You might also be interested in
Replies (7)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Donald, the trouble with all of this is we spend hours and hours on end getting fairly pointless ID which any proper criminal would be able to fake anyhow.
All you have succeeded in doing is create just another 'tick box' culture with a large burden of admin with few results on the ground.
This puts accountants on the back foot to start with. We don't really care about it, and why should we? Nor do estate agents, lawyers, or anyone else. Its just another thing to get through before we can do our job, bare minimum compliance, barem minimum thought.
We are compelled by draconian legislation to submit SAR's, but in practice not one of the ones I have put in has resulted in any action on the part of HMRC. You could have collected at least £20k from ones I have put in if you muppets had bothered to take some action. After which point I can assure you I really cant be bothered any more, and I am happy to keep my eyes pretty closed unless there is something so big and so obvious I am compelled by fear of a prison term for not putting one in.
Remember accountants DONT GET PAID to deal with all of this. Even your standard police informant gets a few £20's for being a garss. We get nothing, but cost.
If you want more SAR's then you need more carrot, less stick, and you need to actually act on them, and been seen to be acting on them.
An accountant submitted an SAR for us and I have been wondering if it will be taken up.
I take from what you say that this is unlikely.
Thank you for your comment.
I agree with the reply 110% - no, actually 120%
This MLR b*llocks is a complete and utter waste of time.
Have to agree with the other responses. I've made a number of SARs re tax evasion, but they've been completely ignored by HMRC, even when I've handed them the information on a plate, with full details of identity, tax references, dates of transactions, etc. One case alone was tax evasion of around £10k in just a single year. If HMRC can't be bothered to act on that kind of information, I can't be bothered to tell them anymore. Like others, I'll keep my eyes and ears closed in the future!
I agree with the previous respondents. The AML system is a load of bollox. It is not used to catch criminals but can be used to persecute those whose only crime is a failure to comply with the burdensome AML admin itself.
When we hear about such things as HSBC being allowed to launder Mexican drug cartel money and its head of compliance at the time being subsequently appointed Chair of the BBC Trust, we tend to view articles like this as drivel.
I would echo what everyone else has said.
In the middle of 2015 I became aware of a fraud in which the fraudster impersonated my firm, to add fake audit reports to accounts. This enabled them to obtain credit from suppliers, receive the goods and then disappear. When I looked into it, I found around 30 linked companies, that I knew of. There were probably dozens of others that I didn’t.
Based upon the county court judgements these companies received, I would estimate the loss to victims be at least £750k.
I probably made around half a dozen SARs over the course of a year. But heard nothing further. The Insolvency Service eventually wound most of them up.
However, a couple of them still survive to this day. One even recently filed what appear to be false unaudited accounts.
Apparently us accountants don’t file enough SARs, but what’s the point, when it appears that the National Crime Agency and other agencies can’t deal with the number they already receive?
I would be keen to see the stats on this but I would imagine that the AML regulations have prosecuted more Solicitors, Accountants and Estate Agents for getting it wrong or making mistakes then they have caught terrorists and drug cartels.
I now understand that Bitcoin is the currency of criminality, yet it is totally unregulated, you couldn't make it up.
Front line is where resources are needed to get on top of this not forcing further regulation on us.