Talk:Money laundering/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

"laundering"

Isn't there a limit on how many times a dollar bill can be bleached and disinfected, before it starts fading? --Uncle Ed

Probably, but this is not the type of money laundering this article discusses. :) -Frecklefoot
[Isn't there a limit on how many times a dollar bill can be bleached and disinfected, before it starts fading? --Uncle Ed] What about another hard currencies --BigBang —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.250.43 (talk) 06:49, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Money laundering origination

It is a myth that money laundering stems from Prohibition when gangsters used slot machines --- or, the more usual version, when Al Capone used laundromats --- to make illicit monies appear as if they'd come from legitimate sources. In fact, the term money laundering was not used until the Watergate scandal in 1972. The OED is the source for this. For the best and most authoritative work on the subject, see Jeffrey Robinson's "The Laundrymen." - User: Alan Train

Please correct it in the article, then. Tempshill 21:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
I found this article to be contradictory, had both the OED version of laundering and the other, incorrect source of laundromats, so I deleted the section on laundromats Daries 20:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Laundering is to money what laundering is to clothes

I am surprised that the term money laundering does not arise from making dirty money into clean money. Or did the use of "dirty" and "clean" come after the adoption of the word "laundering". I bet not and that it is this cleansing that "laundering" refers to. Paul Beardsell 00:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This pdf seems to indicate I may be right. Paul Beardsell 15:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the definition of money laundering to include two major jurisdictions. This needs more work. Perhaps the FATF definition should also be included. DavidP73 (talk) 23:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I have factually corrected the UK law section dropping the section references to PoCA which are probably too specific bearing in mind the weight of other legislation. DavidP73 (talk) 00:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

PRC Money Laundering Legislation

Would this information be of interest/relevence to the article? The PRC just passed a new money laundering law 31-10-2006. Alai 02:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hawala

Isn't money laundering same as hawala?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mundlapati (talk • contribs)


No. Hawala serves an economic need. As the recent collapse of Western banks show, the western banking system is not reliable in handling people's hard earned money which people need to share with family members at a reasonable handling cost in order to survive at their home countries. Philosophically many western governments and their central banks are the worst perpetrators of money laundering. 86.134.235.231 (talk) 15:55, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Do we need THAT many links?

trim the link down? -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 11:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent idea. It was ridiculous that the list of external links was longer than the article. Leuko 07:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
One point on links and one another general point
  • "One of the purest examples of layering comes at the end of the 2004 Danny Boyle film Millions, in which an ordinary family exchanges stolen British pounds for euro in many small, apparently untraceable transactions at banks all over the city." This practice is not layering it's actually called smurfing. Layering is adding transactions to confuse the beneficial ownership of property, smurfing is breaking it into small amounts to avoid detection of exchange or banking transactions.
  • As to the rest of the article I regret it looks a bit of a wreck to me, sorry! DavidP73 (talk) 16:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe what a bunch of nerds we are

We're updating money laundering in the dictionary —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.48.97.37 (talk) 06:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

The use of technology to prevent money-laundering

The External links on the topic of Money Laundering should include a link entitled: "The use of technology to prevent money-laundering". This is a a subject of much interest, and I suggest this link to the best independent review of the anti-money laundering software there is: http: //www.celent.com/PressReleases/20060829/AMLVendors2006.htm

As this report is not available for all, its probably worth mentioning that a smaller but free version exists at http://anti-moneylaundering.neteconomy.com/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.58.81.226 (talk) 08:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

The aftermath of Sept 11th

This topic should not be under the History section. It is a pretty recent development and the section - which is deals with the last 6 years - is as big as the rest of the history sections. That doesn't look right. I'm moving it to its own section. Anurag Garg 18:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

question about money laundering and exchange rates

lets say i work in the US and i want to send money back home, lets say uganda for instance, and considering the exchange value of the US dollar to my home country's currency, back home they may not get the desired amount. so to circumvent this i buy, lets say EUROS in the states and send them as they have a much higher exchange rate than the dollar, my question is, is this tantamount to money laundering?((Tuffcheff 09:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)).

No. That is called arbitrage. 86.134.235.231 (talk) 16:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Call for a scientific definition of Money laundering which should be....

international harmonized if any financial activity is globally involved. Professionally speaking, international laws or standards about money money laundering should be established —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.62.138.32 (talk) 03:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The talk page here is to discuss the article itself, not what the article is about. Thanks. SimonTrew (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Jurisprudence

I added these 2 landmark and historical first rulings of the Court, in relation to the 1986 statute in USA. The Supreme Court of the United States on June 2, 2008, rendered 2 judgments in favor of defendants, narrowing the application of the federal money-laundering statute. First, in a 9-0 decision, ponente Justice Clarence Thomas reversed Acuna, Mexico's Humberto Cuellar's conviction and ruled that "hiding $81,000 in cash under the floorboard of a car and driving toward Mexico is not enough to prove the driver was guilty of money laundering; instead, prosecutors must also prove the driver was traveling to Mexico for the purpose of hiding the true source of the funds." The Court further ruled "that federal prosecutors have gone too far in their use of money laundering charges to combat drug traffickers and organized crime; that money laundering charges under the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986, Sec. 18 U. S. C. § 1956(a)(2)(B)(i) apply only to profits of an illegal gambling ring and cannot be used when the only evidence of a possible crime is when a courier headed to Texas-Mexico border with $ 81,000 in cash (proceeds of a marijuana transaction); it cannot be proven merely by showing that the funds were concealed in a secret compartment of a Volkswagen Beetlecar; instead, prosecutors must show that the purpose of transporting funds in a money laundering case was to conceal their ownership, source or control; the secrecy must be part of a larger “design” to disguise the source or nature of the money." Second, in a 5 to 4 ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia reversed Efrain Santos of Indiana and Benedicto Diaz's convictions for money laundering based on cash from an illegal lottery. Scalia ruled that the law referred to the "proceeds of some form of unlawful activity; paying off gambling winners and compensating employees who collect the bets don't qualify as money laundering; the word “proceeds” in the federal money-laundering statute, 18 U. S. C. §1956,and §1956(a)(1)(A)(i) and§1956(h), applies only to transactions involving criminal profits, not criminal receipts; those are expenses, and prosecutors must show that profits were used to promote the illegal activity." Congress enacted the 1986 statute after the President's Commission on Organized Crime stressed the problem of "washing" criminal proceeds through overseas bank accounts and legitimate businesses. It imposes a 20-year maximum prison terms and heavy fines.supremecourtus.gov/opinions, REGALADO CUELLAR v. UNITED STATES, No. 06–1456, June 2, 2008supremecourtus.gov/opinions, U.S. v. Santos, 06-1005, June 2, 2008ap.google.com, Court rules for defendants on money launderingwww.nytimes.com, Justices Narrow Money-Laundering Lawlatimes.com/news, Supreme Court limits money laundering law --Florentino floro (talk) 10:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

WTF man, Bangladesh?

Nothing against Bangladesh, but are the three internationally important legal policies, the US, the UK and Bangladesh? Shouldn't we put a paragraph informing readers on the Money Laundering policies of Tuvalu? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.24.85.159 (talk) 23:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Add one then. SimonTrew (talk) 22:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

What about the more literal usage of the term?

Not to equate the History Channel or Discovery Channel or whatever program I was watching to gospel truth, but I've heard that in some cases, money laundering can refer to a much more literal process. Drug money often carries traces of drugs, most notably cocaine, which leads many drug dealers to literally launder their money in a clothes washing machine to remove the evidence. Ironically, because of this practice, spotting the laundered money is easier, as it shows traces of laundry detergent. I bring this up on the talk page rather than inserting it into the article because I am unsure of the sources (can't even remember what show I was watching, let alone their sources), unsure of its relevance, and because I feel more comfortable bringing the information up to more experienced users than editing the article myself (frankly, I'm surprised I figured out how to post this comment correctly). Linkkennedy (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

What about the usage of "Usage". Is the word "use" not good enough? SimonTrew (talk) 00:23, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Anyway more relevantly, I imagine the phosphors from the residual detergent on the paper would show up easily under ultraviolet light. Whether this would be a good or bad thing with those false note detection machines I don't know&emdash; I imagine generally bad, but perhaps it would confuse some of them. SimonTrew (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

A good clear-up

I think I have given this quite a good clear-up though have not significantly changed any comment. I always deliberately make my changes in fairly small steps so other editors can see each edit on its own (if they wish to disagree) rather than just a huge amount of red. So if anything wrong, feel free to discuss or to change. Be bold! SimonTrew (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Israel

Was there not an OECD report to say that Israel was the top place for money laundering? Could we have that in the articel? 81.156.180.208 (talk) 01:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you try to find some references and add them then? SimonTrew (talk) 13:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Israel is a money laundering center for the Jewish communities of the world, for example Jewish Americans and Russians. During and prior to the Nazi regimes of Germany, European Jews hid (and the present term laundered) their money in Switzerland, and even to the present day these accounts are being unearthed. These days they can do it in Israel. 86.137.252.77 (talk) 12:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Hitler would have been better off if he introduced the US style 3-strikes-and-out legislation. He would have been able to fix some trumped up charges of money laundering or tax evasion against every single Jew in Germany at that time, seize their worldwide properties and have them legally executed or imprisoned for life. 86.140.37.171 (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Israel, just carry on with your good work. Money laundering was meant to deal with corrupt politicians, government workers and drug dealers. Oficials in the west have abused the legislations to harass ordinary people instead of investigating themselves. Take Baroness Scotland of the UK, why don't they use the same law to investigate her? And all the others from Bill Clinton onwards? Did Clinton give Monika money directly or indirectly from government or White House budgets, because that could count as money laundering? People of the world are not dumb and know that Laws are made to use against them butpeople working in government are generally protected. People of the world should do what the Jews do come what may and protect their own interest and do what is right instead of succumbing to unjust and unfair laws made by cynical government adminstrations, because a government could declare state-sponored mass killing of people lawful, or 3-strikes and you are in jail for life, which of course would not apply to the people working in or for the government. 217.42.58.20 (talk) 11:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Is tax avoidance a form of money laundering?

I'm not familiar with this subject, but I was under the impression that tax avoidance can be the goal of a money launderer. For example, giving a check to a charity and the charity then returns cash while taking a percentage. This type of money laundering does not involve disguising illegally gained monies, but in of itself creates illegal money. If this is correct, the lead should reflect this aspect of money laundering. At this time, the opening sentence in the lead states "Money laundering is the practice of disguising illegally obtained funds so that they seem legal."--Pink Bull (talk) 15:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Probably not. But in the UK recent criminal legislations are so powerful that prosecutors will even go after small amounts of money as money laundering (small could be less than US$1,000). These small amounts could be the results of seizure from petty drug dealers. Recent reports suggest that the UK government spends $17 for every $1 it recovers as laundered money. 86.140.37.171 (talk) 00:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Which English is this?

Someone just changed "labour" to "labor". I changed it back. I can't see much to indicate strongly this is US or British English, the closest clue I find is "transferred" which I *think* in US English would be single R, but not sure, cos I think the rule if it changes the sound (like to "tranfeared") then it keeps the double R. I don't mind which but should we say so explicitly? I am British although I have lived in the US and work for a US company so am quite familiar with both, but this article does not, to my eye, show obvious clues either way. It may for a US reader stick out like a sore thumb as British English, though.

Si Trew (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Breaking Bad

As has already been mentioned, this article was used on the episode "Half Measures" of Breaking Bad. The shot was made before 23 April 2010, since that was when the cleanup tag was removed. The question is if this should be mentioned in the article, or if that would violate the guideline against self-references. Lampman (talk) 22:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

ha ha i noticed that too! it's weird too see real internet things on tv like that, not fake flashy pseudo-internet stuff —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.22.166.8 (talk) 14:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
maybe a screenshot of the page from the episode of breaking bad (S03E12, "Half Measures") could be included somewhere in the article. gets around the whole self reference concerns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.38.59.161 (talk) 04:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Breaking Bad is one of my favorite television programs, but this is far too minor to warrant an image (which wouldn't illustrate much anyway, as it would include no elements readily identifiable with the show). —David Levy 05:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Haha yeah I saw this too. Such a great feeling. Don't know if it's relevant to include a reference in the article itself though. Perhaps such a reference belongs in the Wikipedia article. Autonova (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

does anyone else think this thing is a mess?

This article has been edited hundreds of times, but is still inaccurate and unsourced. I am going to try to do an update of the article, including reorganization, updating, adding citations, etc. Anyone is welcome to join. I intend to start with the US section first and then move on to organizational issues, then rewrite the introduction. Happy to have anyone else help, particularly for the description of non-us money laundering. But this will be a major project, and I am a newbie, so please be patient. --Wiki33139 (talk) 10:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Having a basic structure to work off of would be a good start. Broadly the sections now are:
  • Types / Methods
  • Laws / Legislation
  • Enforcement
  • Misc.
I've organized them broadly under these headers (they were roughly in this order before). Offhand other sections could be a Famous cases section. Not sure if any other sections would be needed. We also need to rework the lead to generalize to a more general definition. Right now it tends to be pretty specific, and from a legal perspective there are several types of money laundering (the U.S. Code has two distinct statutes that cover different forms of transfers) and the lead should focus on the broad version. Shadowjams (talk) 20:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

nicely done. couple of thoughts:

  • I have reworked the US laws section. Still not done, though, as I think the discussion of the two cases unbalances the article. That is especially true given that the second case was undone by subsequent legislation. I am thinking that it makes sense to cut that down significantly. Also, the discussion of terrorist finance needs to go somewhere else and be expanded. I will give that some thought.
  • In looking a some of the links, I noticed that the one for the Money Laundering Control Act is inaccurate, so I have changed it to conform to our section here.
  • I have edited the lead.


--Wiki33139 (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

9/11 and the international response to the underground economy

I am deleting this section for the following reasons:

  • The only source listed is to a French-language web cite, and I thus can't verify it.
  • Clearstream and the journalist who originally leveled the charges in a book "Revelation$" Denis Robert have their own wiki pages, and this does not seem to fit within an article about money laundering.
  • The allegations appear to be false. As noted in the page on Denis Robert: "On 29 March 2004, the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris (High Court) judged Robert, his publisher Les Arènes and the French TV company Canal+ France, which had repeated the allegations raised in Revelation$, to have failed in their attempts to prove any and all allegations; furthermore the court ordered damages to be paid to Clearstream and that the judgment be printed in two French newspapers explaining the defamatory nature of the material."

--Wiki33139 (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Laundered or not?

This section needs to be reworked, as the discussion goes on for too long about a minor area of the law. I proposed condensing it and collapsing into the general discussion of money laundering enforcement, unless the consensus tells me otherwise.

--Wiki33139 (talk) 12:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


Done.

--Wiki33139 (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Enforcement

The beginning paragraph of the section contains a number of unreferenced and inaccurate statements. It is also not organized well, in that it talks about KYC, which should be in the next section, and discusses US law, which is found later.

Most egregiously, it promotes a commercial service, which needs to be deleted.

Wiki33139 (talk) 06:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Definition of money laundering

I reverted the prior edits concerning the definition of money laundering. Money laundering is not simply making money from source A look like it came from source B. If both A and B were legal sources, that would not be money laundering. Rather, money laundering is disguising the source of criminally-derived proceeds to make it look like it was derived legally. Every money laundering prohibition of which I am aware (US, Canada, the EU, and the international standards in the Vienna and Palermo Conventions) require that the money must be from an illegal source. The source previously cited, "How stuff works" itself contains no citations, and is in contradiction with the international standards I mentioned. I added a more authoritative set of citations for the definition as well. Thanks.

Wiki33139 (talk) 10:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Opposition to anti-money-laundering legislation/regulation?

I note no discussion of opposition to anti-money-laundering legislation/regulation, such as on the grounds of financial privacy/confidentiality. Such opposition is present both inside the US (see libertarianism, for instance) and outside (note tax haven countries). Allens (talk) 15:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


Feel free to contribute to maintain whatever balance you think it might need. Also, take a look at "value of enforcement costs," which has a discussion of the countering viewpoint from an economic/effectiveness prospective, but not from a privacy point of view. I will see if I can find a citation, but again, feel free to contribute yourself. Wiki33139 (talk) 10:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll try, but my feelings on the matter are strong enough that I'm worried about keeping NPOV. Allens (talk) 13:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Well, at least acknowledged biases are better than unconscious ones :~). I tried to keep the general tone factual and not imply that the anti-money laundering effort was good or bad, but rather simply describe what exists. In any event, after your comment I added some text regarding privacy, so thanks for bringing that to my attention. I think it is sufficiently balanced to remove the POV "flag," or whatever you call it (I'm not a very experienced editor), from the start of the article. I invite others to give their opinions on the balance of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki33139 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Removed flag regarding POV.
Wiki33139 (talk) 13:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Archives? Where?

Where is the link to the archived discussions? __meco (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

"El Conciento"

This doesn't have a citation, and I can't find anything about it whatsoever on the Internet. Pretty sure this isn't true. Google search returns 2 results - both completely unrelated. 76.118.128.151 (talk) 04:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree; moreover, a specific method of ML practiced in a single place in a single country doesn't belong in the section on general methods of money laundering, nor is it particularly notable. I have deleted, and if the original editor wants to give a source for the claim, then we should find a home for it somewhere else. Wiki33139 (talk) 19:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Phishing

I removed the (very short) section on phishing from the main article. Phishing is a crime itself, not a money laundering process. Although the proceeds of phishing scams are characteristically laundered, that doesn't really differentiate them from any other type of financial crime. --Legis (talk - contribs) 15:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Criminals

Doesnt this article just give criminals ideas on how to launder money? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Anything can be a good example for criminals such as Breaking Bad. It doesn't matter... 88.253.34.73 (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

We're not criminals! We're just buying a Car Wash, that's all. Skyler White aka Saint91 (talk) 00:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Breaking bad season 3 episode 12 :-)--Svebert (talk) 10:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

More effective than what?

In the value of enforcement costs section, it says "The Economist magazine has become increasingly vocal in its criticism of such regulation, particularly with reference to countering terrorist financing, referring to it as a "costly failure", although concedes that the rules to combat money laundering are more effective."

The last part of this sentence is meaningless, because we don't know what it is supposed to be more effective than.

I went and reviewed the article, and in fact what it says is that banking regulations are ineffective, and that other actions (like cracking down on credit card fraud for instance) are much more effective tools against money laundering. Have edited to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.60.181 (talk) 16:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

I think this article should have an "in popular culture" section if only because this article was featured in an episode of Breaking Bad (ep: Half Measures) when one of the characters was researching how to launder money. An article referencing a reference of itself would please me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.8.92 (talk) 23:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. At least Aconite did it with Dexter in season 7. TK(film) (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
The information is now here: Wikipedia in culture#In television episodes.--93.36.142.49 (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Notable Cases

HSBC and Standard Chartered are not listed here. Standard Chartered is arguably an oversight. But someone added HSBC last month and it was promptly deleted with the comment that it was covered in the HSBC article. While that is true, I don't see how that merits its exclusion as a notable case in this article. Jreiss17 (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Be prepared to add Mt. Gox and BTC to the article soon.  ;) 2601:1:9500:6D5:EDC7:D88B:4DF0:3329 (talk) 08:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

global regulatory agencies AML/CFT

suggest to separate global players like IMF, World Bank, Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the world anti-money laundering body and the likes into a separate section. they all use this "insider acronym" that wikipedia hasnt indexed yet: AML/CFT, which automatically connects money laundring with terror financing, as if they were siamese twins

AML/CFT is also in the US code, particularly the dept homeland security and dept of treasury.

EU uses the equivalent term, see What are money laundering and terrorist financing? --Wuerzele (talk) 08:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Page Publicity

So this page was featured in season 3 episode 12 of the Emmy winning (16 wins) TV series Breaking Bad... So is there a way to give the page a banner, or something...? Yeah, I guess that's not really "encyclopedia behavior", but this is not "any encyclopedia"... Even just a little italic sentence saying "This page was featured on the hit Emmy-winning series Breaking Bad" UsernameTBD (talk) 01:33, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Those mentions go on the talk page, not the main article page. There was a template in the heading at the top here, but it wasn't working right. I think it's fixed now. 2600:1006:B110:34CE:B945:D20A:9451:85D (talk) 02:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

pov

Does the author of this article not seem a tad enthusiastic about the subject? Or is it just me?137.205.183.82 (talk) 12:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

United States AML laws section is not good

This short history is a good start.

https://www.fincen.gov/news_room/aml_history.html

--Ishu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.78.142 (talk) 14:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Examples Removed

Why were the examples removed from the "Method" section? These general examples contributed to the understanding of the topic. They were removed by an anonymous user, without any comment. Is there some wikipedia policy against including what would appear to be instructions for criminal activity? 159.172.43.6 (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Replaced the deleted content. If there was a good reason for removing it in the first place, please revert and talk about it here. Assuming good faith, I suspect that this removed either out of a concern for public morality, or for being overly detailed. Phildonnia (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Money laundering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:00, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Thought crime?

One does not do money laundering except to hide something illegal -- embezzlement, drug trafficking, tax evasion, economic plunder, political corruption, concealment of assets from collection in the wake of bankruptcy proceedings or divorce settlements... perhaps two ways in which money laundering could be honorable would be if it were to be used in concealing the funding of the overthrow of a despotic regime or if it were used to transfer money away from people deemed pariahs of a dictatorial regime (like Jews of Nazi Germany) to safe havens to which those pariahs can get access to assets thus secreted.

Money is the lifeblood of any significant activity, and double-entry accounting and mandates for clarity in financial accounting make deceit in financial dealings much more difficult than otherwise. Money laundering would seem to be a form of obstruction of justice if the money involved comes from criminal means or evades taxes. Pbrower2a (talk) 17:55, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Money laundering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Money laundering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Transaction Laundering and Affiliate Fraud

I have added these to the methods section.

My rationale is summed up by these quotations:

"Transaction laundering is the new sophisticated form of money laundering and terrorism financing and is one of the biggest challenges facing the AML regime today.

This advanced merchant-based fraud scheme takes advantage of legitimate payment ecosystems by funneling unknown transactions through seemingly unrelated ecommerce merchant accounts. Sleek legitimate websites act as payment processing storefronts for criminal enterprises selling firearms, illicit drugs, child pornography and other illegal goods.

This creates a situation where Merchant Service Providers (MSPs) unknowingly facilitate money laundering or end up processing payments stemming from, or intended for, financing illegal activities, thus exposing themselves to financial and legal liability, penalties from the credit card companies and severe reputational damage."

http://evercompliant.com/transaction-laundering-new-advanced-form-money-laundering/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.158.110.114 (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC)


Currently, the only search result on wikipedia now for "transaction laundering" is this on the dhgate.com page:

<quote>On November 10, 2015, DHgate.com announced that it had implemented Austreme's Transaction Laundering Detection solution (TLD) for risk and fraud management of its payment platform.[11]</quote>

8-1-2018: I have added a revised section on transaction laundering. I believe that it is too huge an omission to leave out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.158.110.114 (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

"$AUD1000"?

This is used on the page: $AUD1000. What denomination is that? Since it discusses activities of the US, shouldn't it use US dollars? -Frecklefoot —Preceding undated comment added 17:51, 5 February 2003‎ (UTC)

I just removed that, and added US currency notation. I think that this could end up being the most useful information on the wikipedia. --DropDeadGorgias —Preceding undated comment added 20:08, 6 March 2003 (UTC)‎

One problem of criminal activities is accounting for the proceeds without raising the suspicion of law enforcement agencies.

It's not really a problem of [sic] such activities. Rather, criminals try to avoid detection by concealing the origin of their illicit funds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.84.225 (talk) 10:57, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

The problem in this case is that the process is illegal, which begs the question whether "illegal" should be used in the lede. Legality is a social construct. 47.137.185.72 (talk) 01:51, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

After money has been laundered it can be used for legitimate purposes.

Laundered money can't be used legitimately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.84.225 (talk) 11:00, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

It's impossible to prove laundered money is illegitimate. That's the entire point of money laundering. To destroy the trail, so that you are innocent until proven guilty. 198.153.92.254 (talk) 17:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 May 2019 and 2 July 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tailz88.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Definition - is it correct that the amounts need to be large?

In the first sentence of this article, money laundering is defined as "the process of changing large amounts of money obtained from crimes, such as drug trafficking, into origination from a legitimate source". Is it correct to have "large" as a part of the definition? Of course I do understand that the amounts involved increase the seriousness of the crime; however, is it so that if you do the same with smaller amounts, it is not money laundering per se? Eivind (t) 13:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Money_laundering/Archive_1&oldid=1214150874"