Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Business Crimes BulletinKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Lawyers and Money Laundering

By Howard W. Goldstein
May 27, 2008

As anti-money laundering enforcement has become an international priority, financial institutions around the world increasingly rely on lawyers to help them navigate stringent anti-money laundering regulations enforced by criminal penalties. While the duty of lawyers representing financial institutions in the United States is almost solely toward their clients, in the European Union, lawyers have affirmative obligations to report suspected money-laundering activity to government authorities. In other words, lawyers may be involuntarily conscripted as enforcement agents or 'gatekeepers' at the institutions they represent. American lawyers in the European offices of U.S.-based 'international' law firms are not exempt. In some countries, they face criminal liability if they fail to follow 'know your customer' protocols or fail to report suspicious transactions. Meanwhile, in the United States, such 'gatekeeper' reporting obligations have met stiff resistance by the organized bar and have not been implemented.

Sometimes lost in the debate about 'gatekeeping' is the fact that lawyers in the United States have been, and continue to be, prosecuted for substantive violations of the money-laundering statutes. And as companies become both more sophisticated and more global in their operations, the prosecution possibilities expand. As one commentator noted: 'Lawyers are much more involved in advising clients about how to conduct their business than ever before due to the pervasiveness of the regulation of economic activity. When the lawyer moves from the courtroom to the boardroom, the possibility of a lawyer becoming enmeshed in questionable conduct increases substantially.' Henning, Targeting Legal Advice 54 Am. U.L. Rev., 669, 686 (2005).

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing Image

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.