Precious metals, such as gold and silver, pose a high risk of money laundering because they have some features that make them attractive to criminals. According to the FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones1, these features include:
Some precious metals can be formed into other objects, making easier to transport. For example, gold can be melted and shaped into jewellery, coins, bars, or other items that can be easily concealed and moved across borders. This makes it difficult for law enforcement and customs authorities to detect and seize the illicit proceeds of crime.
Precious metals have high intrinsic value in a relatively compact form and are easy to convert into currency.
For example, gold has a stable and universal value that can be exchanged for cash or other assets in any market. This makes it easy for criminals to store, transfer, and launder their illicit funds without leaving a trace in the formal financial system.
The other two options, C and D, are not as relevant to the risk of money laundering. The value of precious metals is determined by the market forces of supply and demand, and it is not easy to inflate or manipulate it.
Precious metals can be used in many high-tech commercial applications, but this does not necessarily make them more valuable or more prone to money laundering.
1: FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Dealers in Precious Metals and Stones, 2008,
https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Fatfrecommendations/Fatfguidanceontherisk- basedapproachfordealersinpreciousmetalsandstones.html
2: Money laundering and terrorist financing risks and vulnerabilities associated with gold, 2015, https://www.
fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Methodsandtrends/Ml-tf-risks-and-vulnerabilities-gold.html
3: The anti-money laundering framework for precious stones and metals dealers in Singapore, 2021,
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JMLC-07-2021-0074/full/html
4: Gold and Money Laundering, 2019, https://www.moneylaunderingnews.com/2019/04/gold-and-money- laundering/

The USA PATRIOT Act of 20011 is a comprehensive anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering legislation that grants various powers and authorities to the US government to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes. Among its provisions, Title III of the Act, also known as the International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 20012, specifically addresses the issue of correspondent banking and the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing through foreign banks that maintain accounts with US banks. Section 319 of Title III3 authorizes the US Attorney General or the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a subpoena or summons to any foreign bank that maintains a correspondent account in the US, and to request any records relating to such account, including records maintained outside the US. Furthermore, Section 319(b) of Title III4 allows the US authorities to seize the funds of the foreign bank held with the US bank, if the foreign bank fails to comply with such a subpoena or summons, or if the US authorities initiate a civil forfeiture action against the funds in the correspondent account. Therefore, the USA PATRIOT Act is the correct answer, as it enables the US authorities to seize the funds of the foreign bank held with the US bank, if the correspondent account is found to have facilitated a transaction involving tainted funds.
References:
USA PATRIOT Act
Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act
Section 319(a) of the USA PATRIOT Act
Section 319(b) of the USA PATRIOT Act

A Risk Appetite Statement (RAS) defines an institution's acceptable level of risk-taking and aligns AML and financial crime controls with organizational strategy.
Option C (Correct): An RAS sets clear limits for acceptable risk-taking, balancing risk and business opportunities.
Option D (Correct): The RAS is a management-approved document that integrates risk tolerance, compliance strategy, and business goals.
Why Other Options Are Incorrect:
Option A (Incorrect): An RAS is not just a reporting document; it actively shapes risk management decisions.
Option B (Incorrect): An RAS includes both qualitative and quantitative factors, but not just qualitative elements.
Option E (Incorrect): An RAS does not only define residual risk-it guides overall risk limits and policies.
How an RAS Strengthens AML Compliance:
Defines acceptable AML risk levels across business units.
Guides compliance teams on risk tolerance for high-risk customers.
Ensures alignment with FATF, regulatory expectations, and internal controls.
Reference:
Basel Committee's Principles for Risk Management
FATF Recommendation 1 (Risk-Based Approach to AML)
Wolfsberg Group Guidance on Risk Appetite and Compliance Frameworks

it describes a reason why trusts established in certain offshore jurisdictions make good vehicles to layer money, which is names of the settlor and beneficiaries are not publicly available. This means that the true owners and controllers of the funds or assets held by the trust are hidden from the public and the authorities, and can only be accessed by the trustee or the protector, who may be complicit or unaware of the money laundering scheme. This creates a high level of anonymity and secrecy for the money launderers, who can use the trust to move, disguise, or conceal the origin and destination of their illicit funds.
The other options are not necessarily reasons why trusts established in certain offshore jurisdictions make good vehicles to layer money, although they may have some advantages or disadvantages depending on the circumstances and the risk profile of the customers and countries involved. Option B describes a possible motive for setting up a trust in an offshore jurisdiction, which is to minimize taxes, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be legitimate tax planning or optimization purposes. Option C describes a possible challenge or obstacle for setting up a trust in an offshore jurisdiction, which is offshore jurisdictions are unfamiliar with trust, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be other legal or financial vehicles available in those jurisdictions. Option D describes a possible characteristic or feature of a trust, which is trusts may hold assets of significant size, but this does not imply that the trust is used to layer money, as there may be valid reasons or sources for the large assets.
ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course - 6th Edition1
Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition)2 ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter 4, pages 86-87
https://www.acams.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACAMS-CAMS-Study-Guide-6th-Edition-Chapter-4.pdf