Free Practice Questions for ACAMS CAMS Exam

The board of directors or designated specialized committee should be provided with statistical data regarding SARs/STRs filed during the reported period, such as the number, type, value, and geographic distribution of the reports, as well as any trends or patterns identified. This information helps the board or committee to oversee the effectiveness of the firm’s AML program, assess the level of compliance risk, and allocate appropriate resources and training. Providing all possible details, names of customers, or copies of SARs/STRs may compromise the confidentiality of the reports, violate data protection laws, or expose the firm to legal liability.

ACAMS Study Guide for the Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (6th Edition), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 223.

The Role of the Money Laundering Reporting Officer - ICAEW, page 14.

 According to the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units, which is a global network of FIUs that promotes information exchange and cooperation, FIUs making requests to another FIU should disclose the reason and purpose for the request, andprovide feedback on how the information was used12. These actions are intended to enhance mutual trust, transparency, and accountability between FIUs, and to facilitate the effective use of financial intelligence and information for combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes12. FIUs making requests should also respect the confidentiality and data protection requirements of the FIU receiving the request, and avoid imposing unreasonable or unduly restrictive conditions12.

FIUs making requests should not send the same request to all FIUs, as this would be inefficient, unnecessary, and potentially harmful. FIUs should only send requests to FIUs that are relevant and competent to provide the information they need, based on the nature and scope of the case12. Sending the same request to all FIUs could overload the system, create duplication, and compromise the security and confidentiality of the information12. FIUs making requests should also make best efforts to provide complete andfactual information, but this is not an action they should take when submitting a request, but rather when responding to a request from another FIU12.

Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units Operational Guidance for FIU Activities and the Exchange of Information

Principles for Information Exchange Between Financial Intelligence Units

The correct next course of action is to request that the new product approval committee include the compliance officer. This is because the compliance officer has the responsibility to ensure that the new financial service complies with the applicable laws, regulations, and standards, and does not pose any undue risks to the institution or its customers. The compliance officer should be involved in the new product development process from the beginning, and provide guidance and feedback on the potential compliance implications and requirements of the new service12.

1: CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 6: Developing an Effective Anti-Money Laundering Program, p. 121-122 2: FATF Guidance: The Role of Hawala and Other Similar Service Providers in Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, October 2013, p. 28, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/Role-of-hawala-and-similar-in-ml-tf.pdf

Many jurisdictions lack robust sanctions frameworks, requiring international cooperation and education to improve compliance.

Option B (Correct):Educational initiatives such as AML/sanctions training and workshops help raise awareness and build capacity.

Option D (Correct):Bilateral cooperation allows knowledge-sharing and technical assistance between regulatory authorities.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):Trade restrictions may pressure non-compliant nations, but they do not directly improve sanctions awareness.

Option C (Incorrect):Enforcing fines without prior education or assistance is ineffective and may create diplomatic tensions.

Best Practices for Sanctions Awareness & Compliance:

Develop international AML/sanctions training programs for emerging markets.

Encourage diplomatic engagement to strengthen legal frameworks.

Leverage FATF’s Mutual Evaluation process to assess progress.

https://egmontgroup.org/en/content/about

"The Egmont Group is a united body of 165 Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs). The Egmont Group provides a platform for the secure exchange of expertise and financial intelligence to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF). This is especially relevant as FIUs are uniquely positioned to cooperate and support national and international efforts to counter terrorist financing and are the trusted gateway for sharing financial information domestically and internationally in accordance with global Anti Money Laundering and Counter Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) standards.

According to the Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking, the beneficial owners of a private banking account are those who generally have ultimate control over the funds in the account and those who are the ultimate source of funds for the account and whose source of wealth should be subject to due diligence1. These two criteria are meant to ensure that the bank knows who is ultimately behind the account and where the funds come from, in order to prevent the use of the bank for money laundering or other criminal purposes. Authorized signers on the account or those who have legal title to a controlling share interest in the customer are not necessarily the beneficial owners, as they may act on behalf of others or have limited influence over the account.

 1: Wolfsberg Anti-Money Laundering Principles for Private Banking (2012), Section 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, 1

According to the ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 38, one of the steps that a financial institution should take when it suspects money laundering activity is to file a suspicious transaction report (STR) or a suspicious activity report (SAR) to the relevant authorities. This will alert the regulators and law enforcement of the potentialmoney laundering scheme and provide them with valuable information to trace the funds and identify the perpetrators.

Another step that a financial institution should take is to identify any unusual or suspicious wire transfers initiated by casas de cambio to jurisdictions outside of Mexico that bear no apparent business relationship with that casa de cambio. This could indicate that the casas de cambio are involved in layering and integration stages of money laundering, where they are moving the illicit funds across borders and disguising their origin and ownership. The financial institution should monitor and document these wire transfers and report them to the authorities if necessary.

Option B is not a relevant step to trace funds through the bank, as it does not provide any information about the source, destination, or purpose of the funds. A decrease in the sale of large denomination U.S. bank notes to casas de cambio by the bank could be due to various factors, such as market demand, exchange rates, or regulatory changes, and does not necessarily indicate money laundering activity.

Option C is also not a relevant step to trace funds through the bank, as it does not indicate any connection to the suspected money laundering scheme. Deposits by casas de cambio that include third-party items, such as sequentially numbered monetary instruments, could be legitimate transactions that are part of the normal business operations of the casas de cambio. Unless there is evidence that these deposits are related to the sale of large denomination U.S. bank notes or the Mexican syndicate, they are not useful for tracing the funds.

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 2, page 38

Combating Money Laundering and Other Forms of Illicit Finance

Sting Operation Snares Casa de Cambio for Allegedly Laundering Millions Through U.S. Banks

Arms and related materials embargo is a type of sanction that prohibits the supply, sale, transfer, or export of arms and related materials to a targeted country, entity, or individual. This type of sanction is most likely to be used in order to avoid escalating violent conflicts and/or proliferation of weapons, as it aims to reduce the availability and access of weapons and ammunition that could fuel violence and instability. Arms and related materials embargo can also prevent the transfer of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems to non-state actors or rogue states. According to the UN, arms and related materials embargo is one of the most common and effective forms of sanctions that the Security Council imposes to address threats to international peace and security12.

1: Different types of sanctions - Consilium1

2: UN Sanctions and the Prevention of Conflict - United Nations University2

D: “Cooperation and coordination between regulatory authorities, law enforcement agencies, and FIUs are essential for effective AML investigations, especially in cross-border cases. This is often accomplished through formal agreements, MOUs, and information-sharing mechanisms.”(CAMS 6th Edition, International Cooperation in AML/CFT; FATF Recommendations 36-40)

International business corporations (IBCs) are entities that are created in jurisdictions that offer low or no taxes, high confidentiality, and minimal regulation. They are often used by individuals and businesses to avoid or evade taxes, conceal assets, and launder money. Some of the risks associated with IBCs are:

They are created in a tax haven. Tax havens are countries or territories that have low or no taxes, lax financial regulation, and high secrecy. They attract IBCs that seek to reduce their tax liabilities, hide their beneficial owners, and evade scrutiny from authorities. Tax havens pose a risk to the global financial system, as they facilitate tax evasion, money laundering, corruption, and illicit financial flows12.

They are established with nominee directors. Nominee directors are individuals who act as the legal representatives of an IBC, but have no actual control or authority over its activities. They are often used to shield the true beneficial owners of the IBC from detection and accountability. Nominee directors pose a risk to the transparency and integrity of the IBC, as they can enable fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, and other criminal activities34.

According to the BSA/AML Manual1, a financial institution is required to file a SAR for any transaction conducted or attempted by, at, or through the institution that involves or aggregates at least $5,000 in funds or other assets, and the institution knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect that the transaction (or a pattern of transactions of which the transaction is a part): (a) involves funds derived from illegal activity or is intended or conducted in order to hide or disguise funds or assets derived from illegal activity; (b) is designed to evade any requirements of the BSA or its implementing regulations; © has no business or apparent lawful purpose or is not the sort in which the particular customer would normally be expected to engage, and the institution knows of no reasonable explanation for the transaction after examining the available facts, including the background and possible purpose of the transaction; or (d) involves use of the institution to facilitate criminal activity. In this case, Bank A is the institution that processes the wire transfer and deems it suspicious, based on its own assessment of the transaction and the customer. Therefore, Bank A is responsible for filing a SAR for the transaction in Country A, where it is located and where the transaction takes place. Bank A does not need to file a SAR for the transaction in Country B or Country C, as it does not have jurisdiction or authority over those countries or the other banks involved. However, Bank A may share information about the suspicious transaction with Bank B or Bank C, subject to certain conditions and limitations, as described in the BSA/AML Manual1.

BSA/AML Manual1

Suspicious Activity Reporting - Overview2

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) Basics3

From Microsoft Start Partners

Another simpler way of looking at the problem is by seeing this case as a Correspondent Banking relationship:

-A is the primary correspondent bank.

-B is the respondent bank.

-C is the receiving bank (of the wire transfer).

Since A is conducting the transaction on behalf of B's customer via the correspondent relationship deemed suspicious, it is the transaction in Country A by the correspondent bank that files the STR. Also, per the regular process, it is on the transaction, not the bank, that the STR is filed against.

Thelife insurance industryis vulnerable tomoney laundering and terrorist financing, especially when policies allowpayments to unknown third parties.

Option A (Correct):Allowing policyholders to transfer funds tounknown third partiesincreases therisk of money laundering. FATF andEU AML Directiveshighlight life insurance policies as high-risk products.

Option B (Incorrect):Completing KYC does not eliminate risk. Customers can use legitimate insurance products for illicit purposes.

Option C (Incorrect):While governance violations should be addressed, themain concern here is money laundering risk, not the compliance team’s involvement in product development.

Option D (Incorrect):Fast-tracking approvalwithoutproper risk assessmentcreates regulatory and reputational risks.

One of the criteria that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) uses to define non-cooperative countries and territories (NCCTs) is the lack of adequate rules for the licensing and creation of financial institutions, especially those with no or minimal presence, and the lack of effective systems for checking the backgrounds of managers and beneficial owners of such institutions. This criterion aims to prevent the establishment and operation of shell banks or other entities that can be used for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes. The FATF requires that countries and territories should have laws and regulations that ensure that financial institutions are subject to adequate licensing or registration procedures, that the authorities have the power to deny or revoke licenses or registrations, and that the authorities have access to information on the identity, reputation, and financial soundness of the managers and beneficial owners of financial institutions.

= Some of the references that support this answer are:

About the Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories NCCT Initiative, Section “The review and listing process”: “The FATF established at that time four regional review groups (Americas, Asia/Pacific, Europe, Africa/Middle East) consisting of representatives from the FATF member governments that served as the main points of contact with the reviewed country or territory. … The review groups gathered relevant laws, regulations and other relevant information, analysed this information against the 25 NCCT criteria, and drafted a report that was sent to the jurisdictions for comment.”

Annual Review of Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories 2006-2007: Eighth NCCT Review, Annex 1: “List of Criteria for Defining Non-Cooperative Countries or Territories”, Criterion 1: “Licensing and creation of financial institutions, in particular those with no physical presence, and the ability to obtain information on the beneficial ownership and control of such institutions.”

FATF (Financial Action Task Force) Countries 2024 - World Population Review, Section “Blacklisted Countries”: “These are countries which were previously placed on the grey list and advised by the FATF to adopt the recommended financial security procedures, but have either failed or refused to do so. Blacklisted countries may be labeled as Non-Cooperative Countries or Territories (NCCTs).”

Financial institutionsmust close accounts that violate sanctions laws or pose a severe AML risk.

Option C (Correct):Doing business with Specially Designated Nationals (SDNs) violates U.S. OFAC and EU sanctions, requiring account closure.

Option A (Incorrect):Multiple SARs do not always require account closure; the institution may continue monitoring the customer.

Option B (Incorrect):Tuition payments are normal transactions and do not justify account closure.

Option D (Incorrect):A civil subpoena does not imply financial crime and does not require closure.

Key Account Closure Triggers:

Violation of OFAC, EU, or UN sanctions laws.

Confirmed criminal activity (e.g., fraud, money laundering, terrorist financing).

Regulatory directive or legal requirement to terminate the account.

Best Practices for Account Closure:

Document the justification for closure (e.g., sanctions compliance, AML concerns).

Notify the customer in a manner that does not constitute "tipping off."

File SARs where required before closing high-risk accounts.

free of payment asset transfer is a trading pattern that may be indicative of money laundering in capital markets. Free of payment asset transfer is a method of transferring securities without any corresponding payment, which can be used to avoid detection of the origin or destination of the funds. This can facilitate the layering or integration stages of money laundering, as the launderer can move the assets across different accounts, jurisdictions, or institutions without leaving a clear audit trail. Free of payment asset transfer can also be used to evade taxes, sanctions, or other regulatory requirements.

ACAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.8, page 28: “Methods to launder money using broker-dealers, investment advisors, and the capital markets (e.g., securities, futures)”.

ExamTopics, Question 476: “Which trading pattern may be indicative of money laundering in capital markets?”

The individual responsible for setting the anti-money laundering software parameters should recommend ensuring that the alert parameters are based on risk, rather than on default software rules. This means that the software should be configured to generate alerts only when transactions or customers exhibit a high level of risk, based on factors such as the source and destination of funds, the amount and frequency of transactions, the type and purpose of the account, the customer profile and behavior, and the presence of any red flags or indicators of money laundering or terrorist financing. By aligning the alert parameters with the risk assessment of the financial institution, the software can reduce the number of false positives and focus on the most relevant and suspicious cases, thus improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the anti-money laundering staff.

Setting AML Transaction Monitoring Thresholds 1, ComplyAdvantage, 2020.

Machine learning techniques for anti-money laundering (AML) analysis: a survey 2, Springer, 2018.

Anti Money Laundering (AML) Definition: Its History and How It Works 3, Investopedia, 2021.

According to the FATF Procedures for the Fourth Round of AML/CFT Mutual Evaluations1, jurisdictions that are determined to have strategic deficiencies in their regimes to counter money laundering, terrorist financing, and proliferation financing are subject to the FATF’s International Cooperation Review Group (ICRG) process. The ICRG process involves the following actions for such jurisdictions:

Demonstrate a high-level commitment to swiftly resolve the identified deficiencies in the FATF mutual evaluation report. This commitment should be made in writing to the FATF President and should include an action plan with specific deadlines and milestones to address the deficiencies.

Report to FATF on the implementation of their progress under the enhanced follow-up mechanism. The FATF will monitor the progress of the jurisdiction through regular reports and on-site visits, and will decide whether the jurisdiction has made sufficient progress to exit the ICRG process or whether further actions are required, such as public statements, counter-measures, or suspension of membership.

The other options are not resulting actions for jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies, as they are either not part of the FATF procedures or not consistent with the FATF’s objectives and principles. For example, the FATF does not issue private statements regarding the level of compliance of a jurisdiction, nor does it allow a jurisdiction to appeal for a technical compliance re-rating based on its own criteria. The FATF also does not grant extensions of deadlines for jurisdictions to improve their regimes, as this would undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the mutual evaluation process.

1: Mutual Evaluations - Financial Action Task Force

2: Procedures for the FATF Fourth Round of AML/CFT Mutual Evaluations

ARisk-Based Approach (RBA)allows financial institutions toallocate compliance resources effectivelyandprioritize higher-risk areasforenhanced due diligence (EDD).

Option A (Correct):An RBA enables institutions to tailor their AML controls based on risk exposure, ensuring better resource allocation.

Option B (Incorrect):While RBAimproves efficiency, itdoes not guarantee faster implementationof controls.

Option C (Incorrect):RBA is a regulatory requirement, butit is not necessarily determined by customer acceptance.

Option D (Incorrect):RBA provides guidance on risk mitigation, but itdoes not dictate specific resource usage.

Benefits of a Risk-Based Approach (RBA):

Efficient use of compliance resourcesby focusing onhigh-risk transactions, customers, and geographies.

Regulatory compliance alignmentwithFATF, Basel Committee, and Wolfsberg Group AML principles.

Flexibility to adjust AML controlsas new threats emerge.

Best Practices for Implementing RBA in AML Compliance:

Conduct enterprise-wide risk assessments (EWRAs).

Classify customers and transactions based on risk levels.

Apply enhanced due diligence (EDD) for high-risk clients.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is a department of the U.S. Treasury that administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security goals1. OFAC regulations cover all persons and entities within the U.S., all U.S.-domiciled entities and their foreign branches, and all U.S. citizens, wherever located or employed2. These include U.S. banks, U.S. corporations, U.S. subsidiaries of foreign corporations, U.S. residents, and U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad3. OFAC regulations do not cover foreign-based entities that have U.S. customers, unless they are owned or controlled by U.S. persons or entities4.

 1: Home | Office of Foreign Assets Control 2: eCFR :: 31 CFR Chapter V – Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury 3: FFIEC BSA/AML Office of Foreign Assets Control - Office of Foreign Assets Control 4: Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC): Definition, Sanctions