27 Amendments of Lídia PEREIRA related to 2021/0250(COD)
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Specific money laundering and terrorist financing threats, risks and vulnerabilities affecting certain economic sectors at national level diminish in distinct manners Member States ability to contribute to the integrity and soundness of the Union financial system. As such, it is appropriate to allow Member States, upon identification of such sectors and specific risks to decide to apply AML/CFT requirements to additional sectors than those covered by Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation]. With a view to preserving the effectiveness of the internal market and the Union AML/CFT system, the Commission should be able, with the support of AMLA, to assess whether the intended decisions of the Member States to apply AML/CFT requirements to additional sectors are justified. In cases where the best interests of the Union would be achieved at Union level as regards specific sectors, the Commission should inform that Member State that it intends to take action at Union level instead and the Member State should abstain from taking the intended national measures.
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In light of the specific anti-money laundering vulnerabilities that have been witnessed in therelated to electronic money issuing, the payment services and the crypto-assets service providing industry, it should be possible for Member States to require that those providers established on their territory in forms other than a branch and the head office of which is situated in another Member State appoint a central contact point. Such a central contact point, acting on behalf of the appointing institution, should ensure the establishments' compliance with AML/CFT rules.
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The Member States remain the best placed to identify, assess, understand and decide how to mitigate risks of money laundering and terrorist financing affecting them directly. Therefore, each Member State should take the appropriate steps in an effort to properly identity, assess and understand its money laundering and terrorist financing risks, as well as risks of non-implementation and evasion of targeted financial sanctions and to define a coherent national strategy to put in place actions to mitigate those risks. Such national risk assessment should be updated regularly and should include a description of the institutional structure and broad procedures of the Member State's AML/CFT regime, as well as the allocated human and financial resources to the extent that this information is available. Such national risk assessment should be made available, when appropriate, to the public.
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In addition, to identify, understand, manage and mitigate risks at Union level to an even greater degree, Member States should make available the results of their risk assessments to each other, to the Commission and to AMLA. When appropriate, this risk assessment should be made public. In order to respect privacy and protect personal data, the results of risk assessments should only be made available to the extent that the data provided is the minimum level of data necessary for the carrying out of AML/CFT duties.
Amendment 258 #
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 addition, it is important that Member States entrust the entity in charge of managing the registers with sufficient powers and resources 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. Member States should ensure that entities in charge of the central registers verify, at the time of submission of the beneficial ownership information, that the given information is accurate.
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Moreover, with the aim of ensuring a proportionate and balanced approach and to guarantee the rights to private life and personal data protection, it should be possible for Member States to provide for exemptions to the disclosure of the personal information on the beneficial owner through the registers of beneficial ownership information and to access to such information, in exceptional circumstances, where that information would expose the beneficial owner to a disproportionate risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, extortion, harassment, violence or intimidation. It should also be possible for Member States to require online registration in order to identify any person who requests information from the register, as well as the payment of a proportionate and adequate fee for access to the information in the register.
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) In order to respect privacy and protect personal data, the minimum data necessary for the carrying out of AML/CFT investigations should be held in centralised automated mechanisms for bank and payment accounts, such as registers or data retrieval systems. It should be possible for Member States to determine which data it is useful and proportionate to gather, taking into account the systems and legal traditions in place to enable the meaningful identification of the beneficial owners. When transposing the provisions relating to those mechanisms, Member States should set out retention periods equivalent to the period for retention of the documentation and information obtained within the application of customer due diligence measures. It should be possible for Member States, when necessary, to extend the retention period on a general basis by law, without requiring case-by- case decisions. The additional retention period should not exceed an additional five years. That period should be without prejudice to national law setting out other data retention requirements allowing case- by-case decisions to facilitate criminal or administrative proceedings. Access to those mechanisms should be on a need-to- know basis.
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46 a (new)
Recital 46 a (new)
(46a) FIUs should cooperate with each other to the greatest extent possible. FIUs, however, should be able to refuse to exchange information with another FIU if, and only when, that exchange is contrary or poses a threat to fundamental principles of the national law.
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) The vast majority of FIUs have been granted the power to take urgent action and suspend or withhold consent to a transaction in order to analyse it, confirm the suspicion and disseminate the results of the analytical activities to the competent authorities. However, there are certain variations in relation to the duration of the postponement powers across the different Member States, with an impact not only on the postponement of activities that have a cross-border nature through FIU-to-FIU cooperation, but also on individuals’ fundamental rights. Furthermore, in order to ensure that FIUs have the capacity to promptly restrain criminal funds or assets and prevent their dissipation, also for seizure purposes, FIUs should be granted the power to suspend, for the necessary and adequate period of time, the use of a bank or payment account in order to analyse the transactions performed through the account, confirm the suspicion and disseminate the results of the analysis to the competent authorities. Given that postponement powers have an impact on the right to property, the preservation of affected persons’ fundamental rights should be guaranteed.
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) FIUs should use secure facilities, including protected channels of communication, to cooperate and exchange information amongst each other. In this respect, a fully encrypted, safe and secure system for the exchange of information between FIUs of the Member States (‘FIU.net’) should be set up. The system should be managed and hosted by AMLA. The FIU.net should be the only system used by FIUs to cooperate and exchange information amongst each other and may also be used, where appropriate, to exchange information with FIUs of third countries and with other authorities and Union bodies. The functionalities of the FIU.net should be used by FIUs to their full potential. Those functionalities should allow FIUs to match their data with data of other FIUs in an anonymous way with the aim of detecting subjects of the FIU's interests in other Member States and identifying their proceeds and funds, whilst ensuring full protection of personal data.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) The movement of illicit money traverses borders and may affect different Member States. The cross-border cases, involving multiple jurisdictions, are becoming more and more frequent and increasingly significant, also due to the activities carried out by obliged entities on a cross-border basis. In order to deal effectively with cases that concern several Member States, FIUs should be able to go beyond the simple exchange of information for the detection and analysis of suspicious transactions and activities and share the analytical activity itself. FIUs have reported certain important issues which limit or condition the capacity of FIUs to engage in joint analysis. Carrying out joint analysis of suspicious transactions and activities will enable FIUs to exploit potential synergies, to use information from different sources, to obtain a full picture of the anomalous activities and to enrich the analysis. FIUs should be able to conduct joint analyses of suspicious transactions and activities and to set up and participate in joint analysis teams for specific purposes and limited period with the assistance of AMLA. The participation of third parties may be instrumental for the successful outcome of joint analyses. Therefore, FIUs may invite, when necessary and adequate, third parties to take part in the joint analysis where such participation would fall within the respective mandates of those third parties.
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Effective supervision of all obliged entities is essential to protect the integrity of the Union financial system and of the internal market. To this end, Member States should deploy independent, effective and impartial AML/CFT supervision and set forth the conditions for effective, timely and sustained cooperation between supervisors.
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) The importance of combating money laundering and terrorist financing should result in Member States laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative sanctions and measures in national law for failure to respect the requirements of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation]. National supervisors should be empowered by Member States to impose such measures to obliged entities to remedy the situation in the case of breaches and, where the breach so justifies, issue pecuniary sanctions. The range of sanctions and measures should be sufficiently broad to allow Member States and competent authorities to take account of the differences between obliged entities, in particular between credit institutions and financial institutions and between traditional financial institutions and virtual asset issuers and service providers, and other obliged entities, as regards their size, characteristics and the nature of the business.
Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) Member States currently have a diverse range of administrative sanctions and measures for breaches of the key preventative provisions in place and an inconsistent approach to investigating and sanctioning violations of anti-money laundering requirements, nor is there a common understanding among supervisors as to what should constitute a "serious" violation and thus distinguish when an administrative sanction should be imposed. That diversity is detrimental to the efforts made in combating money laundering and terrorist financing and the Union's response is fragmented. Therefore, common criteria for determining the most appropriate supervisory response to breaches should be laid down and a range of administrative measures that the supervisors could impose when the breaches are not sufficiently serious to be punished with an administrative sanction should be provided. In order to incentivise obliged entities to comply with the provisions of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation], it is necessary to strengthen the dissuasive nature of administrative sanctions. Accordingly, the minimum amount of the maximum penalty that can be imposed in case of serious breaches of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation] should be raised, in a proportionate and adequate way. In transposing this Directive, Member States should ensure that the imposition of administrative sanctions and measures, and of criminal sanctions in accordance with national law, does not breach the principle of ne bis in idem.
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 86
Recital 86
(86) It is essential that the alignment of this Directive with the revised FATF Recommendations is carried out in full compliance with Union law, in particular as regards Union data protection law, including rules on data transfers, as well as the protection of fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’). Certain aspects of the implementation of this Directive involve the collection, analysis, storage and sharing of data within the Union and with third countries. Such processing of personal data should be permitted, while fully respecting fundamental rights and data protection rules, that require an increased level of protection of when data is shared with third countries and entities, only for the purposes laid down in this Directive, and for the activities required under this Directive, such as the exchange of information among competent authorities.
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
6. For the purposes of this Article, Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with their national law, supervisors or any other authority competent at national level for assessing the appropriateness of persons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, check the existence of a relevant conviction in the criminal record of the person concerned when such conviction is directly related to the type of function carried by a member of the senior management. Any exchange of information for those purposes shall be carried out in accordance with Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA and Decision 2009/316/JHA as implemented in national law.
Amendment 440 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Amendment 650 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall establish an FIU in order to prevent, detect, report and effectively combat money laundering and terrorist financing.
Amendment 666 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that FIUs have rules in place governregarding the security and confidentiality of informationprotection of personal data, whilst keeping it confidential and assuring that that same data is being stored in a secure manner.
Amendment 699 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) direct or indirect access, in full respect of national legislation, to the following law enforcement information:
Amendment 712 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. Where the information referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (b) and (c), is not stored in databases or registers, Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that FIUs can obtain, without undue delay, that information by other means.
Amendment 776 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. A system for the exchange of information between FIUs of the Member States shall be set up (‘FIU.net’). The system shall ensure the secure and encrypted communication and shall be capable of producing a written record under conditions that allow ascertaining authenticity. That system may also be used for communications with FIUs counterparts in third countries and with other authorities and Union bodies. FIU.net shall be managed by AMLA.
Amendment 777 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that any exchange of information pursuant to Article 24 is timely transmitted using the FIU.net. In the event of technical failure of the FIU.net, the information shall be transmitted by any other appropriate means , such as innovative solutions from the technological sector facilitating data transmission, increasing transparency and ensuring a high level of data security.
Amendment 800 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) a number of FIUs are conducting operational analyses in which the circumstances of the case necessitatejustifies coordinated, concerted action in the Member States involved.
Amendment 815 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that all obliged entities are subject to adequate supervision. To that end, Member States shall appoint independent supervisors to monitor effectively, and to take the measures necessary to ensure, compliance by the obliged entities with the requirements set out in Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final] and with the requirement to implement targeted financial sanctions.
Amendment 912 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) order obliged entities to comply, including to implement specific corrective measures, with a concrete and reasonable calendar;
Amendment 934 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For that purpose, they shall provide one or more secure communication channels or innovative solutions from the technological sector for the reporting referred to in the first subparagraph. Such channels or technological solutions shall ensure that the identity of persons providing information is known only to the supervisory authority, or, where applicable, self-regulatory body.