header-logo header-logo

New money laundering rules will threaten business

02 August 2007
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Banking , Commercial
printer mail-detail

News

Half of UK law firms believe the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 will undermine the competitiveness of the UK economy, a new survey shows.
The research by LexisNexis also shows that 52% of law firms believe the new regulations—due to come into force in December—will require additional financial investment and of these, half claim their overall due diligence costs will increase by 10% to 29%. 

Under the new regulations, details of which were released by the government last week, law firms will need to make major changes to how they undertake customer due diligence, in particular, how firms conduct money laundering checks, identify beneficial owners, and perform ongoing monitoring of business relationships.

Although 40% of law firms see no benefits to the new regulations, 68% have started to invest in training resources and 48% have started to invest in personnel to perform due diligence checks.

The regulations will extend supervision to all businesses in the regulated sector to secure greater compliance with anti-money laundering controls and introduce strict tests to ensure money services business, and firms that help set up and manage trusts and companies, are not run for criminal purposes. They will also require extra checks on customers that pose a higher risk of money laundering.

The government says regulatory burdens will be reduced in low risk areas. Firms can make fewer checks in some situations, such as occupational pension funds, while the number of identity checks will be reduced, with firms being able to rely upon checks done by certain other firms, eg solicitors. Greater flexibility will be introduced to record keeping rules so firms can keep only the important details rather than whole documents.

Mark Dunn, head of risk and compliance at LexisNexis, says: “The regulatory authorities are likely to clamp down hard on law firms that do not adhere to the new regulations so companies need to make sure that they don’t run the risk of being penalised.”

Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Banking , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll