ANZ Bank Anti Money Laundering

Please note this sub-forum does not provide professional finance advice. You should seek advice from a licensed financial advisor.

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification.

If investing please consider our affiliate link for new accounts: Sharesies.

Forums › Finance and wealth management › ANZ Bank Anti Money Laundering

1 | 2 | 3

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1788388 25-May-2017 21:17

What I find offensive about the money laundering requirements is that you are seemly a criminal until you prove otherwise. I thought that in this country you were innocent until proven guilty.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1788426 25-May-2017 21:59

Aredwood:

Actually getting votes motivates them far more than tax. If they were really that tax hungry, they would have passed laws forcing the Auckland council to allow far more houses to be built. If we assume that each brand new house sold by a developer sells for $1 Million, that is $150K in GST alone to the government. Then add in the tax on the PAYE wages of all the workers who built it, and company tax paid on the profit of the building company and all of the sub contractors. Now multiply that out to the 20,000 extra houses that Auckland alone needs each year. That is a heck of alot of tax that the government has missed out on.

But the government didn't want to loose the votes from baby boomers and retirees who were making too much money from watching their house values increase. And who would get annoyed if the house next door to them got knocked down to allow terraced housing or apartments to be built. Despite living in an inner city area. And only recently the government finally decided to introduce some reporting requirements to see if any of the money flowing into property was laundered money.

Has the government done any investigation into historical house sales and purchases to see if any were funded with laundered money? Surely it won't be too hard for them to go through the public sale database and check that each sale was fully funded via bank transfers from NZ bank accounts. And red flag those that were not funded via NZ bank transfers.

I could tell you why there is so little land free for development - or at least one big reason.

The cost of sub dividing.

I am in the middle of doing it and have to borrow $150,000 to build a road, put in power and phone, fencing, pay council 'donations' etc etc ect.

If I could have drawn a red line around the area for sale and sold them, passing the legal requirement to complete access etc ect to the buyer I would have been able to get them sold off 5 years ago.

This becomes even less logical when you sell to a developer who has funds, lines of credit, staff, machinery and so on - he can do all that stuff far more easily than the chap who happens to have the land, who is probably paying a bank through the nose just to own it, never mind having to pay to execute a development infrastructure project.

It's not a special law you need in Auckland - it's a revision of the RMA, which is a nonsensical piece of legislation that tries to do too many things and ends up doing none of them well.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1788430 25-May-2017 22:05

Technofreak:

What I find offensive about the money laundering requirements is that you are seemly a criminal until you prove otherwise. I thought that in this country you were innocent until proven guilty.

Seriously, quit with the drama-making. No one is presuming anyone being "guilty" of anything. It's a simple, easy-to-meet request to provide some proof of identity.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1788472 26-May-2017 07:10

dejadeadnz:

Seriously, quit with the drama-making. No one is presuming anyone being "guilty" of anything. It's a simple, easy-to-meet request to provide some proof of identity.

Obviously you have never been affected by some of the shenanigans that goes on with this. I have and it's not good.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1788537 26-May-2017 09:06

Technofreak:

dejadeadnz:

Seriously, quit with the drama-making. No one is presuming anyone being "guilty" of anything. It's a simple, easy-to-meet request to provide some proof of identity.

Obviously you have never been affected by some of the shenanigans that goes on with this. I have and it's not good.

No crime is good. It's interesting that the only one they really want to stop is the one that funds their existence!

I've even seen serious suggestions that cash be outlawed to 'prevent money laundering' when what they really mean is 'to prevent people undertaking transactions, which are probably perfectly innocent and legal, we can't trace and therefore cannot tax'

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1788986 27-May-2017 01:57

Technofreak:

Seriously, quit with the drama-making. No one is presuming anyone being "guilty" of anything. It's a simple, easy-to-meet request to provide some proof of identity.

Obviously you have never been affected by some of the shenanigans that goes on with this. I have and it's not good.

I worked for a major, listed financial institution in the area of risk and designing, monitoring and administering such programs. It's a strong likelihood that, given this background, in my addition to my background as a lawyer, I would know considerably more than you do about why these things are required and that in fact such requirements cause minimal difficulties for most customers. But don't let it stop you from generalising based on your own, singular experience.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1789014 27-May-2017 08:42

Geektastic:

I've even seen serious suggestions that cash be outlawed to 'prevent money laundering' when what they really mean is 'to prevent people undertaking transactions, which are probably perfectly innocent and legal, we can't trace and therefore cannot tax'

Are you talking about the suggestion that $100 notes be scrapped?

Probably not a bad idea, IIRC there was about 150 million $100 notes in circulation in Aus - so that's six hundred dollar notes for every person. I don't know if it's the same here. It seems like a remarkably large number - look in the till in most retail businesses, and there are usually plenty of $50 notes, but very few $100. I don't think I've ever had six, even when needing cash to pay for something to be picked up bought on TM, the ATM dispenses $50 notes maximum.

But I don't think the idea is to catch people involved in "cashies" - small players.

It would be rather a nasty surprise for certain criminals if RBNZ suddenly announced that in a short time period, $100 notes would become valueless, they'd need to exchange them at banks, where already questions get asked if you go to deposit large amounts of cash (over $10k?). I believe that's the purpose of the suggestion, not just to inconvenience your local methamphetamine supplier with the bulk of having to store two briefcases full of $50 notes instead of one full of $100 notes. They'd have to effectively turn themselves in or face losing the cash - or make themselves rather more visible than they'd like by spending or laundering the cash in a hell of a hurry.

Of course they (reserve bank) are only going to be able to do this once, once bitten, criminals will learn and adapt. But I hope they do - it could be very effective! Unlike in Aus where it's been discussed, it needs to be not discussed and sprung as a very nasty surprise if it's going to be effective.

The meme "this will be good for bitcoin" probably also applies.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1789059 27-May-2017 10:26

dejadeadnz:

I worked for a major, listed financial institution in the area of risk and designing, monitoring and administering such programs. It's a strong likelihood that, given this background, in my addition to my background as a lawyer, I would know considerably more than you do about why these things are required and that in fact such requirements cause minimal difficulties for most customers. But don't let it stop you from generalising based on your own, singular experience.

My experience is not singular as you suggest. During an experience I had, a Google search showed a significant number of people with the same or similar issues.

In my experience the architects of these sorts of programmes very often have never looked at them from a customer experience point of view. Their only focus is on what works for their "Institution". Based on this your experience cuts no ice with me. Mentioning lawyers and finance in the same breath doesn't conjure up a good image to me personally either, given the number of lawyers that have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1789098 27-May-2017 12:09

Technofreak:

My experience is not singular as you suggest. During an experience I had, a Google search showed a significant number of people with the same or similar issues.

In my experience the architects of these sorts of programmes very often have never looked at them from a customer experience point of view. Their only focus is on what works for their "Institution". Based on this your experience cuts no ice with me. Mentioning lawyers and finance in the same breath doesn't conjure up a good image to me personally either, given the number of lawyers that have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar.

So relying on hearsay is all you can do, in addition to your own experience? For a start, I can tell you that your assertion that these matters were never looked at from a CX point of view is complete and utter BS. I know for a fact that 4 of the major banks had significant CX involvement through attending relevant industry discussions and the like. And I am not sure what an ad hominem attack on lawyers have got to this with this issue? The fact of the matter is that there are international and domestic laws that have been passed that require the banks to take a few precious minutes out of your life and for good reason. Should these institutions just ignore the law to please you?

1 | 2 | 3