24 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2016/0414(COD)
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Money laundering and the associated financing of terrorism and organised crime remain significant problems at the Union level, thus damaging the integrity, stability and reputation of the financial sector and threatening the internal security and the internal market of the Union, public safety and the individual safety of EU citizens. In order to tackle those problems and also reinforce the application of Directive 2015/849/EU34 , this Directive aims to tackle money laundering by means of criminal law, allowing for betmore efficient and swifter cross- border cooperation between competent authorities. _________________ 34 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 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).
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Union action should continue to take particular account of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations and instruments of other international bodies active in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. The relevant Union legal acts should, where appropriate, be further aligned with the International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and Proliferation adopted by the FATF in February 2012 (the ‘revised FATF Recommendations’). As a signatory to the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (CETS No. 198), the Union should transpose the requirements of that Convention into its legal order. Regardless of EU action in this field, EU Member States who signed, but not ratified the Convention yet, shall do so without delay.
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Tax crimes relating to direct and indirect taxes should be included in the definition of criminal activity, in line with the revised FATF Recommendations. Given that different tax offences may in each Member State constitute a criminal activity punishable by means of the sanctions referred to in this Directive, definitions of tax crimes may diverge in national law. However no harmonisation of, it is not in the scope of this directive to harmonise the definitions of tax crimes in Member States’ national law is sought.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order for the tackling of money laundering by criminal law measures to be an effective tool against organised crime, it shouldmust not be necessary to identify the specifics of the crime that generated the property, let alone require a prior or simultaneous conviction for that crime. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, provided it is a criminal offence in that Member State or third country. Member States may establish as a prerequisite the fa, subject thato the predicate offence would have been a crime in its national law, had it been committed therconditions set out in this Directive.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This Directive aims to criminalise money laundering when committed intentionally. Intention and knowledge may be inferred from objective, factual circumstances. As this Directive provides for minimum rules, Member States are free to adopt or maintain more stringent criminal law rules for money laundering. Member States may, for example,should also provide that money laundering committed recklessly or by serious negligence constitutes a criminal offence.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to deter money laundering throughout the Union, Member States should lay down minimum types and levels of penalties when the criminal offences defined in this Directive are committed. WhereMember States should provide for minimum penalties in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systems, when the offence is committed within a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA37 8 or, wheren the perpetrator abused their professional position to enable money laundering, Member States should provide for aggravating circumstances in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systemswhen the perpetrator is using large-scale sophisticated money laundering schemes such as smurfing, cash couriers, offshore jurisdictions, money laundering syndicates or when the offender acts as service provider for money laundering for more than one criminal group. _________________ 37 Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime, (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42)
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) terrorism, including any of the offences set out in Directive 2017/XX/EU40 ; _________________ 40Directive 2017/XX/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of X X 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism (OJ x L, xx.xx.2017, p. x.).541/EU40 ;
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point q a (new)
(qa) tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as clearly defined in the national law of the Member States;
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
(v) all offences, including tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States, which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards Member States that have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months;
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall ensure that the following conduct shall be a punishable criminal offence, when committed intentionally or by gross negligence:
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing at the time of receipt or of its use, that such property was derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such an activity.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3 shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least fourive years, at least in serious cases.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Each Member States shall ensure that the following circumstances shall be regarded as aggravating circumstances, in relation to the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 whenintentional offences referred to in Article 3 paragraph 1 are punishable by a minimum term of imprisonment of at least two years where one of the following circumstances is applicable:
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the property being laundered is derived from criminal activities referred to in Article 2, paragraph 1 (a), (b), (c), (d), (f), (h), (n) and (m);or
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the offender has a contractual relationship and a responsibility towards an obliged entity or is an obliged entity within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2015/849/EU and has committed the offence in the exercise of their professional activities.; or
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the offender acts as a service provider for money laundering for more than one criminal group within the meaning of Framework Decision 2008/841;
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) the modus operandi of the offender involves the use of letterbox companies, money laundering syndicates, offshore jurisdictions, virtual currencies, smurfing activities, illegal transfer of funds through unregulated systems such as Hawala; or
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) the exclusion of that legal person from entitlement to public benefits or aid including EU programmes or funds;
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a Jurisdiction of more than one Member State Where an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and can be prosecuted in more than one of those Member States, on the basis of the same facts, those Member States shall cooperate in order to decide which of them is to have jurisdiction with the aim, if possible, of centralising proceedings in that Member State. To that end, those Member States may refer to Eurojust in order to facilitate a cooperation between their judicial authorities and to coordinate their action in a swift and effective manner. Member States referred to in the first paragraph shall include: (a) the Member State in the territory where the offence was committed; (b) the Member State where the offender is a national or resident; (c) the Member State where the property was derived from; (d) the Member State in the territory where the offender was arrested.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Investigative tools and confiscation measures
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Freezing and Confiscation 1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that their competent authorities freeze or confiscate, as appropriate, property derived from and instrumentalities used or intended to be used in the commission or contribution to the commission of any of the offences referred to in this Directive, in accordance with Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council; 2. In a case where the property referred to in Article 3, paragraph 1, is located in more than one Member State, Member States’ authorities shall cooperate and, where appropriate, may refer to Eurojust and Europol for a swift and effective cooperation.
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [2418 months after adoption] at the latest. They shall immediately communicate the text of those provisions to the Commission.
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall, by [2418 months after the deadline for implementation of this Directive], submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council, assessing the extent to which the Member States have taken the necessary measures to comply with this Directive.