ self-reported the matter, addressed the root causes and has cooperated with the Reserve Bank throughout the investigation," says Beaumont.
A Citibank spokeswoman says; "Citi understands the crucial role it plays in New Zealand’s financial system. We promptly self-reported the issue to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand and worked with them to enhance our controls and processes."
Given Citibank's failures have implications for the beneficiary banks of the affected transfers from a prescribed transaction reporting compliance perspective, the Reserve Bank says it'll contact affected reporting entities and the wider sector.
"Prescribed transaction reporting, while complex, provides a rich source of financial intelligence to deter money laundering."
The formal warning has been issued to Citibank N.A. New Zealand Branch. It has been a registered NZ bank since 1987, having provided financial services here since 1974, and has a 2.19% stake in Payments NZ, the company that governs NZ's core payment systems.
The Reserve Bank says public censure is the only penalty Citibank faces.
21 Comments
Yeah, numbered Swiss accounts, blind trusts they are all fine, Panama papers, nothing to see, it's just that crypto
There are natural barriers for people to set up BVI companies and blind trusts, etc. It's comparatively easy for people to buy the ol' rat poison (which is not crypto). And the vast majority of BTC transactions are not for money laundering.
I see this Saylor-driven meme that bitcoin is not crypto is starting to take hold. Can you explain what it is supposed to mean?
Crypto is a blanket term that covers all digital currencies. Ratty doesn't share anything with the vast majority of the others including the most vile of sh*tcoins. It stands alone as its own network and is the most dominant. Furthermore, it is really the only commodity among the crypto ecosystem. Some others are just pretending they're commodities but ultimately they're centralized securities.
Crypto is an abbreviation meaning cryptographic currency. Bitcoin is a peer to peer payment network which verifies transactions using cryptography and broadcasts them to a decentralised distributed ledger. Bitcoin is crypto and to argue otherwise is just a a meme. Ethereum settles more value in transactions daily than bitcoin (has been the case for some years) and is closer to a commodity as it has actual utility beyond purely transacting (i.e. powering smart contracts, collateral in defi). We can agree that the vast majority of other cryptos are a trash.
Crypto is an abbreviation meaning cryptographic currency. Bitcoin is a peer to peer payment network which verifies transactions using cryptography and broadcasts them to a decentralised distributed ledger. Bitcoin is crypto and to argue otherwise is just a a meme. Ethereum settles more value in transactions daily than bitcoin (has been the case for some years) and is closer to a commodity as it has actual utility beyond purely transacting (i.e. powering smart contracts, collateral in defi). We can agree that the vast majority of other cryptos are a trash.
No "broadcasting" takes place on the BTC network. And BTC is more representative of a commodity than ETH because of 'proof of work'. The CFTC regards both BTC and ETH as commodities.
'Broadcast' suggests a centralized agent distributes BTC across the network, very much like a TV network or radio station. The Bitcoin blockchain not stored in one master computer or controlled by one company. The BTC blockchain is much more than "crypto" because its blockchain ensures that all transactions are accurate.
Fun fact money laundering in all forms can be crimes and having an unregulated market means there are far more victims of crime, and far more crime and fraud. But thats ok you don't think money laundering and lack of basic customer protection is bad because its your pet boo boo. Your understanding of the word risk is completely absent. It is a wonder people let you handle money by yourself if your gap in understanding risk and financial protections for customers is this bad because you might as well be at the casino gifting money to slot machines.
Another slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket for the "bankster cartel" - just a pure joke !
The Reserve Bank says public censure is the only penalty Citibank faces.
Someone in Citibank knew what was going on ...and thought better to report it now, then the investigation won't be so "rigorous" .....seriously you couldn't make this stuff up !
Further evidence it is definitely a two speed world. The deep pockets, the political connections, rules not so much. If your Bank is euro or 5 eyes, versus Indian or Chinese?
Then remember the old maxim: Never blame conspiracy that which can be explained by incompetence.
However explained, one thing is clear. MBIE. Deeply disappointing.
"The transactions took place between January 2017 and July 2020, and between November 2021 and April 2022. "
How does this work? Do they have a toggle in their systems that you can simply switch this on or off depending on how much the gangsters bribe someone at Citi. 64,000 transactions, incredible.....
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.