Model Answer

The fight against money laundering is becoming increasingly difficult due to evolving criminal techniques and the widespread adoption of technology. Traditional anti-money laundering (AML) tactics, which focused on detecting anomalies, transaction patterns, and hidden relationships through manual investigations, are now proving insufficient.

Challenges to Traditional AML Systems

1. Shift from Physical to Digital Efforts
   Money laundering has transitioned from physical methods to digital platforms, enabling criminals to hide funds through electronic cash, digital currencies, and cyber currencies. For example, launderers use online wallets and encrypted digital communications to evade detection.
2. Proliferation of Unregulated Financial Activities
   Technology has created virtual financial hubs beyond regulatory oversight. These free zones allow seamless capital flow, both legitimate and illicit, further complicating enforcement efforts.
3. Scale of Financial Transactions
   Globalization and digitalization have exponentially increased transaction volumes. Traditional AML systems struggle to process and analyze this vast data efficiently.
4. Increased Anonymity
   Cyber-laundering involves converting cash into digital assets transferred via encrypted communication, ensuring anonymity and bypassing conventional monitoring mechanisms.
5. Emergence of Cryptocurrencies
   Decentralized platforms supporting cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum facilitate pseudo-anonymity, making them a preferred tool for money laundering. For instance, a Chainalysis study revealed that $22.2 billion was laundered via crypto in 2023 Addressing the Challenges

India has implemented measures such as the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, to combat laundering. However, advanced tools like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and big data analytics are essential to enhance accuracy, streamline compliance, and proactively tackle emerging threats.

Incorporating technology into AML strategies will help governments and financial institutions stay ahead in combating sophisticated laundering methods.

Model Answer

Impact on the Economy

1. Macroeconomic Instability:
   Money laundering leads to significant financial outflows that destabilize the exchange rate and cause asset bubbles. This was evident in the Yes Bank-DHFL money laundering case, which triggered turmoil in India’s financial sector. The movement of illicit funds exacerbates economic instability and erodes trust in financial institutions.
2. Reduced Tax Revenues:
   Money laundering and tax evasion result in a direct loss to government revenue. According to the State of Tax Justice report (2020), India loses 0.41% of GDP annually due to global tax abuse. These losses hinder public spending and economic development.
3. Distorted Economic Productivity:
   Laundered money is often invested in non-productive assets like real estate, art, and antiques, diverting resources from productive investments. This reduces overall economic productivity and impacts long-term growth prospects.
4. Erosion of Public Institutions:
   Money laundering can be used to bribe public officials, manipulate elections, and undermine the rule of law. The VVIP chopper scam serves as a stark example where illicit money was used to influence government decisions, weakening the integrity of public institutions.

Impact on National Security

Money laundering also fuels criminal activities, including terrorism and drug trafficking, which pose a direct threat to national security. A report by Rashtriya Raksha University highlights how illegal online betting and gambling companies are used for money laundering and terrorist financing.

Challenges in Combating Money Laundering

1. Complex Methods:
   Criminals constantly evolve their methods, using tools like shell companies and cryptocurrencies to conceal illicit funds, making detection challenging.
2. Lack of Synergy Between Agencies:
   Agencies such as CBI and ED often work in silos, hindering effective coordination. Synchronization is crucial to track and prevent money laundering activities.
3. Weak KYC Norms:
   Non-compliance with Know Your Customer (KYC) regulations by banks and financial institutions, as seen with Paytm Payment Bank, exacerbates the problem.
4. Smuggling and Tax Havens:
   The prevalence of illegal black markets and the existence of tax haven countries like Cayman Islands and Mauritius further complicate enforcement efforts.

Conclusion

Combating money laundering requires robust enforcement, effective coordination between agencies, stringent KYC norms, and international cooperation to tackle the global nature of the problem.

Model Answer

Key Steps Taken by India:

1. Expansion of AML/CFT Legislation:
   • The Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, was expanded in May 2023 to cover a broader range of professionals and entities. This includes chartered accountants, company secretaries, and cost accountants, enhancing the scope of anti-money laundering (AML) and combating the financing of terrorism (CFT) measures. This change aligns with the FATF’s recommendation for a more inclusive approach to combating illicit financial flows.
2. Strengthening Customer Due Diligence (CDD):
   • India has made significant improvements in customer due diligence (CDD) processes, ensuring greater transparency in financial transactions. The introduction of Know Your Customer (KYC) and Know Your Business (KYB) norms now includes verification of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) number for entities before engaging in business, ensuring authenticity and accountability.
3. Enhanced Supervision and Enforcement:
   • The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) have taken steps to increase transparency and mitigate risks. For example, SEBI mandates Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) to report structural changes within seven working days. Furthermore, the RBI has imposed restrictions on individuals from FATF non-compliant jurisdictions acquiring significant banking shareholdings.

Areas for Further Improvement:

1. Inclusion of DNFBPs in Oversight:
   • While the PMLA targets financial institutions, it does not yet cover Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs), such as real estate agents and dealers in precious metals. Including DNFBPs in regulatory oversight is crucial for enhanced compliance with FATF standards.
2. Terrorism Financing Monitoring:
   • There is a need to improve monitoring and regulation of crowdfunding platforms and informal value transfer systems, as terrorist groups have increasingly used these methods to fund activities.

India’s efforts to comply with FATF recommendations reflect a strong commitment to addressing money laundering and terrorism financing but require continuous adaptation to evolving global standards and threats.