From: jrobertson@union-bank.net
[mailto:jrobertson@union-bank.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 4:52 PM
To: regs.comments@federalreserve.gov; Comments;
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov;
regs.comments@ots.treas.gov
Subject: EGRPRA
Federal Banking Regulatory Agencies:
Thank you for the opportunity to share
our comments on the Bank Secrecy Act and related
regulations. We are a community bank, the only locally
owned bank in a small town in Arkansas. We have been
providing banking services to our customers for over
fifty years; our customers are our friends, neighbors
and relatives. The increased amount of resources we have
been required to commit to BSA compliance has impacted
the services we provide: we have just recently made the
decision to cease the sale of official checks and
traveler’s checks to non-customers due to record-keeping
requirements.
We believe that the current limits of
$10,000 for currency transactions and $3,000 for
monetary instruments need to be increased. These amounts
no longer are “large” cash transactions and increase the
number of reports we must file. We have a business
customer that is ineligible for exemption; he has made
deposits every Monday morning for at least the last five
years for his weekend business receipts and every Monday
we complete a CTR. This repetitive filing of CTR’s for
amounts just over $10,000 surely adds to the backlog of
reports awaiting review.
We review all of our exempt accounts
annually; both examiners and the internal auditor
request documentation of this review. We feel that this
is more than sufficient and should eliminate the need
for the biannual filing for Phase II exempt customers.
We have, as required, reviewed our
customers and accounts to determine which should be
classified as “high-risk” (according to the definition
of high risk accounts) and monitored for suspicious
activity and money laundering. Guidance from the
agencies would be most helpful in determining what
constitutes suspicious activity that should be reported
and is a genuine cause for concern.
Money Service Business: Please don’t
force us to be regulators! We simply don’t feel it is
our responsibility to determine if our MSB customer has
been registered with FINCEN, to do a risk assessment of
our customer, review their money laundering program and
their internal procedures. If the government feels this
level of scrutiny is necessary for MSB’s (and we include
local businesses that provide check cashing services to
their customers that may qualify them as an MSB), the
government should be conducting the review and the MSB
should be responsible for reporting. The bank should not
be in the middle of this process.
Regulation D: Please allow us to be
competitive in the marketplace and eliminate the
restrictions on the payment of interest and transfers.
Again, we appreciate the opportunity
to comment on these areas of concern.
Debra Keen, CFO
Judy Robertson, VP Compliance
Susan Chilton VP Accounting, BSA
Officer
Jim Handley, Security Officer
Union Bank of Benton
|