Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations
關於可疑活動報告和其他反洗錢注意事項的常見問題解答
https://www.fincen.gov/resources/statutes-regulations/guidance/answers-frequently-asked-questions-regarding-suspicious
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
聯邦儲備委員會
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
聯邦存款保險公司
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
金融犯罪執法網絡
National Credit Union Administration
全國信用社管理局
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
貨幣監理署
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations
關於可疑活動報告和其他反洗錢注意事項的常見問題解答
January 19, 2021
2021年1月19日
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), jointly with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) (collectively, the Federal banking agencies), and in consultation with the staff of certain other federal functional regulators, is issuing answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding suspicious activity reports (SARs) and other anti-money laundering (AML) considerations for financial institutions covered by SAR rules. The answers to these FAQs clarify the regulatory requirements related to SARs to assist such financial institutions with their compliance obligations, while enabling financial institutions to focus resources on activities that produce the greatest value to law enforcement agencies and other government users of Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reporting. The answers to these FAQs neither alter existing BSA/AML legal or regulatory requirements, nor establish new supervisory expectations; they were developed in response to recent Bank Secrecy Act Advisory Group (BSAAG) recommendations, as described in more detail in FinCEN’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on Anti-Money Laundering Program Effectiveness, published in September 2020.
金融犯罪執法網絡（FinCEN）會同聯邦儲備委員會（FRB）、聯邦存款保險公司（FDIC）、全國信用社管理局（NCUA）和貨幣監理署（OCC）（以下統稱「聯邦銀行監管機構」），並與其他特定聯邦職能監管機構的工作人員磋商一致，向可疑活動報告規則涵蓋的金融機構發布關於可疑活動報告（SAR）和其他反洗錢注意事項的常見問題解答（FAQ）。這些常見問題解答澄清了有關可疑活動報告的監管要求，以協助這些金融機構履行合規義務，同時使其能夠將資源集中在對執法機構和其他《銀行保密法》（BSA）報告的政府用戶產生最大價值的活動上。這些常見問題解答既不會改變現有的《銀行保密法》/反洗錢法律或監管要求，也不會建立新的監管預期；它們是根據《銀行保密法》諮詢小組（BSAAG）最近的建議制定的，詳見FinCEN於2020年9月發布的《關於反洗錢計劃有效性的擬議規則制定預先通知（ANPRM）》。
Question 1: Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts
問題1：執法部門要求金融機構維持帳戶
Can a financial institution maintain an account or customer relationship for which it has received a written 「keep open」 request from law enforcement, even though the financial institution has identified suspicious or potentially illicit activity?
在收到執法部門「維持關係」的書面要求後，金融機構是否可以維持帳戶或客戶關係，哪怕已經識別可疑或潛在非法活動？
Yes. Law enforcement may have an interest in ensuring that certain accounts and customer relationships remain open notwithstanding suspicious or potential criminal activity in connection with the account. A financial institution may decide to maintain an account based on a written 「keep open」 request from a law enforcement agency, however, it is not obligated to do so. The written request should be specific and indicate both that the law enforcement agency has requested that the financial institution maintain the account, as well as the purpose and duration of the request. Keeping such an account open as requested may be highly useful to law enforcement and may further efforts to identify and combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other illicit financial activities.
可以。執法部門可能會對確保維持某些帳戶和客戶關係感興趣，儘管有涉及該帳戶的可疑或潛在犯罪活動。金融機構可以基於執法機構「維持關係」的書面要求決定是否維持帳戶，但並沒有義務這樣做。書面要求應當具體，表明執法機構對金融機構維持帳戶的要求、以及要求的目的和期限。按要求維持此類帳戶對執法部門可能會高度有用，並且有助於識別和打擊洗錢、恐怖融資和其他非法金融活動。
A financial institution should not be criticized solely for its decision to maintain an account relationship at the request of law enforcement or for its decision to close the account. Ultimately, the decision to maintain or close an account should be made by a financial institution in accordance with its own policies, procedures, and processes. It may be useful for financial institutions to maintain documentation of 「keep open」 requests, including after a request has expired. If financial institutions keep such an account open as requested by law enforcement, they are still required to comply with all applicable BSA requirements, including requirements to conduct ongoing risk-based monitoring, and, as appropriate, file SARs, including continuing activity SARs consistent with FinCEN guidance.
金融機構不應僅因其在執法部門要求下決定維持帳戶關係或因其決定關閉帳戶而受到批評。歸根結底，金融機構應當按照自身的政策、程序和流程決定是否維持或關閉帳戶。對金融機構來說，保存「維持關係」要求的文件可能會很有用，包括在要求過期後。如果金融機構按執法部門要求維持此類帳戶，它們仍必須遵守所有適用的《銀行保密法》要求，包括進行持續的風險為本監測、並視情況報送可疑活動報告，包括按照FinCEN指引對持續活動報送可疑活動報告。
Question 2: Receipt of Grand Jury Subpoenas/Law Enforcement Inquiries and SAR Filing
問題2：收到大陪審團傳票/執法查詢與可疑活動報告報送
Should a financial institution file a SAR solely on the basis of receiving a grand jury subpoena or other law enforcement inquiries?
僅憑收到大陪審團傳票或其他執法查詢，金融機構是否應當報送可疑活動報告？
No. The receipt of a law enforcement inquiry, such as a grand jury subpoena, does not by itself indicate that the criteria requiring the filing of a SAR have been met. However, receipt of a grand jury subpoena or other law enforcement inquiry is pertinent information relevant to a financial institution’s overall assessment of risk and the risk profile for the relevant customer(s) and account(s). Generally, a financial institution will assess and review all relevant information it has about a customer that is the subject of a grand jury subpoena or other law enforcement inquiries, in accordance with its risk-based AML program. For example, the receipt of a grand jury subpoena should cause a financial institution to review relevant account activity and transactions.
不用。收到執法查詢，例如大陪審團傳票，本身並不表示已經符合可疑活動報告的報送標準。不過，收到大陪審團傳票或其他執法查詢是與金融機構的總體風險評估及相關客戶和帳戶的風險狀況相關的信息。一般來說，按照風險為本的反洗錢計劃，金融機構將評估和審查其掌握的作為大陪審團傳票或其他執法查詢對象的客戶的所有相關信息。例如，收到大陪審團傳票時，金融機構應當審查相關的帳戶活動和交易。
The financial institution should determine whether SAR filing is necessary based on its assessment of all information available and applicable regulatory requirements. If a financial institution files a SAR on a customer or transaction following the receipt of a grand jury subpoena or other law enforcement inquiry, the SAR should focus on the facts and circumstances that support a finding of suspicious activity rather than the subpoena or inquiry itself.
金融機構應當基於其對所有可用信息和適用監管要求的評估，確定是否有必要報送可疑活動報告。如果金融機構在收到大陪審團傳票或其他執法查詢後對客戶或交易報送可疑活動報告，則可疑活動報告應當側重於支持可疑活動調查結果的事實和情況，而非傳票或查詢本身。
Question 3: Maintaining a Customer Relationship Following the Filing of a SAR or Multiple SARs
問題3：在報送一份或多份可疑活動報告後維持客戶關係
Is a financial institution required to terminate a customer relationship following the filing of a SAR or multiple SARs?
在報送一份或多份可疑活動報告後，金融機構是否必須終止客戶關係？
No. There is no BSA regulatory requirement to terminate a customer relationship after the filing of a SAR or any number of SARs. The decision to maintain or close a customer relationship as a result of the identification of suspicious activity is a determination for a financial institution to make based on the information available to it, its assessment of money laundering or other illicit financial activity risks, and established policies, procedures, and processes.
不用。《銀行保密法》並不要求在報送一份或多份可疑活動報告後終止客戶關係。金融機構在識別可疑活動後，應當基於其掌握的信息、對洗錢或其他非法金融活動風險的評估、以及既定的政策、程序和流程，確定是否維持或終止客戶關係。
Financial institutions have the flexibility to develop risk-based procedures and monitoring processes for the purpose of updating the customer risk profile and determining when to maintain or close accounts. Generally, financial institutions have policies, procedures, and processes in place that establish an escalation process for decisions to maintain or terminate customer relationships based on relevant factors, including SAR filing(s). These processes establish criteria, including when review by senior management and legal staff is warranted, for the decision to maintain or terminate the customer relationship in light of elevated risk factors. As indicated above, there is no specific number of SAR filings that a financial institution must consider to trigger any particular escalation step. Rather, the number of SAR filings and other factors that trigger escalation steps may vary based upon, among other things, the risk profile of the customer, including the geographical locations involved, the volume and type of transactions conducted by customers, the type of account, and the types of SARs filed by the financial institution in relation to the customer.
金融機構可以靈活制定風險為本的程序和監測流程，以便更新客戶風險狀況，並確定何時維持或關閉帳戶。一般來說，金融機構都有相應政策、程序和流程來建立一個基於相關因素——包括可疑活動報告報送——決定是否維持或終止客戶關係的升級流程。這些流程確定了根據高風險因素決定是否維持或終止客戶關係的標準，包括當有必要由高級管理層和法律人員進行審查時。如上所述，金融機構不必考慮觸發任何特定升級措施的可疑活動報告報送數量。相反，觸發升級措施的可疑活動報告報送數量和其他因素可能會因客戶風險狀況——包括涉及的地理位置、客戶進行的交易量和交易類型、帳戶類型、以及金融機構報送的可疑活動報告類型——的不同而不同。
Question 4: SAR Filing on Negative News Identified in Media Searches
問題4：就媒體搜索中識別的負面新聞報送可疑活動報告
Is a financial institution required to file a SAR based solely on negative news?
僅憑負面新聞，金融機構是否必須報送可疑活動報告？
No. The existence of negative news related to a customer or other activity at a financial institution does not by itself indicate that the criteria requiring the filing of a SAR have been met, and does not automatically require the filing of a SAR by a financial institution. A financial institution may review media reports, news articles and/or other references to assist in its performance of customer due diligence, as well as its evaluation of any transactions or activity it considers unusual or potentially suspicious. For example, negative news may cause a financial institution to review customer activity as well as other related information, such as that of third parties with transactions involving the customer’s account. As with other identified unusual or potentially suspicious activity, financial institutions should comply with applicable regulatory requirements and follow their established policies, procedures, and processes to determine the extent to which it investigates and evaluates negative news, in conjunction with its review of transactions occurring by, at, or through the institution, to determine if a SAR filing is required.
不用。金融機構出現與客戶或其他活動有關的負面新聞，本身並不表示已經符合可疑活動報告的報送標準，也不會自動要求金融機構報送可疑活動報告。金融機構可以審查媒體報導、新聞文章和/或其他參考資料，以協助履行客戶盡職調查、以及評估其認為異常或潛在可疑的任何交易或活動。例如，負面新聞可能會導致金融機構審查客戶活動以及其他相關信息，如交易涉及客戶帳戶的第三方。和其他識別為異常或潛在可疑的活動一樣，金融機構應當遵守適用的監管要求，並遵循既定的政策、程序和流程，以確定其調查和評估負面新聞的程度，同時審查由本機構、在本機構、或經本機構發生的交易，以確定是否需要報送可疑活動報告。
Question 5: SAR Monitoring on Multiple Negative Media Alerts
問題5：對多個負面媒體預警的可疑活動報告監測
If there are multiple negative news alerts based on the same event, is a financial institution expected to independently investigate each of those alerts?
如果有基於同一事件的多個負面新聞預警，金融機構是否需要獨立調查每個預警？
No. In circumstances where there are multiple negative news alerts (as identified through monitoring for unusual or suspicious activity) based on the same underlying events, a financial institution does not need to independently investigate each alert, but rather may consider whether the alert contains new or different information that warrants further investigation or whether the negative news otherwise assists or informs the evaluation of the activity at issue. Many financial institutions maintain a process for managing a high volume of alerts generated by news. This type of process will allow the financial institution to identify and evaluate new information and assess whether to update customer information and risk profile, investigate transactions which may result in the filing of a SAR, or escalate or terminate a customer relationship, as appropriate consistent with its policies, procedures, and processes. Financial institutions have flexibility in developing risk-based procedures and monitoring processes for the purpose of complying with customer due diligence requirements and, where appropriate, consideration of negative news.
不用。在有基於同一基本事件的多個負面新聞預警（通過監測異常或可疑活動識別）的情況下，金融機構無需獨立調查每個預警，而是可以考慮預警是否包含有必要進一步調查的新的或不同的信息，或者負面新聞是否對評估審查中的活動產生幫助或影響。許多金融機構都有一個流程來管理由負面新聞產生的大量預警。此類流程將使金融機構能夠識別和評估新的信息，並按照自身的政策、程序和流程，評估是否需要更新客戶信息和風險狀況、調查可能導致可疑活動報告報送的交易、或者視情況升級或終止客戶關係。金融機構可以靈活制定風險為本的程序和監測流程，以便遵守客戶盡職調查要求，並視情況考慮負面新聞。
Question 6: Information in Data Fields and Narrative
問題6：數據欄位和文字敘述部分的信息
Do financial institutions need to repeat information in the SAR narrative that has already been included in other SAR data fields?
金融機構是否需要在可疑活動報告的文字敘述部分重複輸入其他數據欄位已經包含的信息？
No. As stated in the SAR instructions, information provided in other sections of a SAR does not need to be repeated in the narrative unless necessary to provide a clear and complete description of the suspicious activity. Consistent with FinCEN’s SAR instructions, financial institutions should focus the SAR narrative on the information necessary to enable the reader to understand the activity reported, including what was unusual or irregular about the activity that caused suspicion. For example, granular detail (such as subject identification data) that is reported in the appropriate SAR data fields does not need to be repeated in the SAR narrative, unless such information is necessary to clearly describe the activity reported. Additionally, the SAR narrative may benefit from information about the suspicious activity that may not be readily evident from SAR data fields alone, such as an explanation about why the filer selected different characterizations of suspicious activity in the SAR data fields. Note, however, that FinCEN Advisories may include requests for financial institutions to incorporate certain terms in SAR field 2 (Financial Institution Note to FinCEN) and in the narrative to indicate a connection between the suspicious activity being reported and the subject of an advisory.
不用。正如可疑活動報告說明中所述，除非有必要清楚和完整地描述可疑活動，否則無需在文字敘述部分重複輸入其他部分所提供的信息。按照FinCEN可疑活動報告說明，金融機構應當將文字敘述部分的重點放在使讀者能夠理解所報告的活動的必要信息上，包括引起懷疑的活動的異常或不正常之處。例如，無需在文字敘述部分重複輸入相關數據欄位所報告的顆粒細節（如對象身份證件數據），除非需要此類信息來清楚地描述所報告的活動。此外，文字敘述部分可以從關於可疑活動的信息中獲益，這些信息僅從數據欄位來看可能並不明顯，如對為什麼報送機構在數據欄位中選擇了不同可疑活動特徵的解釋。不過，請注意，FinCEN建議可能包含對金融機構在欄位2（報送機構注釋）和文字敘述部分加入某些術語的要求，以表明所報告的可疑活動與建議主題之間的聯繫。
Question 7: SAR Character Limits
問題7：可疑活動報告字數限制
Should financial institutions file additional SARs on the same suspicious activity to accommodate narratives that are longer than the SAR narrative character limits?
金融機構是否應當就同一可疑活動報送額外的可疑活動報告，以容納超出文字敘述部分字數限制的內容？
No. Filers must provide a clear, complete, and concise description of the suspicious activity that led to the decision to file the SAR. A financial institution that reaches the SAR narrative character limit should not file an additional SAR to continue a narrative in order to avoid duplicate filings on the same activity in the database. Instead, filers should focus the relevant information in the narrative as much as possible, and may include additional, relevant information as an attachment to the SAR, or note that it is available as supporting documentation.
不用。報送機構必須清楚、完整和簡明地描述導致決定報送該可疑活動報告的可疑活動。為了避免資料庫中同一活動的重複報送，達到文字敘述部分字數限制的金融機構不應報送額外的可疑活動報告來繼續進行文字敘述。相反，報送機構應當儘可能聚焦文字敘述部分的相關信息，並且可以將其他相關信息作為可疑活動報告附件，或者註明其他相關信息可以作為證明文件提供。
To keep narratives within the character limit and enable efficient review of information (such as transaction records) that is displayed most clearly in tabular format, filers can include a single comma-separated values (CSV) file with no more than one megabyte of data as an attachment to a SAR. If a filer wishes to include information in a tabular format in a SAR, the CSV attachment should be used; filers should not include tabular information within the SAR narrative.
為了使文字敘述部分保持在字數限制內，並使報送機構能夠有效審查以表格格式顯示最清楚的信息（如交易記錄），報送機構可以將一個不超過1MB數據的逗號分隔值（CSV）文件作為可疑活動報告附件。如果報送機構希望將表格格式的信息納入可疑活動報告，則應當使用CSV附件；報送機構不應在文字敘述部分輸入表格格式的信息。
Filers must retain all supporting documentation or a business record equivalent for five years from the date of the report. All supporting documentation (such as copies of instruments; receipts; sale, transaction or clearing records; photographs; and surveillance audio or video recordings) must be made available to appropriate authorities upon request.
報送機構必須將所有證明文件或同等業務記錄自報告之日起保存5年。所有證明文件（如文書副本；收據；銷售、交易或清算記錄；照片；以及監控音頻或視頻記錄）必須按要求提供給有關當局。
（註：本文封面圖片來源於FinCEN官方網站。）