Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Cross-Border Electronic Transmittals of Funds Survey, 14289-14291 [E6-4073]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 21, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Cross-Border
Electronic Transmittals of Funds
Survey
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network requests
comments on a survey that seeks input
from trade groups representing members
of the U.S. financial services industry
on the feasibility of requiring reporting
of cross-border electronic transmittals of
funds, and the impact such reporting
would have on the industry. The survey
is part of a study of these issues
required by section 6302 of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004. This request for
comments is being made pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 105–13, 44 U.S.C. 3506
(c)(2)(A).
Written comments should be
received on or before May 5, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network, P.O. Box 39,
Vienna, Virginia 22183, Attention: PRA
Comments—Cross-Border Survey.
Comments also may be submitted by
electronic mail to the following Internet
address: regcomments@fincen.gov, with
a caption in the body of the text,
‘‘Attention: PRA Comments—CrossBorder Survey.’’
Inspection of comments. Comments
may be inspected, between 10 a.m. and
4 p.m., in the FinCEN reading room in
Washington, DC. Persons wishing to
inspect the comments submitted must
request an appointment by telephoning
(202) 354–6400.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
requests for copies of the questions for
the new cross-border survey that is the
subject of this notice should be directed
to: Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, Regulatory Policy and
Programs Division at (800) 949–2732.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 17, 2004, President Bush
signed into law S. 2845, the Intelligence
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004 (Act).1 Among other things, the
Act requires that the Secretary of the
Treasury study the feasibility of
‘‘requiring such financial institutions as
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
DATES:
1 Pub.
L. 108–458, 118 Stat. 3638 (2004).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:01 Mar 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
the Secretary determines to be
appropriate to report to the Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network certain
cross-border electronic transmittals of
funds, if the Secretary determines that
reporting of such transmittals is
reasonably necessary to conduct the
efforts of the Secretary against money
laundering and terrorist financing.’’ The
report must identify what cross-border
information would be reasonably
necessary to combat money laundering
and terrorist financing; outline the
criteria to be used in determining what
situations will require reporting; outline
the form, manner, and frequency of
reporting; and identify the technology
necessary for Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network to keep, analyze,
protect, and disseminate the data
collected. This survey seeks input from
trade groups representing members of
the U.S. financial services industry on
the feasibility of requiring reporting of
cross-border electronic transmittals of
funds, and the impact such reporting
would have on the industry.
Title 31 CFR 103.33 (e)–(g) provides
uniform recordkeeping and transmittal
requirements for financial institutions
and are intended to help law
enforcement and regulatory authorities
detect, investigate and prosecute money
laundering and other financial crimes
by preserving an information trail about
persons sending and receiving funds
through the funds transfer system.
Although the requirements for banks
and non-bank financial institutions are
similar, their respective rules contain
different terminology. For the purposes
of this document, when terminology for
banks is used, the intent is for it to
apply to the broader universe of
financial institutions.
Under current regulations, for each
payment order that it receives, a
financial institution must obtain and
retain the following information on
funds transfers of $3,000 or more: (a)
Name and address of the originator; (b)
the amount of the funds transfer; (c) the
date of the request; (d) any payment
instructions received from the originator
with the payment order; (e) the identity
of the beneficiary’s bank; (f) and as
much information pertaining to the
beneficiary as is received, such as name
and address, account number, and any
other identifying information.
Intermediary and beneficiary banks
receiving a payment order are required
to keep an original or a copy of the
payment order. An originator bank is
required to verify the identity of the
person placing a payment order if it is
made in person and if the person is not
already a customer. Similarly, if a
beneficiary bank delivers the proceeds
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14289
to the beneficiary in person, the
beneficiary bank is required to verify the
identity of that person if not already a
customer.
The feasibility study will examine the
advisability of imposing the
requirement that financial institutions
report to the Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network certain of the
transactions of which it must currently
maintain records under those
regulations. The intent of this survey is
to gather information from the banking
and financial services industries to
assist in determining the feasibility and
impact of such a reporting requirement.
If feasible, the Act requires the Secretary
to promulgate rules imposing a
reporting requirement by December
2007. An inadequate understanding of
the impact could result in ineffective
regulations that impose unreasonable
regulatory burdens with little or no
corresponding anti-money laundering
benefits.
We would appreciate receiving
comments on this survey on or before
April 15, 2006.
You may submit comments or
questions about this survey by e-mail to
eric.kringel@fincen.gov or by U.S. Mail
to: Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, Post Office. Box 39, Vienna,
VA 22183, Attn: Eric Kringel, Senior
Policy Advisor. Thank you for your
assistance.
Solely for purposes of clarity and in
aiding respondents in your comments to
the questions below, we propose the
following definition:
Cross-Border Electronic Transmittal of
Funds. Cross-border electronic
transmittal of funds means any wire
transfer in which either the originator or
the beneficiary of the transfer is located
in the United States and the other is
located outside the United States. This
term also refers to any chain of wire
transfer instructions that has at least one
cross-border element, and encompasses
any such transfer in which an
institution is involved as originator’s
institution, beneficiary’s institution,
intermediary, or correspondent, whether
that institution’s involvement involves
direct transmission to or from a foreign
institution. The definition does not
include any debit transmittals, point-ofsale (POS) systems, transaction
conducted through an Automated
Clearing House (ACH) process, or
Automated Teller Machine (ATM).
To the extent your member financial
institutions can provide the following
information, we would like responses to
the questions outlined below. We are
seeking general or aggregated
information (i.e., ‘‘45% of our
membership * * *.’’) rather than
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
14290
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 21, 2006 / Notices
specific responses about particular
institutions.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Background Information
1. Please characterize the institutions
your organization represents (i.e., banks,
broker-dealers, currency dealers or
exchangers, casinos, money services
businesses, etc.).
2. How would you further describe
the institutions your organization
represents by the primary nature of your
business (i.e., community banks, credit
unions, money center banks, money
transmitters, specialized business lanes,
etc.).
3. What is the approximate volume of
the overall funds transfer business (by
total number and aggregate dollar
amount) your member institutions
conduct over a one-year period?
4. What is the approximate volume
cross-border electronic transmittals of
funds (by total number and aggregate
dollar amount) your member
institutions send and receive over a oneyear period?
To the extent possible, please estimate
the percentage of cross-border electronic
transmittal of funds sent or received by
your member financial institutions, in
the following categories (if applicable):
a. On behalf of their own customers,
b. As an intermediary or
correspondent for other institutions
c. As internal settlement with their
own institution’s foreign affiliates or
branches.
d. As the U.S. financial institution
that directly transmitted the payment
order to or accepted the payment order
from a financial institution located
outside of the United States.
5. Do your member institutions send
or receive cross-border electronic
transmittal of funds in-house or through
a correspondent?
a. What systems (e.g., SWIFT,
Fedwire, CHIPS, proprietary system) are
used to send or receive cross-border
funds transfers?
b. What is the proportional usage of
each system if more than one system is
used?
c. Are there instances when the
system used is dictated by the nature of
the transaction or customer instruction?
If possible, please exclude those
situations where the decision is due to
the fact that the receiving financial
institution does not use a particular
system.
Existing Record Maintenance and
Compliance Process
6. How do your member institutions
maintain the funds transfer records
required by 31 CFR 103.33 (i.e., message
system logs or backups, wire transfer
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:30 Mar 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
instruction database, account history
files, etc.)?
a. If the data is stored electronically,
can the storage systems export such data
into a spreadsheet or database file for
reporting?
7. Approximately how many times in
a one-year period does the government
subpoena or otherwise issue a legal
demand requiring your member
institutions to produce cross-border
wire transfer information?
Note: We understand that many requests
seek ‘‘any and all records’’ pertaining to an
account or subject. Where possible, please
distinguish those requests from more specific
requests for cross-border electronic
transmittals of funds.
8. Can you estimate the approximate
total cost (e.g., person-hours or other
costs) to your member institutions in
time and expense responding to these
legal demands? If you cannot estimate
the costs incurred, please describe
generally the resources involved in
complying with such requests.
Foreign Transactions
9. Do your member institutions or any
of their branches, subsidiaries, or
affiliates transmit or receive crossborder electronic transmittals of funds
from a location in either Australia or
Canada?
a. If yes, please briefly describe the
measures taken, including the general
estimates of the costs in time and
expense incurred, to ensure compliance
with the cross-border funds transfer
reporting requirements in those
jurisdictions and the measures in place
to monitor and maintain compliance.
10. If the Department of the Treasury
required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds
involving amounts over $3,000, what
general steps would your member
institutions need to take (and how
burdensome would it be) to comply?
a. Would the answer differ if the value
threshold were $10,000?
b. Would the answer differ if there
were no value threshold?
c. How would these different
thresholds affect the volume of the
reporting from your member
institutions?
d. How would the answer differ with
the type of required reporting (e.g.,
electronic file upload, Web-based form)?
e. How would the answer differ with
the timing of required reporting (e.g.,
real-time, end-of-day, within 30 days)?
f. To the extent possible, please
estimate any cost increase for crossborder electronic transmittals of funds s
that may result.
g. To the extent possible, please
describe any effects that reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requirements may have on the volume
or value of cross-border electronic
transmittals of funds.
Potential Impact on Financial
Institutions
11. If the Department of Treasury
required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds in a
SWIFT, CHIPS or other file format
specified by the Department, what steps
would your member institutions need to
take to extract such data from existing
records to submit the information as
required?
12. If the Department of Treasury
required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds but also
provided exceptions for certain
customers or types of transactions (i.e.,
internal settlement, identical originator
and beneficiary, transfers to government
entities, etc.), what exemptions would
you suggest?
a. How difficult would it be for your
member institutions to build such
exceptions into the business process for
creating the report?
b. Would the costs to implement the
exceptions outweigh the benefits?
13. If the Department of the Treasury
required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds, should
the requirement be limited to certain
institutions (e.g., only the originating
institution, only the beneficiary’s
institution, only the U.S. financial
institution that directly transmits the
payment order to or accepts the
payment order from a financial
institution located outside of the United
States)? Please explain the rationale for
your response.
14. Can your member financial
institutions’ automated systems
distinguish between domestic funds
transfer and a cross-border electronic
transmittal of funds?
15. Among the following definitions
of ‘‘cross-border electronic transmittal of
funds’’ what potential advantages and
disadvantages do you perceive? Do you
have any suggestions for such a
definition or can you highlight any
particular issues that should be
addressed in such a definition?
(Note: All of the following definitions
would exclude check, debit transmittal,
ATM, or ACH payments.)
a. Cross-border electronic transfer of
funds means any wire transfer where
the originator’s and beneficiary’s
institutions are located in different
countries and one of the institutions is
located in the United States. This term
also refers to any chain of wire transfers
that has at least one cross-border
element
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 21, 2006 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
b. Cross-border electronic transfers of
funds include transactions where either
(1) a foreign office of a financial
institution instructs a U.S. office of a
financial institution to effect payment in
the U.S., directly or indirectly, or (2)
where U.S. office of a financial
institution instructs a foreign office of a
financial institution to effect a payment
abroad, directly or indirectly.
c. Cross-border electronic transmittal
of funds means the transmission—
through any electronic, magnetic or
optical device, telephone instrument or
computer—of instructions for the
transfer of funds, other than the transfer
of funds within the United States. In the
case of SWIFT messages, only SWIFT
MT 100 and SWIFT MT 103 messages
are included
d. Cross-border electronic transmittal
of funds means an instruction for a
transfer of funds that is transmitted into
or out of the United States electronically
or by telegraph, where the financial
institution is acting on behalf of, or at
the request of, another person who is
not a financial institution
Title: Cross-Border Electronic
Transmittals of Funds Survey.
OMB Number: 1506–0048.
Abstract: Survey to be conducted with
business owners and managers in the
Cross-Border Electronic Transmittals of
Funds industry. Survey asks
respondents to report on cross-border
financial services provided by their
businesses.
Type of Review: New information
collection.
Affected Public: Business or other for
profit institutions.
Frequency: One time.
Estimated Burden: Reporting average
of 60 minutes per response.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
23,262.
Estimated Total Responses: 23,262.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 23,262.
Request for Comments
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval. All comments will become a
matter of public record. Comments are
invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected: (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:01 Mar 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital
or start-up costs and costs of operation,
maintenance and purchase of services to
provide information.
Dated: March 14, 2006.
Robert Werner,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network.
[FR Doc. E6–4073 Filed 3–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Request for Comments on Treasury’s
Report to Congress on International
and Exchange Rate Policies
Office of the Under Secretary
for International Affairs, Treasury.
ACTION: Request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of the Under
Secretary for International Affairs of the
U.S. Department of the Treasury invites
all interested parties to comment on the
methodology used in preparing its semiannual report to Congress on
International and Exchange Rate
Policies and to submit views on the
contents of its next report.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before April 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted by mail, facsimile or email.
All comments should contain the
following information in the heading:
‘‘Attn: Request for Public Comments on
the Report to Congress on International
and Exchange Rate Policies.’’
Mailing address: Office of the Under
Secretary for International Affairs,
Department of the Treasury, 1500
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220.
Facsimile: (202) 622–2009 (not a tollfree number).
Email: ashby.mccown@do.treas.gov.
For further information concerning the
submission of comments, refer to the
heading ‘‘Request for Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION portion of
this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Weeks, Director, Global Economics
Unit, Department of the Treasury, 1500
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220, (202) 622–9885
(not a toll-free number),
john.weeks@do.treas.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 3004 of Public Law 100–418
(22 U.S.C. 5304) requires, inter alia, that
the Secretary of the Treasury analyze on
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14291
an annual basis the exchange rate
policies of foreign countries, in
consultation with the International
Monetary Fund, and consider whether
countries manipulate the rate of
exchange between their currency and
the United States dollar for purposes of
preventing effective balance of
payments adjustment or gaining unfair
competitive advantage in international
trade. Section 3004 further requires that:
‘‘If the Secretary considers that such
manipulation is occurring with respect
to countries that (1) have material global
current account surpluses; and (2) have
significant bilateral trade surpluses with
the United States, the Secretary of the
Treasury shall take action to initiate
negotiations with such foreign countries
on an expedited basis, in the
International Monetary Fund or
bilaterally, for the purpose of ensuring
that such countries regularly and
promptly adjust the rate of exchange
between their currencies and the United
States dollar to permit effective balance
of payment adjustments and to
eliminate the unfair advantage.’’
Section 3005 (22 U.S.C. 5305)
requires, inter alia, the Secretary of the
Treasury to provide each six months a
report on international economic policy,
including exchange rate policy. Among
other matters, the reports are to contain
the results of negotiations conducted
pursuant to Section 3004. Each of these
reports bears the title, Report to
Congress on International Economic and
Exchange Rate Policies, (the ‘‘Report’’).
Treasury is soliciting comments on
the methods used by Treasury to
analyze the economies and exchange
rate policies of foreign countries in
order to help improve the process of
carrying out its responsibilities under
Sections 3004 and 3005. The most
recent Report can be found on the Web
site of the Office of the Under Secretary
for International Affairs, at https://
www.treas.gov/offices/internationalaffairs/economic-exchange-rates/.
Treasury is also soliciting views on
approaches that might be fruitful in the
upcoming spring 2006 Report.
Request for Comments
Comments must be submitted in
writing by one of the methods specified
in the ADDRESSES portion of this notice.
All comments should contain the
following information in the heading:
‘‘Attn: Request for Comments on the
Report to Congress on International and
Exchange Rate Policies.’’ Comments
must be received by April 7, 2006.
Treasury requests that comments be no
more than two pages in length.
The Office of the Under Secretary for
International Affairs will not accept
E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM
21MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 21, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14289-14291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4073]
[[Page 14289]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Cross-Border Electronic Transmittals of Funds Survey
AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network requests comments on
a survey that seeks input from trade groups representing members of the
U.S. financial services industry on the feasibility of requiring
reporting of cross-border electronic transmittals of funds, and the
impact such reporting would have on the industry. The survey is part of
a study of these issues required by section 6302 of the Intelligence
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. This request for comments
is being made pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
Law 105-13, 44 U.S.C. 3506 (c)(2)(A).
DATES: Written comments should be received on or before May 5, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network, P.O. Box 39, Vienna, Virginia 22183, Attention:
PRA Comments--Cross-Border Survey. Comments also may be submitted by
electronic mail to the following Internet address:
regcomments@fincen.gov, with a caption in the body of the text,
``Attention: PRA Comments--Cross-Border Survey.''
Inspection of comments. Comments may be inspected, between 10 a.m.
and 4 p.m., in the FinCEN reading room in Washington, DC. Persons
wishing to inspect the comments submitted must request an appointment
by telephoning (202) 354-6400.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
requests for copies of the questions for the new cross-border survey
that is the subject of this notice should be directed to: Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network, Regulatory Policy and Programs Division at
(800) 949-2732.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 17, 2004, President Bush signed
into law S. 2845, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
of 2004 (Act).\1\ Among other things, the Act requires that the
Secretary of the Treasury study the feasibility of ``requiring such
financial institutions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to
report to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network certain cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds, if the Secretary determines that
reporting of such transmittals is reasonably necessary to conduct the
efforts of the Secretary against money laundering and terrorist
financing.'' The report must identify what cross-border information
would be reasonably necessary to combat money laundering and terrorist
financing; outline the criteria to be used in determining what
situations will require reporting; outline the form, manner, and
frequency of reporting; and identify the technology necessary for
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to keep, analyze, protect, and
disseminate the data collected. This survey seeks input from trade
groups representing members of the U.S. financial services industry on
the feasibility of requiring reporting of cross-border electronic
transmittals of funds, and the impact such reporting would have on the
industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pub. L. 108-458, 118 Stat. 3638 (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 31 CFR 103.33 (e)-(g) provides uniform recordkeeping and
transmittal requirements for financial institutions and are intended to
help law enforcement and regulatory authorities detect, investigate and
prosecute money laundering and other financial crimes by preserving an
information trail about persons sending and receiving funds through the
funds transfer system. Although the requirements for banks and non-bank
financial institutions are similar, their respective rules contain
different terminology. For the purposes of this document, when
terminology for banks is used, the intent is for it to apply to the
broader universe of financial institutions.
Under current regulations, for each payment order that it receives,
a financial institution must obtain and retain the following
information on funds transfers of $3,000 or more: (a) Name and address
of the originator; (b) the amount of the funds transfer; (c) the date
of the request; (d) any payment instructions received from the
originator with the payment order; (e) the identity of the
beneficiary's bank; (f) and as much information pertaining to the
beneficiary as is received, such as name and address, account number,
and any other identifying information. Intermediary and beneficiary
banks receiving a payment order are required to keep an original or a
copy of the payment order. An originator bank is required to verify the
identity of the person placing a payment order if it is made in person
and if the person is not already a customer. Similarly, if a
beneficiary bank delivers the proceeds to the beneficiary in person,
the beneficiary bank is required to verify the identity of that person
if not already a customer.
The feasibility study will examine the advisability of imposing the
requirement that financial institutions report to the Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network certain of the transactions of which it must
currently maintain records under those regulations. The intent of this
survey is to gather information from the banking and financial services
industries to assist in determining the feasibility and impact of such
a reporting requirement. If feasible, the Act requires the Secretary to
promulgate rules imposing a reporting requirement by December 2007. An
inadequate understanding of the impact could result in ineffective
regulations that impose unreasonable regulatory burdens with little or
no corresponding anti-money laundering benefits.
We would appreciate receiving comments on this survey on or before
April 15, 2006.
You may submit comments or questions about this survey by e-mail to
eric.kringel@fincen.gov or by U.S. Mail to: Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network, Post Office. Box 39, Vienna, VA 22183, Attn: Eric
Kringel, Senior Policy Advisor. Thank you for your assistance.
Solely for purposes of clarity and in aiding respondents in your
comments to the questions below, we propose the following definition:
Cross-Border Electronic Transmittal of Funds. Cross-border
electronic transmittal of funds means any wire transfer in which either
the originator or the beneficiary of the transfer is located in the
United States and the other is located outside the United States. This
term also refers to any chain of wire transfer instructions that has at
least one cross-border element, and encompasses any such transfer in
which an institution is involved as originator's institution,
beneficiary's institution, intermediary, or correspondent, whether that
institution's involvement involves direct transmission to or from a
foreign institution. The definition does not include any debit
transmittals, point-of-sale (POS) systems, transaction conducted
through an Automated Clearing House (ACH) process, or Automated Teller
Machine (ATM).
To the extent your member financial institutions can provide the
following information, we would like responses to the questions
outlined below. We are seeking general or aggregated information (i.e.,
``45% of our membership * * *.'') rather than
[[Page 14290]]
specific responses about particular institutions.
Background Information
1. Please characterize the institutions your organization
represents (i.e., banks, broker-dealers, currency dealers or
exchangers, casinos, money services businesses, etc.).
2. How would you further describe the institutions your
organization represents by the primary nature of your business (i.e.,
community banks, credit unions, money center banks, money transmitters,
specialized business lanes, etc.).
3. What is the approximate volume of the overall funds transfer
business (by total number and aggregate dollar amount) your member
institutions conduct over a one-year period?
4. What is the approximate volume cross-border electronic
transmittals of funds (by total number and aggregate dollar amount)
your member institutions send and receive over a one-year period?
To the extent possible, please estimate the percentage of cross-
border electronic transmittal of funds sent or received by your member
financial institutions, in the following categories (if applicable):
a. On behalf of their own customers,
b. As an intermediary or correspondent for other institutions
c. As internal settlement with their own institution's foreign
affiliates or branches.
d. As the U.S. financial institution that directly transmitted the
payment order to or accepted the payment order from a financial
institution located outside of the United States.
5. Do your member institutions send or receive cross-border
electronic transmittal of funds in-house or through a correspondent?
a. What systems (e.g., SWIFT, Fedwire, CHIPS, proprietary system)
are used to send or receive cross-border funds transfers?
b. What is the proportional usage of each system if more than one
system is used?
c. Are there instances when the system used is dictated by the
nature of the transaction or customer instruction? If possible, please
exclude those situations where the decision is due to the fact that the
receiving financial institution does not use a particular system.
Existing Record Maintenance and Compliance Process
6. How do your member institutions maintain the funds transfer
records required by 31 CFR 103.33 (i.e., message system logs or
backups, wire transfer instruction database, account history files,
etc.)?
a. If the data is stored electronically, can the storage systems
export such data into a spreadsheet or database file for reporting?
7. Approximately how many times in a one-year period does the
government subpoena or otherwise issue a legal demand requiring your
member institutions to produce cross-border wire transfer information?
Note: We understand that many requests seek ``any and all
records'' pertaining to an account or subject. Where possible,
please distinguish those requests from more specific requests for
cross-border electronic transmittals of funds.
8. Can you estimate the approximate total cost (e.g., person-hours
or other costs) to your member institutions in time and expense
responding to these legal demands? If you cannot estimate the costs
incurred, please describe generally the resources involved in complying
with such requests.
Foreign Transactions
9. Do your member institutions or any of their branches,
subsidiaries, or affiliates transmit or receive cross-border electronic
transmittals of funds from a location in either Australia or Canada?
a. If yes, please briefly describe the measures taken, including
the general estimates of the costs in time and expense incurred, to
ensure compliance with the cross-border funds transfer reporting
requirements in those jurisdictions and the measures in place to
monitor and maintain compliance.
10. If the Department of the Treasury required reports of cross-
border electronic transmittals of funds involving amounts over $3,000,
what general steps would your member institutions need to take (and how
burdensome would it be) to comply?
a. Would the answer differ if the value threshold were $10,000?
b. Would the answer differ if there were no value threshold?
c. How would these different thresholds affect the volume of the
reporting from your member institutions?
d. How would the answer differ with the type of required reporting
(e.g., electronic file upload, Web-based form)?
e. How would the answer differ with the timing of required
reporting (e.g., real-time, end-of-day, within 30 days)?
f. To the extent possible, please estimate any cost increase for
cross-border electronic transmittals of funds s that may result.
g. To the extent possible, please describe any effects that
reporting requirements may have on the volume or value of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds.
Potential Impact on Financial Institutions
11. If the Department of Treasury required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds in a SWIFT, CHIPS or other file format
specified by the Department, what steps would your member institutions
need to take to extract such data from existing records to submit the
information as required?
12. If the Department of Treasury required reports of cross-border
electronic transmittals of funds but also provided exceptions for
certain customers or types of transactions (i.e., internal settlement,
identical originator and beneficiary, transfers to government entities,
etc.), what exemptions would you suggest?
a. How difficult would it be for your member institutions to build
such exceptions into the business process for creating the report?
b. Would the costs to implement the exceptions outweigh the
benefits?
13. If the Department of the Treasury required reports of cross-
border electronic transmittals of funds, should the requirement be
limited to certain institutions (e.g., only the originating
institution, only the beneficiary's institution, only the U.S.
financial institution that directly transmits the payment order to or
accepts the payment order from a financial institution located outside
of the United States)? Please explain the rationale for your response.
14. Can your member financial institutions' automated systems
distinguish between domestic funds transfer and a cross-border
electronic transmittal of funds?
15. Among the following definitions of ``cross-border electronic
transmittal of funds'' what potential advantages and disadvantages do
you perceive? Do you have any suggestions for such a definition or can
you highlight any particular issues that should be addressed in such a
definition?
(Note: All of the following definitions would exclude check,
debit transmittal, ATM, or ACH payments.)
a. Cross-border electronic transfer of funds means any wire
transfer where the originator's and beneficiary's institutions are
located in different countries and one of the institutions is located
in the United States. This term also refers to any chain of wire
transfers that has at least one cross-border element
[[Page 14291]]
b. Cross-border electronic transfers of funds include transactions
where either (1) a foreign office of a financial institution instructs
a U.S. office of a financial institution to effect payment in the U.S.,
directly or indirectly, or (2) where U.S. office of a financial
institution instructs a foreign office of a financial institution to
effect a payment abroad, directly or indirectly.
c. Cross-border electronic transmittal of funds means the
transmission--through any electronic, magnetic or optical device,
telephone instrument or computer--of instructions for the transfer of
funds, other than the transfer of funds within the United States. In
the case of SWIFT messages, only SWIFT MT 100 and SWIFT MT 103 messages
are included
d. Cross-border electronic transmittal of funds means an
instruction for a transfer of funds that is transmitted into or out of
the United States electronically or by telegraph, where the financial
institution is acting on behalf of, or at the request of, another
person who is not a financial institution
Title: Cross-Border Electronic Transmittals of Funds Survey.
OMB Number: 1506-0048.
Abstract: Survey to be conducted with business owners and managers
in the Cross-Border Electronic Transmittals of Funds industry. Survey
asks respondents to report on cross-border financial services provided
by their businesses.
Type of Review: New information collection.
Affected Public: Business or other for profit institutions.
Frequency: One time.
Estimated Burden: Reporting average of 60 minutes per response.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 23,262.
Estimated Total Responses: 23,262.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 23,262.
Request for Comments
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will
become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected: (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates
of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance and
purchase of services to provide information.
Dated: March 14, 2006.
Robert Werner,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. E6-4073 Filed 3-20-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-02-P
