Free ACAMS CAMS Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 7

PEPs are recognized by CAMS 6th Edition and FATF as posing elevated risk due to:

A. The family members and close associates of PEPs may be involved in illicit activities:“The risks extend beyond the PEP to family members and close associates, who may be used to conceal the movement of illicit funds.”(CAMS 6th Edition, PEP Risk Factors; FATF Guidance)

C. PEPs may exploit embassy activities to conceal bribery and corruption transactions:“PEPs may use their position or diplomatic privileges, such as embassy operations, to disguise or facilitate the movement of illicit funds.”(CAMS 6th Edition, Corruption and PEP Risks)

Incorrect Options:

B: There is no such legal provision granting PEPs financial immunity or unlimited credit.

D: Banks may (and often must) exit PEP relationships not in line with their risk appetite.

B. An internal auditor with the requisite knowledge and expertise of AML: An internal auditor with sufficient knowledge and expertise in AML regulations and compliance requirements can perform the AML audit.

D. Qualified bank staff if not involved in the AML function being tested: Qualified bank staff who are not involved in the AML function being audited can perform the AML audit.

"Increasingly, countries are using economic sanctions instead of military force as an instrument of foreign policy"

OFAC sanctions are a key element of the U.S. AML/CFT framework. According to the CAMS 6th Edition and OFAC regulations:

Blocked funds must be placed into an interest-bearing account on a financial institution's books (B):“Blocked property must be held in a separate interest-bearing account on the books of the U.S. financial institution.”(CAMS 6th Edition, Sanctions Compliance; OFAC FAQs)

Sanctions can be either comprehensive or selective using the blocking of assets and trade restrictions (C):“OFAC administers both comprehensive and targeted (selective) sanctions programs to fulfill U.S. foreign policy and national security goals.”(CAMS 6th Edition, Sanctions Compliance)

Incorrect Options:

A: OFAC can sanction entities, vessels, and organizations—not just individuals or those in foreign countries.

D: There is no automatic expiration of OFAC sanctions after five years.

 According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), one of the red flags for money laundering is the transfer of large sums of money to or from high-risk jurisdictions, especially if the transactions are inconsistent with the customer’s profile or business activity. Large payments to a beneficiary in a high-risk jurisdiction may indicate that the originator is involved in illicit activities such as tax evasion, fraud, corruption, or terrorism financing. Therefore, such payments should be escalated for further investigation and reporting1

 1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 64.

AML risk assessments must beupdatedwhen there aresignificant changes in business operations.

Option A (Correct):New products (e.g.,cryptocurrency services, trade finance) introducenew AML risks.

Option D (Correct):Technology changes(e.g.,AI in transaction monitoring, new digital banking platforms) impactfraud and AML controls.

Option E (Correct):Mergers or acquisitionsintroducenew customer bases, jurisdictions, and compliance frameworks, requiringrisk reevaluation.

Option B (Incorrect):While compliance restructuring is important,it does not change inherent risk exposure.

Option C (Incorrect):Management changesmay affect oversight, but they donot directly alter risk exposure.

This action is the most appropriate because it demonstrates the local manager’s responsibility and accountability for the sanctions compliance program. Sanctions screening is an important part of the Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) processes, as it helps to identify and prevent transactions with sanctioned individuals or entities, which could expose the financial institution to legal, regulatory, and reputational risks. Failing to perform sanctions screening could result in violations of sanctions laws and regulations, which could lead to fines, penalties, sanctions, or even criminal prosecution. Therefore, the local manager should immediately inform senior management of the issue, so that they can take corrective actions, such as implementing screening procedures, conducting a risk assessment, reviewing existing customers, reporting any potential violations, and providing training and guidance to the staff.

The other actions are not appropriate because they either do not address the root cause of the problem, or they could worsen the situation. Starting screening new customers without informing senior management could create a false sense of compliance, and it could also miss the existing customers who may be sanctioned. Immediately informing the regulators without informing senior management could undermine the trust andcommunication within the organization, and it could also trigger an investigation or enforcement action before the issue is resolved internally. Doing nothing because the department only handles a very small number of mortgages could be a sign of negligence or indifference, and it could also expose the financial institution to significant risks, as even one transaction with a sanctioned party could have serious consequences.

CAMS Certification Package - 6th Edition | ACAMS, Chapter 4: Developing and Implementing an AML Training Program, pp. 97-98

CAMS Certifications: How to Get CAMS Certified | ACAMS, CAMS Study Guide, pp. 76-77

What is Sanctions Screening and How Does It Work? | Jumio, Introduction and Benefits of Sanctions Screening

Sanctions Screening: Challenges and Control Considerations, Background and Regulatory Expectations for Sanctions Screening

Sanction Screening: A Complete Guide | KYC AML Guide, What is Sanction Screening and Why is it Important?

When a financial institution is requested to provide data and information to a law enforcement agency for matters related to the financing of terrorism, assistance cannot be refused on the grounds of tipping-off. Tipping-off refers to disclosing to a customer or any third party that a suspicious activity report (SAR) has been filed. However, in this specific context, the obligation to provide information to law enforcement takes precedence over any concerns related to tipping-off. Financial institutions must cooperate fully with law enforcement agencies in such cases to combat money laundering and terrorist financing12.

The customer purchased property insurance that is twice the value of the business indicates potential money laundering. This could be a sign of insurance fraud, which is one of the predicate offenses for money laundering. Insurance fraud involves making false or exaggerated claims to obtain illegitimate financial benefits from an insurance company. The customer may have purchased an excessive amount of insurance to cover the value of the property and then intentionally damage or destroy it to claim the insurance payout. The customer may then use the insurance money to launder the proceeds of other criminal activities.

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.21

CAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.21

ACAMS Chapter 1 Exam Questions, Question 682

6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (6AMLD): Biggest Changes, Section 23

Money laundering through real estate is a common method of disguising the source and ownership of illicit funds. Real estate transactions often involve large amounts of money, complex legal structures, and cross-border transfers, which can obscure the true nature and origin of the funds. The new business customer in this scenario raises several red flags that warrant enhanced due diligence, such as:

The business was established five years ago but has a vague website and no physical presence in the state where it is registered.

One of the principals has an international phone number and lives abroad, which could indicate a foreign shell company or a politically exposed person.

The other principal works out of a recreational vehicle, which could suggest a lack of legitimate business activity or income.

The business claims to be a real estate business, but does not provide any details about its projects, clients, or partners.

These factors suggest that the business may be involved in money laundering through real estate, either by purchasing properties with illicit funds, using properties to generate illegal income, or selling properties to launder money. Therefore, the financial institution should conduct enhanced due diligence to verify the identity, background, and source of funds of the business and its principals, as well as the purpose and nature of the account relationship.

ACAMS Study Guide for the CAMS Certification Examination - 6th Edition, Chapter 2: Money Laundering Risks and Methods, pp. 46-47

Enhanced Due Diligence in Construction and Real Estate, by James Swenson, Ethixbase 360

Due Diligence & Legal Considerations in Commercial Real Estate, by Justia

According to the CAMS study guide, chapter 4, page 851, bearer shares are shares that do not have the name of the owner registered on them, and the ownership is transferred by the physical delivery of the share certificate. This means that the true beneficial owner of the company can be hidden or changed without any record or notification. Bearer shares are considered a high-risk factor for money laundering and terrorist financing, as they can facilitate the movement and concealment of illicit funds through anonymous corporate vehicles. Therefore, the company having bearer shares should cause the most suspicion of money laundering among the options given.

The other options are not necessarily indicative of money laundering, although they may have some risk implications depending on the context and the customer profile. Option A, the jurisdiction being a known tax haven, may suggest that the company is seeking to avoid or minimize taxes, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be legitimate tax planning or optimization purposes. Option C, the corporation director being a European citizen, may indicate that the company has some cross-border or international activities, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be valid business or personal reasons for the director’s nationality. Option D, no financial statements being filed for 3 years, maysuggest that the company is not complying with the accounting or reporting standards of the jurisdiction, but this does not imply that the company is involved in money laundering, as there may be other explanations or mitigating factors for the lack of financial statements.

1: ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, page 85: https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf

A Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) is an agreement between two or more countries that allows for the exchange of information and evidence in the investigation and enforcement of criminal laws. MLATs provide a framework for countries to assist each other with investigations, prosecutions, and other legal matters, including the exchange of information, evidence, documents, and testimony. MLATs are commonly used in investigations related to money laundering, terrorism, and other transnational crimes.

 A beneficial owner is the natural person who ultimately owns or controls a legal entity or arrangement, such as a company, a trust, or a foundation. Identifying the beneficial owner is essential for preventing and detecting money laundering, terrorist financing, tax evasion, and other illicit activities that may involve the misuse of corporate vehicles. However, some individuals or entities may attempt to conceal the true beneficial ownership of a company by using various techniques, such as complex ownership structures, shell companies, bearer shares, or nominees. A nominee is a person or an entity that acts on behalf of another person or entity, usually for a fee or a commission, without disclosing the identity of the real owner or controller. Nominees can be used to protect or conceal the identity of the beneficial owner and controller of a company or asset. A nominee can help overcome jurisdictional controls on company ownership and circumvent directorship bans imposed by courts and government authorities. While the appointment of nominees is lawful in most countries, the use of nominees for money laundering purposes is illegal and a red flag for suspicious activity. Therefore, the person filling out an application on the company’s behalf indicating that a beneficial owner is a nominee for another person not named in the company’s documentation is an indicator that there is an attempt to conceal the company’s true beneficial ownership12.

The other options are not necessarily indicators of concealment of beneficial ownership, as they may have legitimate explanations or reasons. The company having a subsidiary in another jurisdiction with a local investor as a beneficial owner may be a normal business practice or a strategic decision, as long as the ownership information is transparent and accurate. Recent changes to the company’s ownership structure may reflect the company’s growth, development, or adaptation to market conditions, as long as they are documented and reported to the relevant authorities. Beneficial ownership information from the time that the company was formed several years ago not matching the current information may be due to natural changes in the company’s shareholders, directors, or managers, as long as they are updated and verified periodically.

Application Programming Interfaces (APIs)are tools that enableinterconnectivity and data exchangebetween different software applications. In AML contexts, APIs are commonly used tointegrate third-party systems, such as screening tools, customer databases, and transaction monitoring platforms, ensuring real-time and accurate flow of information.

This technological capability supports enhancedautomation, agility, and efficiencyin AML processes.

AML compliancemust be balanced with data protection lawssuch asGDPR (EU), CCPA (U.S.), and local banking secrecy laws.

Option B (Correct):Data minimization ensures financial institutions only collect and retain essential customer dataneeded for AML compliance.

Option C (Correct):Regularly updating data processing policies ensures compliance with evolving data protection regulations.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Incorrect):Unrestricted access to customer data increases privacy risksand canviolate GDPR and other data protection laws.

Option D (Incorrect):AML data must not be repurposed without regulatory justification, asGDPR requires data usage to align with its original collection purpose.

Best Practices for Managing Data Privacy in AML Compliance:

Restrict access to AML data on a need-to-know basis.

Implement strong encryption and security controls for customer data.

Ensure all AML-related data collection aligns with privacy regulations.

Money laundering through real estate transactions involves integrating illicit funds into the legitimate financial system while providing a relatively “safe” property investment. In this context, the most relevant factor to examine is the beneficial owner of the asset. Identifying the true owner behind a property helps uncover potential money laundering schemes. Criminals often use third parties, shell companies, or complex ownership structures to distance the transaction from the source of illicit funds. Investigating the beneficial owner’s identity is crucial for detecting and preventing real estate-related money laundering12.

Reference data screening is a core element of AML/CFT programs and typically covers:

Customers (B):“All customers must be screened against sanctions, PEP, and adverse media lists as part of onboarding and ongoing due diligence.”(CAMS 6th Edition, Due Diligence and Screening)

Third-party service providers (C):“Screening should extend to relevant third parties, such as agents and service providers, to prevent indirect exposure to sanctioned entities.”(CAMS 6th Edition, Third-Party Screening; FATF Recommendations)

Incorrect Options:

A: Types of payment messages are not screened; the entities/individuals are.

D: Customer spouses may be screened in some KYC processes but are not a standard dataset for reference screening.