Cayman meets CFATF assessment deadline

| 27/02/2020 | 4 Comments
Cayman News Service
Attorney General Samuel Bulgin

(CNS): Following the blow to the Cayman Islands financial sector after it was blacklisted by the European Union as being non-cooperative on tax issues because it missed the deadline to pass relevant laws, Cayman continues efforts to get on good international standing on other fronts, namely to be seen as a jurisdiction that does not support financial crime. As such, the Office of the Attorney General has announced that a new assessment has been completed ahead of the deadline set by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF).

According to a release from the AG’s office, Cayman is making strides to meet the recommendations that the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) made in its mutual evaluation (MER) report of the Cayman Islands, which was published in March 2019. The mutual evaluation assessed the jurisdiction’s compliance with the Financial Action Task Force 40 Recommendations relating to countering money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation financing.

The MER raised a concern about the potential risks posed by a type of financial institution governed by the Securities Investment Business Law (SIBL) that may offer securities investment services, such as portfolio management and brokerage services, to sophisticated and high net worth individuals without obtaining a licencee under that law. While these entities, known as SIBL Excluded Persons (SIBL-EPs), were always required to comply with the AML/CFT legislation in the Cayman Islands, they were not subject to comprehensive supervision to ensure that they fulfilled these legal requirements.

The release said that notably, the MER stated that the lack of data and information on this sub-sector had not permitted the Cayman Islands to fully assess the risks associated with the activities in that sector.

“One of the core requirements of the FATF framework is for countries to know and understand their ML/TF risks and to take measures to mitigate such risks, which is why the lack of risk assessment of this sub-sector was specifically highlighted in the report,” said Attorney General Sam Bulgin.

As a result, in 2019 the Cayman Islands conducted an assessment of the money laundering and terrorist financing risks of these SIBL-EPs. CIMA conducted a comprehensive data collection exercise for all SIBL-EPs, requiring information to be provided on five risk categories: nature and size of business, customer types, product and services, geographic exposure, and delivery channels.

Of 2,372 SIBL-EPs registered with CIMA, 94% provided a response to the data request, resulting in a comprehensive representation of the sub-sector. The analysis of the data concluded that the risks arising from the geographic exposures of SIBL-EPs were Medium Low. However, a Medium-High risk of ML/TF was assigned to the other risk categories. This resulted in a Medium-High rating for the entire sector.

The risk assessment report also discusses the measures recently taken by the Cayman Islands to mitigate the risks associated with SIBL-EPs, especially the recent amendments to the SIBL to bring SIBL-EPs under the authorisation and supervisory regime of CIMA.

As of 15 January, SIBL-EPs no longer exist as a category. All entities previously operating as SIBL-EPs have to re-register with CIMA, providing information on their ownership and control structure as a part of the registration process. From 15 January 15, such entities are known as “Registered Persons” and are subject to the same authorisation and AML/CFT supervisory engagement as any other sectors subject to CIMA’s mandate.


Share your vote!


How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: ,

Category: Business, Financial Services

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Any SIBL brokers whose core business involves accepting “free delivery” of securities, disposal, and wiring out funds, or conversion into another security for delivery out… should have a much higher UBO burden. US/Cdn electronic delivery systems make it very easy for bad actors to match instructions against unmatched UBOs – not even sure it matters at the custodial level.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Maybe it’s the 6% that didn’t bother to respond to the CIMA request that we need to worry about?!? This isn’t rocket science…more pump and dump headlines coming sadly with some of the same cowboys. CIMA has no handle on this.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Maybe if (big if) Cayman Islands was not seen as a island that does not enforce any of its many laws these countries might start believing you. Just saying.

  4. Anonymous says:

    What action has Cayman done to address CFATF action item #6 in regards to countering local political and judicial corruption, drug transshipment, and associated money laundering?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.