New business products should be evaluated for AML concerns before they are launched into the market. This is because new products may introduce new risks or vulnerabilities that could be exploited by money launderers or terrorist financiers. By conducting a pre-launch assessment, a financial institution can identify and mitigate these risks, design appropriate controls and procedures, and ensure compliance with the relevant laws and regulations. A pre-launch assessment can also help a financial institution to align its AML strategy with its business objectives, and avoid potential reputational damage or regulatory sanctions.
References:
* 9 Things to Consider When Evaluating an AML Solution
* CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, page 38.

According to the ACAMS study guide, one of the red flags for money laundering in crowdfunding platforms is
"projects that are fully funded within a very short period of time, especially if the funding comes from a small number of donors or from a single donor" (p. 222). This could indicate that the project is a front for laundering illicit funds or financing terrorism. The other options are not necessarily indicative of money laundering risk, as they could be explained by legitimate factors such as the popularity, urgency, or ambition of the project.
References:
* ACAMS. (2020). Study Guide for the Certification Examination for Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (6th ed.). Miami, FL: ACAMS.
* ESMA. (2015)Questions and Answers: Investment-based crowdfunding and money laundering/terrorist financing 1. Paris, France: ESMA.

A suspicious transaction report (STR) is a document that financial institutions must file with the relevant authorities when they detect or suspect any activity that may be related to money laundering, terrorist financing, or other criminal offences. An STR should include the details of the customer, the transaction, the reason for suspicion, and any other relevant information.
One of the indicators of suspicious activity is the use of financial instruments, such as checks, money orders, or cashier's checks, that are drawn on other institutions and deposited in amounts under the currency reporting thresholds. This may suggest that the customer is trying to avoid the detection and reporting of large cash transactions, which is a technique known as structuring or smurfing. Structuring is illegal and may indicate that the customer is laundering money from illicit sources or evading taxes.
Another indicator of suspicious activity is the use of financial instruments that are sequentially numbered, meaning that they have consecutive serial numbers. This may suggest that the customer has obtained the instruments from the same source or issuer, and that they are using them to launder money or finance illegal activities. Sequentially numbered instruments may also indicate that the customer is involved in fraud, such as check kiting or counterfeit checks.
Therefore, if a bank conducts a quarterly review on a retail customer's account and finds that the customer has made a number of large deposits of financial instruments drawn on other institutions in amounts under the thresholds, and that the instruments were sequentially numbered, the bank will most likely file an STR. This is because this activity does not fit the customer's historical profile, and it raises a high level of suspicion that the customer is engaged in money laundering or other criminal activities.
References:
* CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2, page 108
* Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Suspicious Activity Reporting and Other Anti-Money Laundering Considerations, Question 5, page 7
* Anti-money laundering - handling suspicious activity, Section 6.3, page 3
* Tell us about suspicious activity that may be linked to money laundering, Section 3, page 1

The FATF communicates its findings regarding jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies by issuing two formal documents three times per year, namely the FATF Public Statement and the Improving Global AML/CFT Compliance: On-going Process document1. These documents identify the jurisdictions that have serious and/or systemic deficiencies in their AML/CFT regimes and the progress they have made in addressing them. The FATF also calls on its members and other jurisdictions to apply counter-measures or enhanced due diligence measures to protect the international financial system from the risks emanating from these jurisdictions1.
References: =
* 1: High-risk and other monitored jurisdictions - Financial Action Task Force (FATF)

Financial institutions (FIs) are required to cooperate with law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in their investigations of money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. However, sometimes LEAs may submit requests for information or documents that are overly broad, unduly intrusive, or unreasonable in scope or volume. Such requests may pose challenges or risks for FIs, such as violating customer privacy, compromising data security, disrupting business operations, or incurring excessive costs.
The most appropriate response for an FI in such a situation is to narrow the request through a prompt response to the LEA. This means that the FI should communicate with the LEA as soon as possible to clarify the purpose, scope, and relevance of the request, and to negotiate a more reasonable and proportionate request that meets the LEA's needs and the FI's capabilities. The FI should also explain the potential difficulties or consequences of complying with the original request, and propose alternative or additional sources of information that may be more useful or accessible. The FI should document the communication and the agreed terms of the request, and comply with the request in a timely and accurate manner.
By narrowing the request through a prompt response, the FI can demonstrate its good faith and willingness to cooperate with the LEA, while also protecting its own interests and obligations. This can help avoid or resolve any conflicts or misunderstandings between the FI and the LEA, and facilitate a more efficient and effective investigation.
References:
Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION AND ENFORCEMENT BY AML/CFT SUPERVISORS OF THE FINANCIAL SECTOR AND LAW ENFORCEMENT Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering: Requests by Law Enforcement for Financial Institutions to Maintain Accounts Support of Law Enforcement ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide 6th Edition