The Money Laundering Regulations 2003

UK Statutory Instrument 2003 No. 3075 — creates 6 criminal offences.

Made

28 November 2003

In force from

Not determined

Extent

Not stated

Subject

Corporate, financial services, company law, employment, charity, electoral and tax

Made under

European Communities Act 1972, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

Explanatory note

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — published with the instrument by the department that made it. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

These Regulations replace the Money Laundering Regulations 1993 and 2001 with updated provisions which reflect Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 91/308/EEC on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering. A Transposition Note setting out how the main elements of Directive 2001/97/EC will be transposed into UK law is available from the Financial Systems and International Standards Team, HM Treasury, 1 Horse Guards Road, London SW1A 2HQ. The Transposition Note is also on HM Treasury’s website (www.hm-treasury.gov.uk). A regulatory impact assessment has been prepared and placed in the library of each House of Parliament. A copy is likewise available from the Treasury and can be found on the Treasury’s website. Where business relationships are formed, or one-off transactions are carried out, in the course of relevant business (defined in regulation 2), the persons carrying out such relevant business are required to maintain certain identification procedures (regulation 4), record-keeping procedures (regulation 6) and internal reporting procedures (regulation 7) and to establish other appropriate procedures for the purpose of forestalling or preventing money laundering (regulation 3(1)(b)). They are also required to train their employees in those procedures and, more generally, in the recognition of money laundering transactions and the law relating to money laundering (regulation 3(1)(c)). A person who fails to maintain the procedures or carry out the training is guilty of a criminal offence (regulation 3(2)). Casino operators must obtain satisfactory evidence of the identity of all people using their gaming facilities (regulation 8). Regulation 9 requires the Commissioners of Customs and Excise to keep a register of money service operators and a register of high value dealers and regulations 10-11 state the registration requirements placed on such persons. Regulation 12 lists the grounds on which registration may be refused by the Commissioners, including where information which has been supplied is incomplete, false or misleading. Regulation 13 lists the circumstances in which registration may be cancelled by the Commissioners. Regulation 14 allows the Commissioners to charge fees. Regulations 15 to 19 state the powers of the Commissioners in relation to money service operators and high value dealers, including a power to enter and inspect premises. Where there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence under the Regulations is being, has been or is about to be committed by a money service operator or high value dealer, the Commissioners may seek a court order requiring any person in possession of certain information to allow them access to it. Regulation 19 allows the Commissioners to enter premises with a warrant, to search persons and to take away documents. Regulation 20 allows the Commissioners to impose a civil penalty in certain circumstances. Regulation 21 provides a mechanism for a formal review by the Commissioners of their decisions. Regulation 22 provides for appeals against the Commissioners' decisions to be heard by a VAT tribunal. Regulation 23 allows the Commissioners to prosecute offences under the Regulations. Regulation 24 allows fees and penalties to be recovered as a civil debt. Regulation 25 requires people who are authorised by the Financial Services Authority (“the FSA”) to inform the FSA before they operate bureaux de change. Regulation 26 requires supervisory authorities (defined in regulation 2) and various other people who obtain information indicative of money laundering to inform a constable. Regulation 28 allows the Treasury to require people who carry on relevant business to refrain from doing business with people in certain non-EEA States.

Offences created by this instrument

• If an offence under regulation 3 committed by a body corporate is shown— a to have been committed with the consent or… regulation 27(1) · Revoked · Strict liability
• If an offence under regulation 3 committed by a partnership is shown— a to have been committed with the consent or the… regulation 27(2) · Revoked · Strict liability
• If an offence under regulation 3 committed by an unincorporated association (other than a partnership) is shown— a to… regulation 27(3) · Revoked · Strict liability
• Systems and training etc. to prevent money laundering regulation 3(2) · Revoked · Strict liability
• Record-keeping procedures regulation 6 · Revoked · Mixed — some elements strict, some not
• Record-keeping procedures regulation 6(6) · Revoked · Strict liability

What Parliament said about it

Contributions, debates and written statements mentioning this instrument by name. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

• Proceeds of Crime Act (Money Laundering) Commons · Written Statements · 22 November 2005 · The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Paul Goggins)

  I have today laid in draft before Parliament the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Money Laundering Regulations (Amendment) Order 2005. The draft Order brings to a conclusion an informal consultation exercise which the Home Office conducted last year on whether the law on the duty of accountants, auditors and tax advisers to report money laundering under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 needed to be changed to bring it fully into line with European Community law, and if so how. This followed representations from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales that the current…

• Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Money Laundering Regulations 2003 (Amendment) Order 2005 Lords · Lords Chamber · 9 December 2005 · Lord Bassam of Brighton

  My Lords, the Government have a comprehensive strategy in place to seize and confiscate the proceeds of crime and to combat money laundering. Over £185 million has been recovered over the last three years from drug dealers and other criminals who make people's lives a misery. Taking away criminals' profits sends out a clear message that crime does not pay. It prevents criminals funding further activity and removes negative role models from many of our communities. Taking the profit out of crime by seizing and confiscating criminal assets means that it is crucial that we have comprehensive…

• Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and Money Laundering Regulations 2003 (Amendment) Order 2005 Lords · Lords Chamber · 9 December 2005
• On-course Betting Commons · Westminster Hall · 14 March 2007 · Mr. Caborn

  We are not going to resolve this issue in the debate. I will look into this matter with my officials. At the end of my speech I shall say how we think matters should proceed. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for referring to the important issue of money laundering. We must ensure that there is integrity in all sections of the gaming and gambling industry. If we do not, everyone will suffer. The Government take the prevention of money laundering extremely seriously in every industry, including on-course betting. In 2000, the NJPC engaged two former senior police officers to investigate…

• Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill [Lords] Commons · Commons Chamber · 5 July 2007 · The Minister of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Mr. Stephen Timms)

  I begin by expressing thanks to the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown) for his words of welcome and by welcoming him to this brief. I also thank the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Susan Kramer) for her welcome and express good wishes to her in her new responsibilities. I endorse what my right hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (Mr. Clarke) said about the contribution that she has made to debates on the Bill in recent months. The hon. Member for Cotswold explained what new clause 1 would do. I must say to him that it would give the Government a very wide…

• Future of CDC Commons · Westminster Hall · 14 July 2011 · Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate, particularly because I am not a member of the International Development Committee, although I follow its work closely. I welcome the Committee’s report on CDC, which has operated in the shadows for too long and which is increasingly a subject of public concern. I am pleased to note that the issue of compliance by CDC fund managers with the Department for International Development-sponsored CDC investment code has been raised in the report, because it is an important issue. I have followed the issue at first hand after one of my…

How Parliament handled it

Parliament's Statutory Instruments service records procedure from May 2017 onwards, and this instrument predates it. That is a limit of the source, not a statement that nothing happened.

Check the source

• This instrument on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text, including amendments made since
• Other instruments from 2003