Academic journal article ABA Banking Journal

Retroactive "PATRIOTism" ?

Academic journal article ABA Banking Journal

Retroactive "PATRIOTism" ?

Article excerpt

Q. If we did not have one of the four identification items--name, address, dote of birth, and taxpayer identification number--required under the USA PATRIOT Act on accounts that were existing at the time of customer identification program implementation, is it required that we go back and get any of these items that might be missing?

A. No, not as a matter of regulatory mandate. The relevant guidance from the interagency exam manual states at footnote 35 that:

"The bank may demonstrate that it knows an existing customer's true identity by showing that before the issuance of the final CIP rule, it had comparable procedures in place to verify the identity of persons who had accounts with the bank as of October 1, 2003, though the bank may not have gathered the very same information about such persons as required by the final CIP rule. Alternative means include showing that the bank has had an active and longstanding relationship with a particular person, as evidenced by such things as a history of account statements sent to the person, information sent to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) about the person's accounts without issue, loans made and repaid, or other services performed for the person over a period of time. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.