|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:|
|This is not a forum for general discussion about Money laundering. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Money laundering at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
|Threads older than 100 days may be archived by.|
More effective than what?
In the value of enforcement costs section, it says "The Economist magazine has become increasingly vocal in its criticism of such regulation, particularly with reference to countering terrorist financing, referring to it as a "costly failure", although concedes that the rules to combat money laundering are more effective."
The last part of this sentence is meaningless, because we don't know what it is supposed to be more effective than.
I went and reviewed the article, and in fact what it says is that banking regulations are ineffective, and that other actions (like cracking down on credit card fraud for instance) are much more effective tools against money laundering. Have edited to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 16:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
This is used on the page: $AUD1000. What denomination is that? Since it discusses activities of the US, shouldn't it use US dollars? -Frecklefoot —Preceding undated comment added 17:51, 5 February 2003
- I just removed that, and added US currency notation. I think that this could end up being the most useful information on the wikipedia. --DropDeadGorgias —Preceding undated comment added 20:08, 6 March 2003
In Popular Culture
I think this article should have an "in popular culture" section if only because this article was featured in an episode of Breaking Bad (ep: Half Measures) when one of the characters was researching how to launder money. An article referencing a reference of itself would please me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- Couldn't agree more. At least Aconite did it with Dexter in season 7. TK(film) (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- The information is now here: Wikipedia in culture#In television episodes.--18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
HSBC and Standard Chartered are not listed here. Standard Chartered is arguably an oversight. But someone added HSBC last month and it was promptly deleted with the comment that it was covered in the HSBC article. While that is true, I don't see how that merits its exclusion as a notable case in this article. Jreiss17 (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Be prepared to add Mt. Gox and BTC to the article soon. ;) 2601:1:9500:6D5:EDC7:D88B:4DF0:3329 (talk) 08:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
global regulatory agencies AML/CFT
suggest to separate global players like IMF, World Bank, Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the world anti-money laundering body and the likes into a separate section. they all use this "insider acronym" that wikipedia hasnt indexed yet: AML/CFT, which automatically connects money laundring with terror financing, as if they were siamese twins
- IMF Technical Assistance on AML/CFT IMF Anti-Money Laundering/Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT)
- World Bank Comprehensive Reference Guide to Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT)
- Action Task Force
AML/CFT is also in the US code, particularly the dept homeland security and dept of treasury.
EU uses the equivalent term, see What are money laundering and terrorist financing? --Wuerzele (talk) 08:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)