96-9798. Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act RegulationsExemptions From the Requirement To Report Transactions in Currency  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 24, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 18204-18211]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-9798]
    
    
    
    
    [[Page 18203]]
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part III
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of the Treasury
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    31 CFR Part 103
    
    
    
    Exemptions From the Requirement To Report Transactions in Currency and 
    List of Entities Who Are Exempt; Interim Rule and Notice
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / 
    Rules and Regulations
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    [[Page 18204]]
    
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
    
    31 CFR Part 103
    
    RIN 1506-AA10; 1506-AA11
    
    
    Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations--Exemptions From 
    the Requirement To Report Transactions in Currency
    
    AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Treasury.
    
    ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This document contains an interim rule eliminating the 
    requirement to report transactions in currency in excess of $10,000, 
    between depository institutions and certain classes of ``exempt 
    persons'' defined in the rule. The interim rule applies to currency 
    transactions occurring after April 30, 1996. It is adopted as a major 
    step in reducing the burden imposed upon financial institutions by the 
    Bank Secrecy Act and increasing the cost-effectiveness of the counter-
    money laundering policies of the Department of the Treasury. The 
    interim rule is part of a process to achieve the reduction set by the 
    Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994 in the number of currency 
    transaction reports filed annually by depository institutions.
    
    DATES: Effective date. The interim rule is effective May 1, 1996.
        Comment deadline. Comments must be received by August 1, 1996.
        Applicability. This interim rule applies to transactions in 
    currency occurring after April 30, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Office of 
    Regulatory Policy and Enforcement, Financial Crimes Enforcement 
    Network, Department of the Treasury, 2070 Chain Bridge Road, Vienna, 
    Virginia 22182-2536, Attention: Interim CTR Exemption Rule.
        Submission of comments. An original and four copies of any comment 
    must be submitted. All comments will be available for public inspection 
    and copying, and no material in any such comments, including the name 
    of any person submitting comments, will be recognized as confidential. 
    Accordingly, material not intended to be disclosed to the public should 
    not be submitted.
        Inspection of comments. Comments may be inspected at the Department 
    of the Treasury between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., in the Financial 
    Crimes Enforcement Network (``FinCEN'') reading room, on the third 
    floor of the Treasury Annex, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., 
    Washington, D.C. 20220. Persons wishing to inspect the comments 
    submitted should request an appointment by telephoning (202) 622-0400.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Johnson, Assistant Director, 
    Office of Financial Institutions Policy, FinCEN, at (703) 905-3920; 
    Charles Klingman, Office of Financial Institutions Policy, FinCEN, at 
    (703) 905-3920; Stephen R. Kroll, Legal Counsel, FinCEN, at (703) 905-
    3590; or Cynthia A. Langwiser, Office of Legal Counsel, FinCEN, at 
    (703) 905-3590.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Introduction
    
        This document adds, as an interim rule, a new paragraph (h) (the 
    ``Interim Rule'') to 31 CFR 103.22. The Interim Rule exempts, from the 
    requirement for the reporting of transactions in currency in excess of 
    $10,000, transactions occurring after April 30, 1996, between 
    depository institutions 1 and certain classes of exempt persons 
    defined in the Interim Rule. The Interim Rule is adopted to implement 
    the terms of 31 U.S.C. 5313(d) (and related provisions of 31 U.S.C. 
    5313 (f) and (g)), which were added to the Bank Secrecy Act by section 
    402(a) of the Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994 (the ``Money 
    Laundering Suppression Act''), Title IV of the Riegle Community 
    Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-325 
    (September 23, 1994).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ As explained below, the text of the rule itself uses the 
    term ``bank,'' which as defined in 31 CFR 103.11 (c) includes both 
    banks and other classes of depository institutions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    II. Background
    
    A. Statutory Provisions
    
        The Bank Secrecy Act, Titles I and II of Pub. L. 91-508, as 
    amended, codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, and 31 
    U.S.C. 5311-5330, authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, inter alia, 
    to issue regulations requiring financial institutions to keep records 
    and file reports that are determined to have a high degree of 
    usefulness in criminal, tax, and regulatory matters, and to implement 
    counter-money laundering programs and compliance procedures. 
    Regulations implementing Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act (codified at 
    31 U.S.C. 5311-5330) appear at 31 CFR Part 103. The authority of the 
    Secretary to administer Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act has been 
    delegated to the Director of FinCEN.
        The reporting by financial institutions of transactions in currency 
    in excess of $10,000 has long been a major component of the Department 
    of the Treasury's implementation of the Bank Secrecy Act. The reporting 
    requirement is imposed by 31 CFR 103.22, a rule issued under the broad 
    authority granted to the Secretary of the Treasury by 31 U.S.C. 5313(a) 
    to require reports of domestic coin and currency transactions.
        Four new provisions (31 U.S.C. 5313 (d) through (g)) concerning 
    exemptions were added to 31 U.S.C. 5313 by the Money Laundering 
    Suppression Act. Subsection (d)(1) provides that the Secretary of the 
    Treasury shall exempt a depository institution from the requirement to 
    report currency transactions with respect to transactions between the 
    depository institution and the following categories of entities:
    
        (A) Another depository institution.
        (B) A department or agency of the United States, any State, or 
    any political subdivision of any State.
        (C) Any entity established under the laws of the United States, 
    any State, or any political subdivision of any State, or under an 
    interstate compact between 2 or more States, which exercises 
    governmental authority on behalf of the United States or any such 
    State or political subdivision.
        (D) Any business or category of business the reports on which 
    have little or no value for law enforcement purposes.
    
        Subsection (d)(2) states that:
    
        The Secretary of the Treasury shall publish in the Federal 
    Register at such times as the Secretary determines to be appropriate 
    (but not less frequently than once each year) a list of all of the 
    entities whose transactions with a depository institution are exempt 
    under this subsection from the [currency transaction] reporting 
    requirements. * * *
    
    The companion provisions of 31 U.S.C. 5313(e) authorize the Secretary 
    to permit a depository institution to grant additional, discretionary, 
    exemptions from currency transaction reporting. Subsection (f) places 
    limits on the liability of a depository institution in connection with 
    a transaction that has been exempted from reporting under either 
    subsection (d) or subsection (e) and provides for the coordination of 
    any exemption with other Bank Secrecy Act provisions, especially those 
    relating to the reporting of suspicious transactions. New subsection 
    (g) defines ``depository institution'' for purposes of the new 
    exemption provisions.
        Section 402(b) of the Money Laundering Suppression Act states 
    simply that in administering the new statutory exemption procedures:
    
    the Secretary of the Treasury shall seek to reduce, within a 
    reasonable period of time, the number of reports required to be 
    filed in the aggregate by depository institutions pursuant to 
    section 5313(a) of title 31 * * *
    
    [[Page 18205]]
    
    by at least 30 percent of the number filed during the year preceding 
    [September 23, 1994,] the date of enactment of [the Money Laundering 
    Suppression Act].
    
    During the period September 24, 1993 through September 23, 1994, 
    approximately 11.2 million currency transaction reports were filed. Of 
    that number, approximately 10.9 million reports were filed by 
    depository institutions. Thus the statute contemplates a reduction of 
    at least approximately 3.3 million filings per annum.
    
    B. Shortcomings of the Present Exemption System
    
        The enactment of 31 U.S.C. 5313 (d) through (g) reflects a 
    Congressional intention to ``reform * * * the procedures for exempting 
    transactions between depository institutions and their customers.'' See 
    H.R. Rep. 103-652, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 186 (August 2, 1994). The 
    administrative exemption procedures at which the statutory changes are 
    directed are found in 31 CFR 103.22(b)(2) and (c) through (f); those 
    procedures have not succeeded in eliminating routine currency 
    transactions by businesses from the operation of the currency 
    transaction reporting requirement.
        Several reasons have been given for this lack of success. The first 
    is the retention by banks of liability for making incorrect exemption 
    determinations. The risk of potential liability is made more serious by 
    the complexity of the administrative exemption procedures (which 
    require banks, for example, to assign dollar limits to each exemption 
    based on the amounts of currency projected to be needed for the 
    customary conduct of the exempt customer's lawful business). Finally, 
    advances in technology have made it less costly for some banks to 
    report all currency transactions rather than to incur the 
    administrative costs (and risks) of exempting customers and then 
    administering the terms of particular exemptions properly.
        The problems created by the administrative exemption system include 
    that system's failure to provide the Treasury with information needed 
    for thoughtful administration of the Bank Secrecy Act. Although banks 
    are required to maintain a centralized list of exempt customers and to 
    make that list available upon request, see 31 CFR 103.22 (f) and (g), 
    there is no way short of a bank-by-bank request for lists (with the 
    time and cost such a request would entail both for banks and 
    government) for Treasury to learn the extent to which routine 
    transactions are effectively screened out of the system or (for that 
    matter) the extent to which exemptions have been granted in situations 
    in which they are not justified.
        In crafting the 1994 statutory provisions relating to mandatory and 
    discretionary exemptions, Congress sought to alter the burden of 
    liability and uncertainty that the administrative exemption system 
    created. The statutory provisions embraced several categories of 
    transactions that were either already partially exempt or plainly 
    eligible for exemption under the administrative exemption system.2 
    In addition, Congress authorized the Treasury to exempt under the 
    mandatory rules, as indicated above, ``[a]ny business or category of 
    business the reports on which have little or no value for law 
    enforcement purposes.'' 31 U.S.C. 5313 (d)(1)(D).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \2\ Thus, as noted below, transactions in currency between 
    domestic banks are already exempt from reporting, see 31 CFR 
    103.22(b)(1)(ii), and ``[d]eposits or withdrawals, exchanges of 
    currency or other payments and transfers by local or state 
    governments, or the United States or any of its agencies or 
    instrumentalities'' are one of the categories of transactions 
    specifically described as eligible for exemption by banks. See 31 
    CFR 103.22(b)(2)(iii).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    C. Objectives of the Interim Rule
    
        As indicated above, the Interim Rule is the first step in the use 
    of section 402 of the Money Laundering Suppression Act to transform the 
    Bank Secrecy Act provisions relating to currency transaction reporting. 
    That transformation has four objectives.
        The first is to reduce the burden of currency transaction 
    reporting. That reduction comes in part through the issuance of a 
    blanket regulatory exemption covering transactions in currency between 
    one depository institution and another within the United States and 
    between depository institutions and government departments and agencies 
    at all levels. But at least an equal (and likely a significantly 
    greater) part of the reduction comes from the decision to treat as 
    being of little interest to law enforcement transactions in currency 
    between depository institutions and corporations whose common stock is 
    listed on certain national stock exchanges.
        That decision reflects a second, related objective of the Interim 
    Rule: to begin the process of limiting currency transaction reports to 
    transactions for which the benefits of the reporting requirement (both 
    providing usable information to enforcement officials and creating a 
    deterrent against attempts to misuse the financial system) justify the 
    costs of supplying the information to the Treasury. It is unlikely that 
    reports of routine currency transactions for a company of sufficient 
    size to be traded on a national securities exchange can be of 
    significant use, by themselves, to law enforcement, regulatory, or tax 
    authorities.
        The third objective is to focus the Bank Secrecy Act reporting 
    system on transactions that signal matters of clear interest to law 
    enforcement and regulatory authorities. In publishing the final rule 
    relating to the reporting of suspicious transactions under the Bank 
    Secrecy Act, Treasury stated ``its judgment that reporting of 
    suspicious transactions in a timely fashion is a key component of the 
    flexible and cost-efficient compliance system required to prevent the 
    use of the nation's financial system for illegal purposes.'' See 61 FR 
    4326, 4327 (February 5, 1996). The Interim Rule re-enforces the central 
    importance of suspicious transaction reporting to Treasury's counter-
    money laundering program; expanded suspicious transaction reporting 
    forms a basis for steps to reduce sharply the extent to which routine 
    currency transactions by ongoing businesses are required to be 
    reported. Currency transactions, like non-currency transactions, are 
    required to be reported under the terms of new 31 CFR 103.21, if they 
    constitute suspicious transactions as defined in that section; nothing 
    in the Interim Rule reduces or alters the obligations imposed by 31 CFR 
    103.21. See 31 U.S.C. 5313(f)(2)(B).
        The relationship between required suspicious transaction reporting 
    and expanded and simplified exemptions from routine currency 
    transaction reporting is a strong one; each rule forms an integral part 
    of the policy of the other. The substitution of suspicious transaction 
    reporting for routine reporting of all currency transactions by exempt 
    persons in effect defines what a routine transaction for an exempt 
    person is. That is, a routine currency transaction, in the case of an 
    exempt person, is a transaction that does not trigger the suspicious 
    transaction reporting requirements, because the transaction does not, 
    for example, give the bank a reason to suspect money laundering, a 
    violation of a reporting requirement, or the absence of a business 
    purpose. See 31 CFR 103.21(a)(2) (i)-(iii).
        The fourth objective of the Interim Rule is to create an exemption 
    system that works. Thus choices have been made with an eye to achieving 
    ease of administration and comprehensibility--the very factors whose 
    absence hindered the prior administrative exemption process.
    
    [[Page 18206]]
    
        FinCEN has attempted to craft a rule that will be easily understood 
    by the banking professionals who must apply it. That meant painting 
    with a broad brush; any general exemption rule will almost certainly 
    include within its terms some results that are not optimal when viewed 
    in isolation.
        FinCEN understands that the changeover to the new system will 
    require an initial period of effort by both the Treasury and banking 
    institutions; it is impossible to reduce the volume of currency 
    transaction reports to the extent that the Interim Rule tries to do 
    without creating some small degree of temporary inconvenience as the 
    terms of the system change. FinCEN believes, however, that the 
    transition period will be relatively short and that the new greatly 
    streamlined exemption procedures, once in place, will be self-
    sustaining and will produce a leaner, less burdensome, and more cost 
    effective exemption system than now exists.
        FinCEN is eager to improve the terms of the rule as necessary to 
    eliminate temporary incongruities. Comments on ways in which the rule 
    could be improved in this regard are specifically invited.
    
    D. Additional Relief Under Study
    
        The Interim Rule is the first result of FinCEN's work to put in 
    place the new exemption system contemplated by the provisions of 31 
    U.S.C. 5313 (d) through (g). The goal of FinCEN's work in this area, 
    like the Congress' goal in shaping the Money Laundering Suppression Act 
    provisions on exemptions, is to reduce the cost of Bank Secrecy Act 
    compliance and to further a fundamental restructuring of the Bank 
    Secrecy Act. The restructuring emphasizes cost-effective collection of 
    only that information that is likely to benefit law enforcement and 
    regulatory authorities.
        In solving the issues posed by implementation of the new statutory 
    exemption rules, FinCEN has consulted regularly with banking industry 
    representatives. For example, under the auspices of Bank Secrecy Act 
    Advisory Group it convened a working session of bank officials to 
    discuss possible structures for the new exemption system and the 
    constraints that bank operating procedures posed for broad-scale relief 
    from unnecessary currency transaction reporting.
        In this connection, FinCEN is aware that the Interim Rule and any 
    final rule resulting therefrom may well affect the operation of large 
    banks in urban areas more than the operation of smaller community-based 
    institutions, if only because larger companies tend to do business with 
    larger banks and because the Interim Rule does not simplify the 
    exemption system with respect to transactions by privately held 
    companies, large and small, whose banking history and business would 
    also justify a simplified exemption system.
        Accordingly, FinCEN is working now on a notice of proposed 
    rulemaking implementing the discretionary exemption authority contained 
    in 31 U.S.C. 5313(e) and will at the appropriate time consult with the 
    banking community in shaping proposals to implement that authority. 
    Meanwhile, banks will still be able to maintain any exemptions properly 
    granted under the current administrative system. Commenters on this 
    Interim Rule are invited to include in their comments any suggestions 
    on the projected second stage of the exemption effort.
    
    III. Specific Provisions
    
    A. 103.22(a). Reports of Currency Transactions
    
        A new sentence is added following the first sentence of paragraph 
    (a) of 31 CFR 103.22 to provide a cross-reference in that paragraph to 
    the provisions of new paragraph (h) added by the Interim Rule.
    
    B. 103.22(h)(1). Currency Transactions of Exempt Persons With Banks 
    Occurring After April 30, 1996
    
        Paragraph (h)(1) states the general effect of the Interim Rule. 
    That is, simply and directly: no currency transaction report is 
    required to be filed by a bank for a transaction in currency by an 
    exempt person occurring after April 30, 1996.
        The Interim Rule uses the term ``bank'' rather than ``depository 
    institution'' to define the class of financial institutions to which 
    the Interim Rule applies. Although 31 U.S.C. 5313(d) speaks of 
    exemptions for transactions with ``depository institutions'' (as the 
    latter term is defined in 31 U.S.C. 5313(g)), FinCEN believes that the 
    broad definition of bank contained in 31 CFR 301.11(c) includes all of 
    the categories of institutions included in the statutory ``depository 
    institution'' definition; because the term ``bank'' is familiar to bank 
    officials who work with the Bank Secrecy Act, substitution of a new 
    term whose effect is the same does not appear either necessary or 
    advisable.
        The Interim Rule applies only to transactions between exempt 
    persons and banks, to reflect the terms of 31 U.S.C. 5313(d); it does 
    not apply to transactions between exempt persons and financial 
    institutions other than banks. Comments are invited about whether the 
    rule should extend to transactions with such other classes of financial 
    institutions.
        Although 31 U.S.C. 5313(d) speaks of ``mandatory'' exemptions, the 
    Interim Rule does not affirmatively prohibit banks from continuing to 
    report routine currency transactions with exempt persons. Treasury 
    believes that the incentives created by the Interim Rule are, as 
    Congress intended them to be, sufficiently great to lead banks to take 
    advantage of the new exemption system to a far greater extent than they 
    took advantage of the prior administrative exemption system.
        The Interim Rule, however, is not simply a regulatory relief 
    measure. As indicated above, it is part of a fundamental restructuring 
    of the Bank Secrecy Act's administration. Treasury hopes and expects 
    that banks will be willing to undertake the one-time effort necessary 
    to make the new, substantially different system work.
    
    C. 103.22(h)(2). Exempt Person
    
        Under the Interim Rule, the crucial exemption determinant is 
    whether a particular entity is an ``exempt person.'' That term is 
    defined in new paragraph (h)(2).
        The first three categories of exempt persons specified in paragraph 
    (h)(2) are those to whom exemption is required to be granted by 31 
    U.S.C. 5313(d)(1)(A)-(C).3
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \3\ The language of 31 U.S.C. 5313(d)(1)(A)-(C) is quoted in 
    section IIA of this Supplementary Information section, above.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Banks. The first category of exempt person is banks themselves, 
    with the result that transactions between banks will not require 
    reporting. In most cases, no reporting is required at present for such 
    transactions; 31 CFR 103.22(b)(1)(ii) states flatly that the currency 
    transaction reporting requirement does not ``require reports * * * of 
    transactions between domestic banks.'' The definition is limited to 
    banking operations and transactions within the United States. Thus a 
    transfer of currency by a bank inside the United States to a bank 
    outside the United States is not exempt under the Interim Rule.
    Departments and Agencies of the United States and of States and Their 
    Political Subdivisions
        The second category of exempt person includes departments and 
    agencies of the United States, of any state, and of any political 
    subdivision of any state.
    
    [[Page 18207]]
    
    The definition of ``United States'' used in 31 CFR 103.11 includes not 
    only the states but also the District of Columbia and the various 
    territories and insular possessions of the United States. See 31 CFR 
    103.11(nn); as of August 1, 1996, the definition will also include the 
    Indian lands. See 61 FR 7054, 7056 (February 23, 1996). Thus 
    departments and agencies of the governments of these areas are also 
    classified as exempt persons under the definition.
    Entities Exercising Governmental Authority
        The third category of exempt person includes any entity established 
    under the laws of the United States 4, of any state, or of any 
    political subdivision of any state, or under an interstate compact 
    between two or more states, that exercises governmental authority on 
    behalf of the United States or any such state or political subdivision. 
    Operating rules for making determinations about the governmental 
    entities are included in paragraph (h)(4), discussed below.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \4\ Again, the broad definition of ``United States'' applies.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Listed Corporations
        The fourth category of person subject to mandatory exemption under 
    31 U.S.C. 5313(d) is ``any business or category of business the reports 
    on which have little or no value for law enforcement purposes.'' 
    Treasury is making use of that provision to treat as an exempt person 
    any corporation whose common stock (i) is listed on the New York Stock 
    Exchange or the American Stock Exchange (but not including stock listed 
    on the Emerging Company Marketplace of the American Stock Exchange), or 
    (ii) has been designated as a Nasdaq National Market Security listed on 
    the Nasdaq Stock Market (but not including stock listed under the 
    separate ``Nasdaq Small-Cap Issues'' category). For convenience, this 
    class of exempt persons is referred to in this discussion as ``listed 
    corporations.''
        The ``listed corporation'' formulation has been adopted for several 
    reasons. First, Treasury believes that the formulation is a convenient 
    and accurate way of describing many, if not most, large-scale 
    enterprises that make extensive routine use of currency in their normal 
    business operations. Second, the list of corporations described in the 
    formulation is readily available and is published in general 
    circulation newspapers each morning. Finally, the scale of enterprises 
    listed on the nation's largest securities exchanges, and the variety of 
    internal and external controls to which they are subject--whether as a 
    matter of market discipline or government regulation--make their use 
    for the sort of money laundering or tax evasion marked by anomalous 
    transactions in currency, or that could be detected by a simple 
    examination of currency transaction reports, sufficiently unlikely that 
    the benefits of a uniform formulation far exceed the apparent risks of 
    such a formulation. This is especially true because of the continuing 
    applicability of the suspicious transaction reporting rules to all 
    (non-currency and currency) transactions between listed corporations 
    and banks.
        The determination whether a company is a corporation for purposes 
    of the Interim Rule depends solely upon the formal manner of its 
    organization; if the company has a corporate charter, it is a 
    corporation, and if it does not, it is not a corporation, for purposes 
    of the Interim Rule. The sort of ``corporate equivalence'' analysis 
    required, for example, for certain purposes to determine an entity's 
    status under the Internal Revenue Code is neither called for nor 
    permitted by the Interim Rule.5
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \5\ Again, there may be a limited group of entities, listed on 
    the national securities exchanges but organized abroad, for which 
    such a distinction raises issues of interpretation that cannot be 
    dealt with effectively in the Interim Rule. Guidance is requested on 
    whether such issues exist and, if so, how they should be resolved.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        At present the Interim Rule applies only to corporations, even 
    though Treasury understands that the equity interests of some 
    partnerships and business trusts are also listed on the named 
    securities exchanges. Comments are invited as to whether the definition 
    of exempt person should be extended to all persons whose equity 
    interests are so listed.
    Consolidated Subsidiaries of Listed Corporations
        Many, if not most, listed corporations include groups of subsidiary 
    operating corporations whose treatment under the Interim Rule raises 
    significant issues. Such subsidiaries are not named in stock exchange 
    listings, but the policy of the statute and Interim Rule cannot be 
    effectively implemented without the inclusion of such subsidiaries in 
    the exempt person category.
        That fact raises an issue of what might be called the ``burden'' of 
    reducing regulatory burden. Many definitions of parent-subsidiary 
    relationship are quite technical and of importance only to legal, 
    accounting, and investment specialists; even definitions phrased only 
    in terms of stock ownership often devolve into questions of direct or 
    indirect stock ownership that can be extremely difficult to resolve.
        In that context, mindful of the need to provide as simple a 
    formulation as possible, the Interim Rule treats as a subsidiary any 
    corporation that files a consolidated income tax return with a listed 
    corporation. The choice of this standard was not any easy one; its 
    chief rationale is that the fact of consolidation (as opposed to, say, 
    eligibility for consolidation) is relatively easy to determine by 
    asking corporate customers (and by asking corporate officials to ask 
    their tax or accounting departments if necessary).
        Franchisees of listed corporations (or of their subsidiaries) are 
    not included within the definition of exempt person, unless such 
    franchisees are independently exempt as listed corporations or listed 
    corporation subsidiaries. A local corporation that holds a McDonald's 
    franchise, for example, is not an exempt person simply because 
    McDonald's Corporation is a listed corporation; a McDonald's outlet 
    owned by McDonald's Corporation directly, on the other hand, would be 
    an exempt person, because McDonald's Corporation's common stock is 
    listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
        Still, the definition is not optimal. It introduces a note of 
    complexity into the Interim Rule, and Internal Revenue Service 
    (``IRS'') statistics indicate that at best only 70 to 80 percent of the 
    companies eligible to file consolidated income tax returns with their 
    parent companies actually do so. The success of the Interim Rule in 
    reducing the volume of currency transaction reports will depend in part 
    upon the effectiveness and acceptance of the definition of subsidiary 
    company, and comments are encouraged about the appropriateness of the 
    definition. FinCEN would especially welcome ideas about other 
    formulations, based upon sound banking practice, that bank employees 
    would find easy to apply and that would accomplish the goals of the 
    Interim Rule more effectively than a definition based upon 
    consolidation for income tax filing purposes.
    
    D. 103.22(h)(3). Designation of Exempt Persons
    
        The Interim Rule imposes one condition on a bank's exemption of 
    currency transactions of a customer who satisfies the definition of 
    exempt person. That condition is that a single form be filed 
    designating the exempt person and the bank that recognizes it as such. 
    The designation is to be made by a bank by filing for each exempt 
    person a single Internal Revenue Service
    
    [[Page 18208]]
    
    Form 4789 (the form now used by banks and others to report a 
    transaction in currency) that is marked (in the Form's line 36) to 
    indicate its purpose and that provides identifying information about 
    the exempt person and bank involved.
        The designation requirement must be satisfied, for existing 
    customers, on or before August 15, 1996. The requirement is a condition 
    subsequent; that is, a bank may recognize a customer as an exempt 
    person on April 30, and stop filing currency transaction reports as 
    permitted by the Interim Rule, even though it does not satisfy the 
    designation requirement for the customer until August 15, 1996.
        The designation of new customers as exempt persons must be made no 
    later than 30 days following the first transaction in currency in 
    excess of $10,000 between a bank and the new customer. (Because persons 
    may become new customers during the period April 30-August 15, 1996, a 
    new customer to whom the 30 day designation rule applies is, 
    technically, a customer who satisfies the exempt person definition and 
    who becomes a customer, or who seeks to engage in its first transaction 
    in currency, after July 15, 1996.)
        Under the Interim Rule, each bank that deals with an exempt person 
    must satisfy the designation requirement. FinCEN hopes to be able to 
    use the results of the designation filings to compile a list of exempt 
    persons that can itself be published in the Federal Register, as 
    contemplated by 31 U.S.C. 5313(d)(2), in place of the shorter 
    descriptive notice of exempt persons that is published 
    contemporaneously with the publication of the Interim Rule. The 
    designation filings will also be used to review the effectiveness of 
    the Interim Rule (and of any final rule that is derived from it) and 
    the extent to which its terms are understood and used by banks.
    
    E. 103.22(h)(4). Operating Rules for Applying Definition of Exempt 
    Person
    
        The Interim Rule contains several provisions that are designed to 
    assist banks in applying the definition of ``exempt person.''
    1. General Rule
        As indicated above, every effort has been made to craft a rule that 
    is as simple to understand and to administer as its broad objective 
    will permit. Application of the Interim Rule requires instead that 
    banks simply make one or more determinations about the status of 
    particular customers. The rule does not specify detailed procedures for 
    making or documenting the determinations required. (Indeed, one defect 
    of the administrative exemption system was its need for detailed 
    procedural steps for authorizing exemptions. See 31 CFR 103.22(d).) 
    Instead, paragraph (h)(4)(i) explains that banks are expected to 
    perform the same degree of due diligence in determining whether a 
    customer is an exempt person (and documenting that determination) that 
    a reasonable and prudent bank would perform in the conduct of its own 
    business in avoiding losses from fraud or misstatement. In other words, 
    FinCEN's objective is to leave it to bankers, who have already designed 
    business procedures and protocols to deal with similar problems, to 
    adapt their present procedures to achieve the results sought by the 
    Interim Rule.
        An assessment of compliance with the terms of the Interim Rule will 
    focus not on whether a bank necessarily makes every judgment perfectly, 
    but on whether it takes the steps a reasonable and prudent banker would 
    take to create systems to apply the Interim Rule's terms. Such an 
    approach is a corollary to the limitations on liability set by 31 
    U.S.C. 5318(f)(1) and repeated in paragraph (h)(6) of the Interim Rule; 
    under the liability limitations a bank remains subject to penalties if, 
    inter alia, it has a reason to believe that a particular customer or 
    transaction does not meet the criteria established for the granting of 
    an exemption.
    2. Government Status
        Paragraph (h)(4)(ii) permits a bank to determine the status of a 
    customer as a government department, agency, or instrumentality based 
    on its name or community knowledge, much like the so-called ``eyeball 
    test,'' cf. Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6049-4(c)(1)(ii), for the determination 
    of exempt recipient status for the purposes of information reporting 
    and withholding with respect to interest payments under applicable 
    provisions of the Internal Revenue Code.
        The determination whether an entity exercises ``governmental 
    authority'' is unfortunately not amenable to such a simple test, and 
    the second sentence of paragraph (h)(4)(ii) states a general definition 
    of governmental authority for use by banks.
    3. Status as Listed Corporation
        Paragraph (h)(4)(iii) permits a bank to rely on any New York, 
    American, or Nasdaq Stock Market listing published in a newspaper of 
    general circulation. Such listings are easily identified. For example, 
    in the Wall Street Journal, which is published and distributed 
    nationally, the listings are entitled, respectively, ``NEW YORK STOCK 
    EXCHANGE COMPOSITE TRANSACTIONS,'' ``AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE COMPOSITE 
    TRANSACTIONS,'' AND ``NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET ISSUES.'' Because such 
    listings often make use of the trading symbols (abbreviated company 
    names) for each stock, banks may also rely on any commonly accepted or 
    published stock symbol guide in reviewing the newspaper listings to 
    determine if the listings include their customers.
    4. Consolidated Return Status
        The treatment of a corporation as an exempt person because it is 
    included in the consolidated income tax return of a listed corporation 
    presents one of the more difficult issues of administration in the 
    Interim Rule. The corporations included on any consolidated return are 
    required to be shown on Internal Revenue Service Form 851 (Affiliation 
    Schedule) filed with the return; a bank may rely upon any reasonably 
    authenticated photocopy of Form 851 (or the equivalent thereof for the 
    appropriate tax year) in determining the status of a particular 
    corporation, or it may rely upon any other reasonably authenticated 
    information (for example, an officer's certificate) relating to a 
    corporation's filing status.
    
    F. 103.22(h)(5). Limitation on Exemption
    
        The exemption for transactions by an exempt person applies only 
    with respect to transactions involving that person's own funds. The 
    exemption does not apply to situations in which an exempt person is 
    engaging in a transaction as an agent on behalf of another, beneficial 
    owner of currency. (If the principal for whom the agent is acting is 
    itself an exempt person, the exempt status of the principal is what 
    causes the transaction to be exempt.) In other words, an exempt person 
    cannot lend its status, for a fee or otherwise, to another person's 
    transactions.
    
    G. 103.22(h)(6). Effect of Exemption; Limitation on Liability
    
        The designation requirement applies equally to exempt persons who 
    have previously been the subject of bank-initiated exemptions under the 
    administrative exemption system as it does to other customers.
        Once a bank has complied with the terms of the Interim Rule, it is 
    generally protected, by 31 U.S.C. 5313(f) and paragraph (h)(6) of the 
    Interim Rule, from any penalty for failure to file a currency 
    transaction report with respect to a currency transaction by an exempt 
    person. The protection does not apply if
    
    [[Page 18209]]
    
    the bank knowingly files false or incomplete information relating to 
    the exempt person (for example on an designation filing) or with 
    respect to the transaction (for example on a suspicious activity 
    report). The protection also does not apply if the bank has reason to 
    believe at the time the exemption is granted that the customer does not 
    satisfy the definition of exempt person or if the transaction is not a 
    transaction of the exempt person.
        It is anticipated that the Interim Rule will supersede the 
    administrative exemption system with respect to categories of exempt 
    persons named in the Interim Rule, 60 days after a final rule based on 
    the Interim Rule is published. At that time, transactions in currency 
    with exempt persons after April 30, 1996 will be exempt from reporting 
    by banks only to the extent that the new terms are satisfied.
    
    H. 103.22(h)(7). Obligation To File Suspicious Activity Reports, etc.
    
        The provisions of the Interim Rule create an exemption only with 
    respect to the currency transaction reporting requirement. The Interim 
    Rule does not create any exemption, and in fact has no effect of any 
    kind, on the requirement that banks file suspicious activity reports 
    with respect to transactions, including currency and non-currency 
    transactions, that satisfy the requirements of the rules of FinCEN and 
    the federal bank supervisory agencies relating to suspicious activity 
    reporting.6 (Indeed, as indicated above, the reduction in currency 
    transaction report volume reflects in part Treasury policy to rely to 
    the greatest extent possible on reports of truly suspicious activity.)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \6\ See 61 FR 4326, 4332, 4338 (February 5, 1996) (FinCEN, 
    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Federal Reserve 
    Board); 61 FR 6095, 6100 (February 16, 1996) (Federal Deposit 
    Insurance Corporation and Office of Thrift Supervision); and 61 FR 
    11526 (March 21, 1996) (National Credit Union Administration).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        For example, multiple exchanges of small denominations of currency 
    into large denominations of currency or currency transactions that are 
    not (or whose amounts are not) commensurate with the stated business or 
    other activity of the exempt person conducting the transaction, or on 
    whose behalf the transaction is conducted, may indicate the need to 
    file suspicious activity reports with respect to transactions in 
    currency. Similarly a sudden need for currency by a business that never 
    before had such a need can form a basis for the determination that a 
    suspicious activity report is due. In all cases, whether such a report 
    is required is governed by the rules of 31 CFR 103.21, rules on whose 
    application the Interim Rule has no effect.
    
    I. 103.22(h)(8). Revocation
    
        The Interim Rule makes clear that the status of an exempt person as 
    such may be revoked at any time by the Treasury Department. Revocation 
    will be prospective in all cases except those to which the protections 
    of liability conferred by 31 U.S.C. 5313(f) and 31 CFR 103.22(h)(6) do 
    not apply.
    
    IV. Regulatory Matters
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        The Department of the Treasury has determined that this interim 
    rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
    12866.
    
    B. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 Statement
    
        Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded 
    Mandates Act''), Pub. L. 104-4 (March 22, 1995), requires that an 
    agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule 
    that includes a federal mandate that may result in expenditure by 
    state, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the 
    private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. If a budgetary 
    impact statement is required, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Act 
    also requires an agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of 
    regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule. FinCEN has 
    determined that it is not required to prepare a written statement under 
    section 202 and has concluded that on balance this interim rule 
    provides the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative to 
    achieve the objectives of the rule.
    
    C. Administrative Procedure Act
    
        Because the Interim Rule implements the statute and grants 
    significant relief from existing regulatory requirements, it is found 
    to be impracticable to comply with notice and public procedure under 5 
    U.S.C. 553(b). Because the Interim Rule grants exemptions to current 
    requirements, it may be made effective before 30 days have passed after 
    its publication date. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
    
    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act relating to an 
    initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis (5 U.S.C. 604) are 
    not applicable to this Interim Rule because the agency was not required 
    to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553 or any 
    other law.
    
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This Interim Rule is being issued without prior notice and public 
    procedure pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). 
    By expanding the applicable exemptions from an information collection 
    that has been reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and 
    Budget (OMB) under control number 1505-0063, the Interim Rule 
    significantly reduces the existing burden of information collection 
    under 31 CFR 103.22. Thus, although the Interim Rule advances the 
    purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et 
    seq., and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, the Paperwork 
    Reduction Act does not require FinCEN to follow any particular 
    procedures in connection with the promulgation of the Interim Rule.
    
    F. Compliance With 5 U.S.C. 801
    
        Prior to the date of publication of this document in the Federal 
    Register, FinCEN will have submitted to each House of the Congress and 
    to the Comptroller General the information required to be submitted or 
    made available with respect to the Interim Rule by the provisions of 5 
    U.S.C. 801 (a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B).
    
    List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 103
    
        Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations 
    (Government agencies), Banks, banking, Currency, Foreign Banking, 
    Foreign currencies, Gambling, Investigations, Law enforcement, 
    Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities, Taxes.
    
    Amendment
    
        For the reasons set forth above in the preamble, 31 CFR Part 103 is 
    amended as set forth below:
    
    PART 103--FINANCIAL RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING OF CURRENCY AND 
    FOREIGN TRANSACTIONS
    
        1. The authority citation for Part 103 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951-1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311-5330.
    
        2. Section 103.22 is amended by adding a new sentence immediately 
    following the first sentence in paragraph (a)(1) and by adding a new 
    paragraph (h) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 103.22  Reports of currency transactions.
    
        (a)(1) * * * Transactions in currency by exempt persons with banks 
    occurring after April 30, 1996, are not subject to
    
    [[Page 18210]]
    
    this requirement to the extent provided in paragraph (h) of this 
    section. * * *
    * * * * *
        (h) No filing required by banks for transactions by exempt persons 
    occurring after April 30, 1996. (1) Currency transactions of exempt 
    persons with banks occurring after April 30, 1996. Notwithstanding the 
    provisions of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, no bank is required to 
    file a report otherwise required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section, 
    with respect to any transaction in currency between an exempt person 
    and a bank that is conducted after April 30, 1996.
        (2) Exempt person. For purposes of this section, an exempt person 
    is:
        (i) A bank, to the extent of such bank's domestic operations;
        (ii) A department or agency of the United States, of any state, or 
    of any political subdivision of any state;
        (iii) Any entity established under the laws of the United States, 
    of any state, or of any political subdivision of any state, or under an 
    interstate compact between two or more states, that exercises 
    governmental authority on behalf of the United States or any such state 
    or political subdivision;
        (iv) Any corporation whose common stock is listed on the New York 
    Stock Exchange or the American Stock Exchange (except stock listed on 
    the Emerging Company Marketplace of the American Stock Exchange) or 
    whose common stock has been designated as a Nasdaq National Market 
    Security listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market (except stock listed under 
    the separate ``Nasdaq Small-Cap Issues'' heading); and
        (v) Any subsidiary of any corporation described in paragraph 
    (h)(2)(iv) of this section whose federal income tax return is filed as 
    part of a consolidated federal income tax return with such corporation, 
    pursuant to section 1501 of the Internal Revenue Code and the 
    regulations promulgated thereunder, for the calendar year 1995 or for 
    its last fiscal year ending before April 15, 1996.
        (3) Designation of exempt persons. (i) A bank must designate each 
    exempt person with whom it engages in transactions in currency, on or 
    before the later of August 15, 1996, and the date 30 days following the 
    first transaction in currency between such bank and such exempt person 
    that occurs after April 30, 1996.
        (ii) Designation of an exempt person shall be made by a single 
    filing of Internal Revenue Service Form 4789, in which line 36 is 
    marked ``Designation of Exempt Person'' and items 2-14 (Part I, Section 
    A) and items 37-49 (Part III) are completed. The designation must be 
    made separately by each bank that treats the person in question as an 
    exempt person. (For availability, see 26 CFR 601.602.)
        (iii) This designation requirement applies whether or not the 
    particular exempt person to be designated has previously been treated 
    as exempt from the reporting requirements of paragraph (a) of this 
    section under the rules contained in paragraph (b) or (e) of this 
    section.
        (4) Operating rules for designating exempt persons. (i) Subject to 
    the specific rules of this paragraph (h), a bank must take such steps 
    to assure itself that a person is an exempt person (within the meaning 
    of applicable provisions of paragraph (h)(2) of this section) that a 
    reasonable and prudent bank would take to protect itself from loan or 
    other fraud or loss based on misidentification of a person's status.
        (ii) A bank may treat a person as a governmental department, 
    agency, or entity if the name of such person reasonably indicates that 
    it is described in paragraph (h)(2)(ii) or (h)(2)(iii) of this section, 
    or if such person is known generally in the community to be a State, 
    the District of Columbia, a tribal government, a Territory or Insular 
    Possession of the United States, or a political subdivision or a 
    wholly-owned agency or instrumentality of any of the foregoing. An 
    entity generally exercises governmental authority on behalf of the 
    United States, a State, or a political subdivision, for purposes of 
    paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section, only if its authorities include 
    one or more of the powers to tax, to exercise the authority of eminent 
    domain, or to exercise police powers with respect to matters within its 
    jurisdiction.
        (iii) In determining whether a person is described in paragraph 
    (h)(2)(iv) of this section, a bank may rely on any New York Stock 
    Exchange, American Stock Exchange, or Nasdaq Stock Market listing 
    published in a newspaper of general circulation and on any commonly 
    accepted or published stock symbol guide.
        (iv) In determining whether a person is described in paragraph 
    (h)(2)(v) of this section, a bank may rely upon any reasonably 
    authenticated corporate officer's certificate or any reasonably 
    authenticated photocopy of Internal Revenue Service Form 851 
    (Affiliation Schedule) or the equivalent thereof for the appropriate 
    tax year.
        (5) Limitation on exemption. A transaction carried out by an exempt 
    person as an agent for another person who is the beneficial owner of 
    the funds that are the subject of a transaction in currency is not 
    subject to the exemption from reporting contained in paragraph (h)(1) 
    of this section.
        (6) Effect of exemption; limitation on liability. (i) FinCEN may in 
    the future determine by amendment to this part that the exemption 
    contained in this paragraph (h) shall be the only basis for exempting 
    persons described in paragraph (h)(2) of this section from the 
    reporting requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.
        (ii) No bank shall be subject to penalty under this part for 
    failure to file a report required by paragraph (a) of this section with 
    respect to a currency transaction by an exempt person with respect to 
    which the requirements of this paragraph (h) have been satisfied, 
    unless the bank:
        (A) Knowingly files false or incomplete information with respect to 
    the transaction or the customer engaging in the transaction; or
        (B) Has reason to believe at the time the exemption is granted that 
    the customer does not meet the criteria established by this paragraph 
    (h) for treatment of the transactor as an exempt person or that the 
    transaction is not a transaction of the exempt person.
        (iii) A bank that files a report with respect to a currency 
    transaction by an exempt person rather than treating such person as 
    exempt shall remain subject with respect to each such report to the 
    rules for filing reports, and the penalties for filing false or 
    incomplete reports, that are applicable to reporting of transactions in 
    currency by persons other than exempt persons. A bank that continues 
    for the period permitted by paragraph (h)(6)(i) of this section to 
    treat a person described in paragraph (h)(2) of this section as exempt 
    from the reporting requirements of paragraph (a) of this section on a 
    basis other than as provided in this paragraph (h) shall remain subject 
    in full to the rules governing an exemption on such other basis and to 
    the penalties for failing to comply with the rules governing such other 
    exemption.
        (7) Obligation to file suspicious activity reports, etc. Nothing in 
    this paragraph (h) relieves a bank of the obligation, or alters in any 
    way such bank's obligation, to file a report required by Sec. 103.21 
    with respect to any transaction, including, without limitation, any 
    transaction in currency, or relieves a bank of any other reporting or 
    recordkeeping obligation imposed by this part (except the obligation to 
    report transactions in currency pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
    section to the extent provided in this paragraph (h)).
        (8) Revocation. The status of any person as an exempt person under 
    this paragraph (h) may be revoked by
    
    [[Page 18211]]
    
    FinCEN by written notice, which may be provided by publication in the 
    Federal Register in appropriate situations, on such terms as are 
    specified in such notice. In addition, and without any action on the 
    part of the Treasury Department:
        (i) The status of a corporation as an exempt person pursuant to 
    paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section ceases once such corporation 
    ceases to be listed on the applicable stock exchange; and
        (ii) The status of a subsidiary as an exempt person under paragraph 
    (h)(2)(v) of this section ceases once such subsidiary ceases to be 
    included in a consolidated federal income tax return of a person 
    described in paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section.
    * * * * *
        Dated: April 16, 1996.
    Stanley E. Morris,
    Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
    [FR Doc. 96-9798 Filed 4-23-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4820-03-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
04/24/1996
Department:
Treasury Department
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Interim rule with request for comments.
Document Number:
96-9798
Dates:
Effective date. The interim rule is effective May 1, 1996.
Pages:
18204-18211 (8 pages)
PDF File:
96-9798.pdf
CFR: (1)
31 CFR 103.22