ARTICLE
6 September 2024

How To Address The Risk Of Sanctions Evasion Via Cryptoassets

G
Gherson

Contributor

Founded in 1988 by Roger Gherson, Gherson Solicitors LLP was first established as a boutique immigration law firm based in London. Now servicing clients across all areas of immigration, international protection and human rights, white collar crime, sanctions, and civil litigation and arbitration, Gherson LLP’s offices continue to expand across Europe.

With over 35 years of experience, Gherson’s expertise extends from meeting the migration needs of international business people and UK-based companies to litigation in all UK jurisdictions and the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice.

On March 11, 2022, UK regulators issued a joint statement stressing that all financial firms, including those in the cryptoasset sector, must comply with sanctions regulations. They must report suspected breaches, implement robust controls, and address additional risks and red flags related to sanctions evasion...
United Kingdom Technology
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On 11 March 2022 the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (part of HM Treasury) ("OFSI"), the UK Financial Conduct Authority and the Bank of England issued a joint statement reiterating that all UK financial services firms are expected to play their part in ensuring that sanctions are complied with. This includes firms in the cryptoasset sector.

This statement served as a timely reminder that financial sanctions regulations do not differentiate between cryptoassets and other forms of assets. Therefore, the use of cryptoassets to circumvent economic sanctions is a criminal offence under the Money Laundering Regulations ("MLRs") and regulations made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018.

What are the legal and regulatory requirements?

The statement initially reminds that:

When dealing with transactions giving rise to concerns about sanctions evasion or money laundering, reporting obligations under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 should also be considered; When dealing with a cryptoasset firm, all authorised financial institutions should check with the FCA register to identify whether a cryptoasset firm is registered, or to check the equivalent register in the respective jurisdiction; and If you know, or have reasonable cause to suspect, that you are in possession or control of, or are otherwise dealing with the funds or economic resources of a designated person, you must freeze them and not deal with them unless there is an exemption or you have an OFSI licence, and report them to OFSI.

What additional measures need to be implemented to reduce the risks?

The statement informs that controls developed to identify customers and monitor their transactions under the MLRs can help with compliance, but firms will need to implement additional sanctions controls as appropriate. These can include:

  • Updating risk assessments to keep track of the nature and type of sanctions measures;
  • Ensuring that customer onboarding and due diligence identify customers who use corporate vehicles to obscure ownership and source of funds;
  • Ensuring that all clients are screened against relevant updated sanctions lists and that effective ongoing monitoring is in place; and
  • Identifying activity that is not in line with the customer profile.

The statement further emphasises how firms that engage with the technology and use blockchain analytical solutions understand that compliance teams can best use these measures.

What additional red flags could be present?

Finally, the additional red flags that could be present according to the statement are as follows:

  • Customers who are located or conducting business to or from a jurisdiction subject to sanctions, or which is on the UK's High Risk Third Country list;
  • Transactions to or from a wallet address associated with a sanctioned entity, or a high risk wallet address;
  • Transactions involving a cryptoasset exchange or custodian wallet provider known to have poor customer due diligence procedures or otherwise high risk; and
  • The use of tools to obfuscate the location of the customer.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More