Activities of Patryk JAKI related to 2021/0250(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the mechanisms to be put in place by the Member States for the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing and repealing Directive (EU) 2015/849
Amendments (26)
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 constitutes the main legal instrument for the prevention of the use of the Union financial system for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing. That Directive sets out a comprehensive legal framework, which Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and the Council23 further strengthened by addressing emerging risks and increasing transparency of beneficial ownership. Notwithstanding its achievements, experience has shown that Directive (EU) 2015/849 should be further improved to adequately mitigate risks and to effectively detect criminal attempts to misuse the Union financial system for criminal purposes and to further integrity of the internal market. _________________ 22 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73). 23 Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, and amending Directives 2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU (OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 43).
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The results of risk assessments should, where appropriate, be made available to obliged entities and publicly in a timely manner to enable them to identify, understand, manage and mitigate their own risks.
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) To be able to review the effectiveness of their systems for combating money laundering and terrorist financing, Member States should maintain, and improve the quality of, relevant statistics. With a view to enhancing the quality and consistency of the statistical data collected at Union level, the Commission for the purpose of streamlining the methodology may adopt implementing acts and the AMLA should keep track of the Union-wide situation with respect to the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing and should publish regular overviews.
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Central registers of beneficial ownership information are crucial in combating the misuse of legal entities. To ensure that in light of comprehensive framework the registers of beneficial ownership information are easily accessible and contain high-quality data, consistent rules on the collection and storing of this information should be introduced.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) The rules governing the operation of beneficial ownership registers must be consistent with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), in particular Article 5(1) thereof on information and the purposes for which information may be collected in the register;
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) With a view to enhancing transparency in order to combat the misuse of legal entities, Member States should ensure that beneficial ownership information is stored in a central register located outside the company, in full compliance with Union law. Member States canshould, for that purpose, use a central database, which collects beneficial ownership information, or the business register, or another central register. Member States may decide that obliged entities are responsible for filling in the register. Member States should make sure that in all cases that information is made available to competent authorities and FIUs and is provided to obliged entities when they take customer due diligence measures.
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) The Commission shall conduct a feasibility assessment engaging all relevant authorities and stakeholders on the development and further streamlining of a European Customer due diligence register.
Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The accuracy of data included in the beneficial ownership registers is fundamental for all of the relevant authorities and other persons allowed access to that data, and to make valid, lawful decisions based on that data. Therefore, where sufficient reasons arise, after careful analysis by the registrars, to doubt the accuracy of the beneficial ownership information held by the registers, legal entities and legal arrangements should be required to provide additional information on a risk-sensitive basis in accordance with national law. In addition, it is important that Member States entrust the entity in charge of managing the registers with sufficient powers to verify beneficial ownership and the veracity of information provided to it, and to report any suspicion to their FIU. Such powers should extend to the conduct of inspections at the premises of the legal entities.
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Moreover, the reporting of discrepancies between beneficial ownership information held in the central registers and beneficial ownership information available to obliged entities and, where applicable, competent authorities, is an effective mechanism to verify the accuracy of the information. AWith an oversight of competent authorities any such discrepancy should be swiftly identified, reported and corrected.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) In view of ensuring that the mechanism of discrepancy reporting is proportionate and focused on the detection of instances of inaccurate beneficial ownership information, Member States may allow obliged entities to request the customer to rectify discrepancies of a technical nature directly with the entity in charge of the central registers. Such request to the customer shall be implemented in a clear and reliable form. Such option only applies to low-risk customers and to those errors of a technical nature, such as minor cases of misspelt information, where it is evident that that those do not hinder the identification of the beneficial owner(s) and the accuracy of the information.
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) FIUs play an important role in identifying the financial operations of terrorist networks, especially cross-border, and in detecting their financial backers. Financial intelligence might be of fundamental importance in uncovering the facilitation of terrorist offences and the networks and schemes of terrorist organisations. FIUs maintain significant differences as regards their functions, competences and powers. The current differences should however not affect an FIU’s activity, particularly its capacity to develop preventive analyses in support of all the authorities in charge of intelligence, investigative and judicial activities, and international cooperation. In the exercise of their tasks, it has become essential to identify the minimum set of data FIUs should have swift access to and be able to exchange without impediments with their counterparts from other Member States. In all cases of suspected money laundering, its predicate offences and in cases involving the financing of terrorism, information should flow directly and quickly without undue delays. It is therefore essential to further enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of FIUs, by clarifying their powers of and cooperation between FIUs, tasks, rules on the exchange of information and the cooperation between FIUs, as well as by harmonising the rules on the protection of personal data and the rules on the processing of different categories of data, so as to ensure full consistency with the EU legal framework in this regard.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Member States should ensure effective, impartial and risk-based supervision of all obliged entities, preferably by public authorities via a separate and independent national supervisor. National supervisors should be able to perform a comprehensive range of tasks in order to exercise effective supervision of all obliged entities and be accordingly granted with such legal powers.
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 79
Recital 79
(79) The cooperation between financial supervisors and the authorities responsible for crisis management of credit institutions and investment firms, such as in particular Deposit Guarantee Scheme designated authorities and resolution authorities, is necessary to reconcile the objectives to prevent money laundering under this Directive and to protect financial stability and depositors under the Directives 2014/49/EU and 2014/59/EU. Financial supervisors should oversee the performance and quality of customer due diligence process where the credit institution has been determined failing or likely to fail or when the deposits are defined as unavailable, and the reporting of any suspicious transactions to the FIU. Financial supervisors should inform the authorities responsible for crisis management of credit institutions and investment firms of any relevant outcome from the customer due diligence performed and of any account that has been suspended by the FIU.
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Before the end of the period referred to in paragraph 3, the Commission, having consulted the Authority for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism established by Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti-Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final] (AMLA), shall issue and make publicly available a detailed opinion regarding whether the measure envisaged:
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. With respect to the obliged entities referred to in Article 3, points (3)(a), (b), (d), (e) and (h) to (l), of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final], Member States shall ensure that supervisors take the necessary measures to prevent persons convicted of money laundering, any of its predicate offences or terrorist financing or their associates from being professionally accredited, holding a management function in or being the beneficial owners of those obliged entities. Member States must ensure that supervisory decisions made under this Article can be subject to administrative appeal.
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Within 2 years of the adoption of the report referred to in paragraph 1, and every fourthree years thereafter, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the actions taken based on the findings of that report.
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall carry out a national risk assessment to identify, assess, understand and mitigate the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing affecting it. It shall keep that risk assessment up to date and review it at least every fourthree years.
Amendment 512 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall require that the reporting of discrepancies referred to in paragraph 5 takes place within 214 calendar days after detecting the discrepancy. In cases of lower risk to which measures under Section 3 of Chapter III of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation] apply, Member States may allow obliged entities to request the customer to rectify discrepancies of a technical nature that do not hinder the identification of the beneficial owner(s) directly with the entity in charge of the central registers.
Amendment 584 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a The Commission in cooperation with AMLA shall conduct a feasibility assessment engaging all relevant authorities and stakeholders on the development of a European customer due diligence register in order to facilitate its quality and limit shortcomings. The Commission shall report on the study referred to in this Article to the European Parliament and the Council, and, if necessary, submit a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and the Council for the establishment of a European customer due diligence register.
Amendment 704 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
(i) any type of information or data which is already held by competent authorities in the context of preventing, detecting, investigating or prosecuting criminal offences, except information about persons, if obtained as a result of operational surveillance activities, about the specific ways of carrying out operational surveillance activities, the rules governing them and the resources and methods used in connection with them, and about persons assisting the law enforcement authorities;
Amendment 734 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that FIUs are empowered to take urgent action, directly or indirectly, where there is a suspicion that a transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, to suspend or withhold consent to a transaction that is proceeding. Such suspension shall be imposed on the obliged entity, if technically feasible, within 48 hours of receiving the suspicious transaction report in order to analyse the transaction, confirm the suspicion and disseminate the results of the analysis to the competent authorities. Member States shall ensure that subject to national procedural safeguards, the transaction is suspended for a period of a maximum of 15 calendar days from the day of the imposition of such suspension to the obliged entity.
Amendment 744 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Such suspension shall be imposed on the obliged entity, if technically feasible, within 48 hours of receiving the suspicious transaction report and immediately notified to the competent judicial authority. Member States shall ensure that the use of that bank or payment account is suspended for a period of a maximum of 5 days from the day of the imposition of the suspension. Member States shall ensure that any extension of such suspension shall be authorizsed by the competent judicial authority.
Amendment 795 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Member States shall ensure that in exceptional, justified and urgent cases and, by way of derogation from paragraph 6, where pursuant to paragraph 1 an FIU is requested to provide information which is either held in a database or registry directly accessible by the requested FIU or which is already in its possession, the requested FIU shall provide that information, if technically feasible, no later than 24 hours after the receipt of the request.
Amendment 907 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) where an obliged entity is subject to an authorisation, withdraw or suspend the authorisation;
Amendment 914 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 973 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 48 – paragraph 3
Article 48 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that, where financial supervisors find that a credit institution has refused to enter intoor continue a business relationship but the documented customer due diligence pursuant to Article 17(2) does not justify such refusal, they shall inform the authority responsible for ensuring compliance by that institution with Directive (EU) 2014/92 or Directive (EU) 2015/2366.