34 Amendments of Ernest URTASUN related to 2021/0239(COD)
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Decentralised Autonomous Organisations (DAO) and other Decentralised Finance (DeFi) arrangements should also be subject to Union AML/CFT rules where they are controlled directly or indirectly, including through smart contracts or voting protocols, by natural and legal persons. In such cases, decentralised organisations or arrangements should be considered crypto-asset service providers falling in the scope of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for a Regulation on Markets in Crypto-assets, and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 - COM/2020/593 final] and this Regulation, regardless of the commercial label or their self-identification as DAO or DeFi. Developers, owners or operators should assess risks of money laundering and terrorist assessments before launching or using a software or platform and take appropriate measures in order to mitigate money laundering and terrorist financing risks in an ongoing and forward-looking manner.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The FATF has developed standards for jurisdictions to identify, and assess the risks of potential non-implementation or evasion of the targeted financial sanctions related to proliferation financing, and to take action to mitigate those risks. Those new standards introduced by the FATF today do not substitute nor undermine the existing strict requirements for countries to implement targeted financial sanctions to comply with the relevant United Nations Security Council Regulations relating to the prevention, suppression and disruption of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and its financing. Those existing obligations, as implemented at Union level by Council Decisions 2010/413/CFSP31 and (CFSP) 2016/84932 as well as by Council Regulations (EU) No 267/201233 and (EU) 2017/150934 , remain strict rule-based obligations binding on all natural and legal persons within the Union. The same approach should apply with regard to targeted financial sanctions relating to terrorism and terrorism financing, and to other applicable Union targeted financial sanctions. _________________ 31 2010/413/CFSP: Council Decision of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ L 195, 27.7.2010, p. 39). 32 Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 of 27 May 2016 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Decision 2013/183/CFSP (OJ L 141, 28.5.2016, p. 79). 33 Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ L 88, 24.3.2012, p. 1). 34 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 of 30 August 2017 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Regulation (EC) No 329/2007 (OJ L 224, 31.8.2017, p. 1).
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) The Union legislation does not currently include provisions that describe the systems and controls that financial institutions, payment service providers or crypto-asset service providers should have to have in place to comply with targeted financial sanctions obligations. Where the legislation provides for certain exemptions from customer due diligence measures or from the obligation to obtain information on the payer or the payee in the context of funds transfers, there may be an apparent conflict between risk- based exemptions and the absolute requirement to comply with applicable sanctions regimes, which is an obligation of result. According to the assessment conducted by the European Banking Authority, there are different interpretations across Member States on the obligations on payment service providers to screen the payer or the payee against sanctions lists, as each payment service provider is expected to screen only its customer in some Member States, whereas, in others, each payment service provider has to screen both the payer and the payee. This situation could create regulatory arbitrage and gaps which could weaken the Union targeted financial sanctions regime. It is therefore necessary to establish common standards on the measures that financial institutions, payment service providers or crypto-asset service providers should take to comply with their financial sanctions obligations and clarify how they should comply with their obligations under the Union targeted financial sanctions regime, in particular in situations where certain exemptions from customer due measures and from the obligation to obtain information on the payer or the payee or on the originator or the beneficiary in the context of transfers of funds or crypto-assets are applied, as well as in situations where it may not be possible to identity with sufficient certainty the customer or beneficial owner, in particular when a transaction or a transfer involves an unhosted wallet or an unregulated entity.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) Designations made by the United Nations Security Council which impose restrictive measures in response to a threat are not immediately enforceable by the Union. Those UN sanctions become eventually applicable in the Union not immediately, but following a due process leading to the adoption of Union measures imposing targeted financial sanctions against designated persons. During the period where the information on sanctioned persons becomes public, and the actual application of EU targeted financial sanctions, there is a risk of asset flight. For this reason, some Member States decided at national level that UN designations become immediately applicable until the adoption of similar measures by the Union while other Member States may rely on preventative measures. However, there are no common rules at Union level and fragmented measures at national level. Hence, it is necessary to ensure appropriate common mitigating measures when no appropriate measures are in place at national level in order to manage the money laundering and terrorist financing risks identified following a UN designation. UN designations are made following a threat to international peace that can emanate from terrorist activities, violation of human rights and other predicate offences. Obliged entities should consider the enhanced risks of money laundering and terrorist financing posed by persons designated by the UN pending the review of this information of the Union, or before the actual entering into force of Union targeted financial sanctions. During this period time, obliged entities should report to the competent FIU any business relationship or transaction with persons considering the suspicion of money laundering, terrorist financing or predicate offence emanating from the UN listing. The FIU should decide to suspend any transaction, withhold its consent, or suspend any account until the review of the information and the adoption, or not, of targeted financial sanctions by the Union. Such measure is without prejudice of the possibility of Member States to apply temporary measures which ensure a higher level of protection of the financial system of the Union such as temporary measures applying directly UN designations pending the adoption of measures by the Union.
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 93
Recital 93
(93) The anonymity of crypto-assets exposes them to risks of misuse for criminal purposes. AnonymousPrivacy crypto- asset wallets, mixers and tumblers do not allow the traceability of crypto-asset transfers, whilst also making it difficult to identify linked transactions that may raise suspicion or to apply to adequate level of customer due diligence. In order to ensure effective application of AML/CFT requirements to crypto-assets, it is necessary to prohibit the provision and the custody of anonymousprivacy crypto-asset wallets as well as the provision and use of mixers and tumblers by crypto-asset service providers.
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point b a (new)
(ba) the relationships between and among crypto-asset service providers and which is expected, at the time when the contact is established, to have an element of duration, including where similar services are provided by a correspondent institution to a respondent institution, and including relationship established for crypto-asset transfers;
Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i a (new)
(ia) persons and platforms, other than crypto-asset service providers, trading or acting as intermediaries for importing, minting, sale and purchase of unique and not fungible crypto-assets that represent ownership of a unique digital or physical asset, including works of art, real estate, digital collectibles and gaming items and any other valuable;
Amendment 484 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) obtain and assess information on whether the customer or the beneficial owner is persons involved are subjected to targeted financial sanctions relating to terrorism and terrorism financing, proliferation financing and to other applicable Union targeted financial sanctions;
Amendment 490 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Without prejudice to any other measures required to comply with the obligation to apply targeted financial sanctions, credit and financial institutions and crypto-asset service providers shall screen the customer’s identity as well as the beneficial owner’s identity against the relevant sanctions lists of designated persons in order to verify that the customer is not a designated individual, entity or group subject to targeted financial sanctions.
Amendment 494 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. AMLA shall issue guidelines on the measures to be applied by obliged entities for assessing whether the customer or the beneficial owner is subject to targeted financial sanction, including how to identify entities controlled by persons subject to targeted financial sanctions.
Amendment 566 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21 a (new)
Amendment 599 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 60 identifying third countries that pose a specific and serious Where AMLA has clear and demonstrable grounds for concluding that a third country other than those covered by Articles 23 and 24, or a credit institution, financial institution or a crypto-asset service provider operating outside the Union, poses a specific and serious threat to the financial system of the Union in accordance with paragraph 2, it shall be empowered to take one or more of the following actions: a) require obliged entities to apply enhanced due diligence measures listed in Article 28(4), points (a) to (g) with respect to the business relationships or occasional transactions involving natural or legal persons from a third country; or b) require obliged entities to apply enhanced due diligence measures listed in Article 30 or 30a with reaspect to the financial system of the Union and the proper functioning of the internal market other than those covered by Articles 23 and 24. business relationships involving a non- EU credit or financial institution or a crypto-asset service provider; or c) recommend the adoption of the specific countermeasures mitigating the risks stemming from high-risk third countries or entities listed in Article 29, 30 and 31a. For the purpose of point c) AMLA shall draw up regulatory technical standards to specify the identified appropriate countermeasures and submit them to the Commission for adoption. AMLA shall publicly disclose the third countries and non-EU entities identified as posing a threat to the Union.
Amendment 604 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission, when drawWhen taking up the delegated actsaction referred to in paragraph s1, AMLA shall take into account in particular the following criteria, with respect to a non-EU jurisdiction:
Amendment 612 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the quality and effectiveness of financial supervision; (d) the existence of a regulatory framework for crypto-assets service providers; (e) the extent to which that jurisdiction is identified by credible sources/ acknowledged processes as favouring secrecy, such as offshore centres; (f) the extent to which that jurisdiction is characterized by high levels of official or institutional corruption; (g) the recurrence of the involvement of the third country into money laundering and terrorist financing schemes.
Amendment 615 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 616 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of determining the level of threat referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may request AMLAWhere relevant, for the purpose of identifying credit or financial institution or crypto-asset service provider posing a threat to the Union, AMLA may request information and cooperate with third supervisory authorities, FIUs and Europol, as appropriate. For the purposes of determining the level of threat referred to in paragraph 1 and identifying specific countermeasures, AMLA may request EBA, ESMA or EIOPA, as appropriate, to adopt an opinion aimed at assessing the specific impact on the orderly functioning and integrity of the Union’s financial system due to the level of threat posed by a third country. or by a credit institution, financial institution or crypto-asset service provider or the impact to the stability of the whole or part of the financial system, taking account of the degree of exposure of the Union to a specific non-EU financial institution. When taking action against a credit or financial institution under this Article, AMLA shall consult ESMA and ensure that the action does not have a detrimental effect on the efficiency of the financial sector or on investors that is disproportionate to the benefits of the action.
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, when drawing up the delegated act is empowered to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 1, shall takc (new) of this Article into account in particular relevant evaluations, assessments or reports drawn up by international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financingrdance with Articles 38 to 41 of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final]. In case of significant divergences with AMLA, the Commission shall adopt a reasoned analysis, which shall be publicly available.
Amendment 629 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Following a request from the European Parliament or the Council, AMLA shall analyse whether a third country or non-EU entity poses a specific and serious threat to the financial system of the Union and the proper functioning of the internal market and submit a report to the requesting institution within 30 days of receipt of the request stating the reasons for its decision as to whether a delegated act should be adopted in accordance with paragraph 1, taking into account public revelations and relevant evaluations, assessments or reports drawn up by international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financing.
Amendment 672 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b – point v
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b – point v
(v) requiring credit and financial institutions and crypto-asset service providers to review and amend, or if necessary terminate, correspondent relationships with respondent institutions in the third country concerned.
Amendment 677 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30a Specific enhanced due diligence measures for correspondent relationships with non- EU entities providing crypto-asset services 1. With respect to correspondent relationships with entities providing crypto-asset services that are not registered in the Union, including relationships established for crypto-asset transactions or transfers, involving the execution of transfers with a respondent institution, in addition to the customer due diligence measures laid down in Article 16, crypto-asset service providers shall be required, on a risk-sensitive basis, and when entering into a business relationship, to: (a) document how they identify whether the respondent institution is an entity registered in the Union; (b) determine if the respondent institution is licensed or registered; (c) gather sufficient information about the respondent institution to understand fully the nature of the respondent's business and to determine from publicly available information the reputation of the institution and the quality of supervision; (d) assess the respondent institution's AML/CFT controls; (e) obtain approval from senior management before establishing new correspondent relationships; (f) document the respective responsibilities of each institution; (g) with respect to accounts or distributed ledger addresses hosted by the correspondent institution that can be directly by customers of the respondent institution on the customer’s own behalf, be satisfied that the respondent institution has verified the identity of, and performed ongoing due diligence on, such customers and that it is able to provide relevant customer due diligence data to the correspondent institution, upon request. Where crypto-asset service providers decide to terminate correspondent relationships for reasons relating to anti- money laundering and counter-terrorist financing policy, they shall document their decision. 2. Crypto-asset service providers shall update the due diligence information for the correspondent relationship on a regular basis or when new risks emerge in relation to the respondent institution. 3. Crypto-asset service providers shall take into account the information referred to in the first paragraph in order to determine, on a risk sensitive basis the appropriate enhanced due diligence measures required to mitigate the risks associated with the respondent institution. 4. By [2 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], AMLA shall issue guidelines to specify the following: the criteria to be taken into account for the determination of a correspondent relationship; the criteria and common template for conducting the assessment referred to in paragraph 1; the risk variables and risk factors criteria to be taken into account to assess the level of risk associated with a particular category of crypto-asset service provider.
Amendment 678 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31 a (new)
Amendment 695 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 b (new)
Article 32 b (new)
Amendment 704 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36a Persons subject to restrictive measures by international organisations 1. Obliged entities shall report to the competent FIU any business relationship or transaction with persons subject to UN sanctions in the temporary period between the moment the UN designation is made publicly available and the moment targeted financial sanctions adopted by the Union become applicable. Obliged entities shall refrain from carrying out any transaction related to a person subject to UN sanctions until they have notified the competent FIU and have complied with any further specific instruction from the FIU. 2. When the competent FIU receives such a notification referred to in Paragraph 1, it shall decide to suspend any transaction, withhold its consent or suspend any account up to 10 calendar days or until the adoption of targeted financial sanctions by the Union. 3. This Article is without prejudice to the possibility of Member States to apply temporary measures which ensure a higher level of protection of the financial system of the Union such as temporary measures applying directly UN designations pending the adoption of EU targeted financial sanctions.
Amendment 707 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Amendment 911 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Credit institutions, financial institutions and crypto-asset service providers shall be prohibited from keeping anonymous accounts, anonymous passbooks, anonymous safe-deposit boxes or anonymous crypto-asset wallets as well as any accountprivacy wallets, mixers and tumblers, otherwise allowing for the anonymisation of the customer account holder or any service that uses encryption and anonymisation tools to obfuscate transactions.
Amendment 941 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 a (new)
Article 59 a (new)
Amendment 968 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
(b) products or transactions that might favour anonymity, including anonymity- enhanced cryptocurrency (AEC) or privacy coins;
Amendment 969 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) anonymising services and tools, including privacy wallets, mixers and tumblers as well as Internet Protocol (IP) anonymizers such as The Onion Router (Tor), the Invisible Internet Project (I2P) and other anonymizing softwares;
Amendment 972 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e
(e) transactions related to oil, arms, precious metals, tobacco products, cultural artefactand stones or jewels and luxury watches, tobacco products, luxury real estate and luxury cars, vessels, aircrafts, cultural artefacts, high value digital collectibles and other items of archaeological, historical, cultural and religious importance, or of rare scientific value, as well as ivory and protected species;
Amendment 974 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
(2a) counterpart risk factors: (a)transactions from or to an non obliged entity, such as unhosted wallets, unregistered or unlicensed entities providing crypto assets services and decentralised arrangements; (b)entities identified as not applying minimum customer due diligence procedures; (c)entities identified by credible sources/acknowledged process, as having strong connections and links to money laundering, terrorist financing and other illegal activities, including darknet marketplaces, ransomware and hacking; (d)crypto-ATMs.
Amendment 976 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
(aa) third countries identified by the Union as high risk third countries or included in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes;
Amendment 978 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) third countries identified by credible sources/ acknowledged processes as having none or inadequate regulation on crypto-asset service providers;
Amendment 980 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) third countries identified by credible sources/ acknowledged processes as favouring financial secrecy, such as offshore centres;