NPRM: Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Programs (all FIs, incl. MSBs) (91 FR 18704) (Part 3 of 5)
Document text
Research, not advice. Part of the Bitcoin research archive (October 2026). Claims labelled unverified, contested or fringe are reported, not endorsed; statuses of bills and rules are as of the date checked. Government, court and patent records are public domain; the research notes are CC BY 4.0.
and the PRA.126 Requests for comments complement the problem identification
proposed rule would enable financial related to the RIA—regarding specific already performed by Congress.134
institutions to more efficiently focus findings, assumptions, or expectations, Nevertheless, FinCEN has remained
their resources on higher-risk items, the or with respect to the analysis in its mindful of these animating
same level of expenditures may generate entirety—can be found in the final considerations as well as the general
more effective outcomes—for the subsection.127 These requests for social and economic costs that may
financial institution, the integrity of the comments have been previewed and ensue from an ineffective AML/CFT
financial system, law enforcement, cross-referenced throughout the RIA. regime.135
national security, and the American FinCEN expects that the proposed
A. Assessment of Impact rulemaking would meaningfully
public, generally.
Consistent with best practices in alleviate certain underlying economic
As described above,120 the proposed regulatory economic analysis, FinCEN’s problems that can impede the
rule would require covered financial assessment of impact begins with an effectiveness of AML/CFT programs.
institutions to establish and maintain overview of broad economic These include potential problems that
effective AML/CFT programs with considerations, identifying, among other flow from the presence of reporting-
certain minimum components, such as: things, the need for the policy related externalities and certain
(1) a risk-based set of internal policies, intervention.128 Next, FinCEN (1) information asymmetries.136
procedures, and controls; (2) establishes baseline estimates of the The expected benefits of the proposed
independent AML/CFT program testing; number of covered financial institutions rule, as discussed below,137 are
(3) the designation of an individual, and other entities that could be affected therefore linked by the extent to which
who is located in the United States, by the proposed rule and (2) describes the proposed new and amended
accessible to FinCEN and/or the the current regulatory requirements and program requirements would address
appropriate Federal functional regulator background practices against which the these fundamental economic problems,
(FFR), and responsible for establishing proposed rule would introduce as doing so would enhance AML/CFT
and implementing the AML/CFT changes.129 The analysis then briefly program effectiveness and thereby
program and coordinating compliance; reviews elements of the proposed rule strengthen, modernize, and improve the
and (4) an ongoing training program. that most directly inform how U.S. AML/CFT regime.
The proposed rule would also, in foreseeable economic impacts would 2. Affected Parties and Institutional
certain instances, alter the scope of flow from how covered financial Baseline
conditions under which FinCEN—and institutions and their respective
regulators to whom FinCEN has regulators would engage in otherwise- In proposing this rule, FinCEN
delegated supervisory authority such as not-undertaken activities to comply.130 considered the incremental impacts of
the Agencies—could issue supervisory Next, the RIA presents the anticipated the proposed requirements relative to
or enforcement actions based solely on benefits and estimated costs to the the current state of the affected markets
implementation deficiencies in cases respective affected parties that would be and their participants.138 This baseline
where a covered financial institution associated with compliance.131 Finally,
Regulatory Action, https://www.whitehouse.gov/
has properly established a program. the assessment concludes with a brief wp-content/uploads/2025/08/CircularA-4.pdf.
Further, the proposed rule would discussion of alternative policies 134 In particular, Congress instructed FinCEN to
provide FinCEN with a consultative role FinCEN considered and could have consider the potential economic inefficiencies
in certain aspects of the supervisory proposed, including an evaluation of the engendered by the presence of market externalities
process for banks.121 relative economic merits of each against when promulgating implementing regulations. See
31 U.S.C. 5318(h)(2)(B)(i) (noting that compliant
In so doing, FinCEN contemplates a the expected value of the rule as financial institutions generate ‘‘a public . . .
number of benefits for covered financial proposed.132 benefit,’’ i.e., positive externalities); see also id.
5318(h)(2)(B)(iii) (further noting the ‘‘public
institutions, regulators and other 1. Broad Economic Considerations benefits’’—positive externalities—generated by
compliance examiners, law enforcement Because this NPRM is being issued compliant financial institutions).
and national security agencies, and the pursuant to statutory obligations, the
135 The extent to which these broad economic
general public that would flow from (1) considerations apply uniformly to the various
necessity for FinCEN to independently components of the proposed rule may in some
ensuring that AML/CFT programs are identify and articulate fundamental instances be limited. FinCEN’s analysis is not
risk based, (2) modernizing and economic problems that the proposed intended to speak to (or in place of) the views of
reforming Federal supervision of AML/ rule is intended to address, as the basis Congress regarding the fundamental economic
CFT programs, and (3) promoting clarity problems that animate the proposed rule but are
for regulatory action,133 is attenuated expected to be generally consistent with what AML
and consistency across FinCEN’s Act section 6101(b), as promulgated, was intended
program rules for the different covered 123 See infra section X.B. to accomplish.
financial institution types. 124 See infra section X.C. 136 See FinCEN, Anti-Money Laundering and
125 See infra section X.D. Countering the Financing of Terrorism Programs, 89
This RIA begins by describing the 126 See infra section X.E. FR 55428, 55450 (July 3, 2024) (Broad Economic
broad economic analysis FinCEN 127 See infra section X.F. Considerations).
undertook to inform its expectations of 128 See infra section X.A.1.
137 See infra section X.A.4.i.
the proposed rule’s economic impact 129 See infra section X.A.2.
138 In this context, FinCEN employs the term
and burden.122 This is followed by 130 See infra section X.A.3.
‘‘market’’ in its broadest economic sense, referring
to any set of exchanges, transactions, or actions that
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
pieces of additional and, in some cases, 131 See infra section X.A.4.
involve counterparties with unique objectives. The
more specifically tailored analysis as 132 See infra section X.A.5.
baseline here set forth also forms the counterfactual
required by E.O.s 12866, 13563, and 133 See E.O. 12866, supra note 111, sec 1(b)(1), against which the quantifiable effects of the rule are
(‘‘Each agency shall identify the problem that it measured; therefore, substantive errors in or
intends to address (including, where applicable, the omissions of relevant data, facts, or other
120 See supra section IV.B.
failures of private markets or public institutions information may affect the conclusions formed
121 Banks include covered financial institutions
that warrant new agency action) as well as assess regarding the general and economically significant
defined under 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(1) and (d). the significance of that problem.’’); see also OMB, impacts of the rule. FinCEN invites comment on the
122 See infra section X.A. Circular A–4 (2003), sec. B, The Need for Federal Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18728 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
analysis of the parties that would be program requirements and must is limited to select clearly identifiable
affected by the proposed rule, their therefore caveat that the incremental subpopulations expected to be the most
current obligations, current program- effects estimated in subsequent directly affected.142 To the extent that
related activities, and currently accrued sections are based on the presumption of the economic impact on additional key,
costs and/or benefits satisfies analytical full compliance with the current directly affected subpopulations of the
best practices by describing the rules.140 FinCEN does not attempt to general public should be considered,
alternative of not pursuing the estimate a baseline population of FinCEN invites comment, data, studies,
proposed, or any other, novel regulatory currently non-compliant entities that or reports that would enhance its ability
action.139 In each case, for amended and could be differently affected by the rule to identify and quantify such effects.143
new requirements, within the RIA, we because it is unclear that the proposed
have attempted to identify the rule would alter the compliance choices a. Covered Financial Institutions
incremental expected economic effects already made by those covered financial The parties expected to comply with
of each component of the proposal as institutions. FinCEN invites comment the proposed new requirements and
precisely as practicable against this on whether this assumption, or the amendments to existing requirements
baseline. Nevertheless, in certain cases, baseline it implies, is appropriate for the include all covered financial
FinCEN can make only qualitative purposes of this analysis.141
institutions as defined in 31 CFR
assessments.
i. Baseline of Affected Parties 1010.100(t) and with existing program
As a first step in the process of
isolating these anticipated marginal FinCEN expects the following obligations prescribed in 31 CFR
effects, FinCEN assessed the current populations would be directly affected chapter X, parts 1020 through 1030.
landscape of the covered financial by proposed rule: (1) covered financial This would include banks (both those
institutions that would be affected by institutions, (2) regulators and other with and without an FFR), casinos,
the proposed rule, including the compliance examiners, and (3) law MSBs, broker-dealers, mutual funds,
population sizes by financial institution enforcement and national security insurance companies, FCMs and IBCs,
type, their existing regulatory agencies. FinCEN also took into DPMSJs, operators of credit card
requirements, and the burden they consideration that certain other systems, loan or finance companies, and
currently face associated with their members and groups of the general housing GSEs.144
compliance activities. FinCEN also public, counterparties, clients/ Table 1 presents FinCEN’s estimates
briefly discusses other categories of customers of affected parties, and other of the total number of entities that meet
persons and entities (i.e., regulators, persons may be indirectly affected by the respective regulatory definitions of
compliance examiners, law enforcement the proposed rule. However, because covered financial institutions.145 Based
and national security agencies, and such effects are not readily quantifiable, on these estimates, FinCEN expects that
certain members of the general public) nor is attribution within groups likely to the proposed rule would affect
that are expected to be directly affected be uniform, the corresponding economic approximately 369 thousand covered
by the proposed rule. impacts are not itemized in further financial institutions, of which
FinCEN acknowledges that the detail for all members of the general approximately 361 thousand, or
discussion below does not include an public in the discussion below. Rather, approximately 98 percent, would
assessment of the baseline level of further consideration of the anticipated qualify as small financial institutions for
general compliance with existing economic impact on the general public IRFA purposes.146
TABLE 1—ESTIMATES OF COVERED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS BY TYPE
Number of financial
Financial institution type a institutions
Banks with an FFR b ............................................................................................................................................................ c 8,623
Banks without an FFR d ....................................................................................................................................................... e 365
Casinos f ............................................................................................................................................................................... g 1,299
Principal MSBs h .................................................................................................................................................................. i 24,856
Agent MSBs ......................................................................................................................................................................... 307,212
Broker-Dealers j ................................................................................................................................................................... k 3,278
Mutual Funds l ...................................................................................................................................................................... m 1,355
Insurance Companies n ........................................................................................................................................................ o 717
FCMs and IBCs p ................................................................................................................................................................. q 954
DPMSJs r ............................................................................................................................................................................. s 6,742
Operators of Credit Card Systems t ..................................................................................................................................... u4
Loan or Finance Companies v ............................................................................................................................................. w 13,342
Housing GSEs x ................................................................................................................................................................... y 13
Total .............................................................................................................................................................................. 368,760
a See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t) (definition of financial institution).
b See 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(1); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(d) and 1020.210(a).
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
accuracy of the baseline population estimates as regulatory alternatives, including the alternative of 143 See infra section X.F #3.
well as any supporting studies, data, or anecdotes not regulating.’’). 144 See supra note 2; see also supra section I.
140 See infra section X.A.4; see also infra sections
in infra section X.F #1. 145 31 CFR 1010.100(t).
139 See E.O. 12866, supra note 111, at section 1(a) X.C and X.E. 146 13 CFR 121.201; see generally infra section
141 See infra section X.F #2.
(‘‘In deciding whether and how to regulate, agencies X.C.
142 See infra section X.A.2.i.d; see also infra
should assess all costs and benefits of available
sections X.A.4.i.d and X.A.4.ii.c.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules 18729
c This includes 4,336 FDIC-insured depository institutions (i.e., federally regulated banks) according to the FDIC’s Quarterly Bank Profile for Q4
2025, p. 2 (https://www.fdic.gov/quarterly-banking-profile/past-quarterly-banking-profiles). It also includes 4,287 NCUA-chartered credit unions
(i.e., federally regulated credit unions) as of December 31, 2025, according to NCUA’s Quarterly Credit Union Data Summary: 2025 Q4, p. i
(https://ncua.gov/analysis/credit-union-corporate-call-report-data/quarterly-data-summary-reports).
d See 31 CFR 1020.210(b).
e The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Master Account and Services Database (https://www.federalreserve.gov/
paymentsystems/master-account-and-services-database-existing-access.htm) contains data as of November 30, 2025, on financial institutions
that use Federal Reserve Bank financial services, including those with no additional Federal regulator. FinCEN used this data to identify 365
banks and credit unions with no additional Federal regulator using Federal Reserve Bank financial services.
f See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(X); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(5) and (6).
g American Gaming Association, State of the States 2025: The AGA Analysis of the Commercial Casino Industry, May 2025, p. 14 (https://
www.americangaming.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/AGA-State-of-the-States-2025.pdf).
h See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(J,K,R); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(3) and (ff) (definition of MSB).
i The definition of MSB (31 CFR 1010.100(ff)) covers both principal and agent MSBs. FinCEN estimated there were 24,856 uniquely identifiable
registered principal MSBs with indicia of active business operations as of the three year-ends 2023–2025. FinCEN has estimated that the num-
ber of agent MSBs is approximately 307,212 based on internal data.
j See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(G); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(2).
k This estimate is based on U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) data on active broker-dealers available at ‘‘Company Information
About Active Broker-Dealers’’ (https://www.sec.gov/foia-services/frequently-requested-documents/company-information-about-active-broker-deal-
ers), which listed 3,278 active broker-dealers registered with the SEC as of December 31, 2025.
l See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(I); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(10) and (gg).
m This estimate is based on the number of registered investment companies filing Form N–1A in SEC’s Annual Registered Investment Com-
pany Update: Form N–CEN Data, Period Ending December 2024, April 2025, table 1.3, p. 4 (https://www.sec.gov/files/annual-registered-invest-
ment-company-update-20250404.pdf).
n See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(M); see also 31 CFR 1025.100(g) (definition of ‘‘insurance company or insurer’’ for purposes of applicability of
FinCEN regulations).
o This estimate includes 717 life and health insurers in the United States during 2024. From U.S. Department of the Treasury, Annual Report
on the Insurance Industry (Sept. 2025), p. 10 (https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/Final%20FIO%202025%20Annual%20Report.pdf). Nei-
ther the estimate presented here nor the estimate of broker-dealers controls for entities that may be both a broker-dealer and an insurance com-
pany; thus, a certain number of affected entities may be double-counted. However, based on consultation with staff of other Federal regulators,
FinCEN believes this population of dually affected entities may be relatively small and unlikely to significantly distort the overall assessment.
p See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(H); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(t)(8) and (9).
q According to Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) data on FCMs available at ‘‘Financial Data for FCMs’’ (https://www.cftc.gov/
MarketReports/financialfcmdata/index.htm), there were 66 registered FCMs as of December 31, 2025. The number of IBCs as of December 31,
2025 (888) was obtained from the National Futures Association (NFA) ‘‘NFA Membership and Registration’’ website (https://www.nfa.futures.org/
registration-membership/membership-and-directories.html). Because deduplication of entities registered as both FCMs and IBCs was not feasible,
this estimate may double-count some entities registered in both categories. FinCEN, however, believes this subpopulation may be small.
r See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(N) (definition of a ‘‘dealer’’ in precious metals, stones, or jewels for purposes of applicability of FinCEN regulations);
see also 31 CFR 1027.100(b).
s This estimate is based on data on firms with North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 423940 (Jewelry, Watch, Precious
Stone, and Precious Metal Merchant Wholesalers) in the U.S. Census Bureau 2022 Statistics of U.S. Businesses (‘‘2022 SUSB Data’’) accessed
March 1, 2025 (https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2022/econ/susb/2022-susb-annual.html). It does not include Jewelry and Silverware Manufac-
turing (NAICS code 33991) or Jewelry Retailers (NAICS code 44831).
t See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(L) (definition of ‘‘operator of a credit card system’’ for purposes of applicability of FinCEN regulations); see also 31
CFR 1028.100(e).
u This value is based on FinCEN review of active, U.S.-based market participants at year-end 2025.
v See 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2)(P) (definition of ‘‘loan or finance company’’); see also 31 CFR 1010.100(lll).
w This estimate is based on 2022 SUSB Data on firms with NAICS codes 522292 (Real Estate Credit) and 522310 (Mortgage and Non-Mort-
gage Loan Brokers).
x See 31 CFR 1010.100(mmm) (definition of ‘‘housing government sponsored enterprise’’).
y Data on the 11 regional Federal home loan banks were obtained from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (https://www.fhfa.gov/supervision/
federal-home-loan-bank-system/about). Housing GSEs are U.S. Government-sponsored enterprises and additionally include Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.
b. Regulators and Other Compliance the proposed rule is expected to directly FinCEN has delegated authority to
Examiners affect FinCEN, the FFRs, and other examine covered financial institutions
compliance examiners, including to determine compliance as presented in
Because covered financial institutions approximately 8,000 to 10,000 Federal table 2.148
would be examined for compliance with examiners, who conduct such
the proposed requirements in this rule, reviews.147
TABLE 2—COVERED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS BY DELEGATED EXAMINING AGENCY
Delegated examining
Financial institution type agency
Banks with an FFR ............................................................................................................................................................. FDIC
FRB
NCUA
OCC
Banks without an FFR ........................................................................................................................................................ IRS
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
Casinos.
MSBs (Principals and Agents).
Insurance Companies.
DPMSJs.
Operators of Credit Card Systems.
147 These figures represent an approximate estimates do not include persons performing 148 See 31 CFR 1010.810(b).
number of Federal examiners provided by FFRs examinations on behalf of SROs, though FinCEN
with AML/CFT supervisory responsibilities. These expects that such parties may also be affected.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18730 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—COVERED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS BY DELEGATED EXAMINING AGENCY—Continued
Delegated examining
Financial institution type agency
Loan or Finance Companies.
Broker-Dealers .................................................................................................................................................................... SEC a
Mutual Funds.
FCMs and IBCs ................................................................................................................................................................... CFTC a
Housing GSEs ..................................................................................................................................................................... FHFA
a See FinCEN, Anti-Money Laundering Programs for Financial Institutions, 67 FR 21110 (Apr. 29, 2002). In the 2002 interim final rule, FinCEN
noted it was appropriate to implement section 5318(h)(1) of the BSA with respect to broker-dealers and FCMs through their respective SROs,
because the SEC and the CFTC and their SROs significantly accelerated the implementation of AML programs for their regulated financial insti-
tutions. Accordingly, 31 CFR 1023.210 and 1026.210 provided that broker-dealers, and FCMs and IBCs, respectively, would be deemed to be in
compliance with the requirements of section 5318(h)(1) of the BSA if they comply with any applicable regulation of their FFR governing the es-
tablishment and implementation of AML programs. FinCEN recognizes the SEC as the FFR, and registered national securities exchanges or a
national securities association, such as FINRA, as the SROs for member broker-dealers. Each SRO may have its own AML program require-
ments (see, e.g., FINRA Rule 3310). The CFTC’s SRO is the NFA. The AML program requirements for FCMs and IBCs are set out in NFA Rule
2–9(c).
FinCEN additionally anticipates being anticipates could benefit most notably corresponding U.S. adult population in
uniquely affected as the agency (1) to from the proposed rule: (1) those the survey year, that would imply that
which covered financial institutions harmed, or who could be harmed, by over 56 million people were affected by
would submit AML/CFT program- ML/TF or related illicit activities and (2) fraud or scams alone, and thus, that the
related reports; (2) which would those whose access to the financial subpopulation of those harmed, or who
coordinate how information submitted system is unduly constrained as a result could be harmed, by ML/TF or related
in AML/CFT program-related reports of inappropriately tailored AML/CFT illicit activities is vast.
may in turn support law enforcement programs. FinCEN anticipates that though
and national security efforts; and (3) AML/CFT programs that are effective smaller in size, the population whose
which would take, or consult with the facilitate law enforcement and national access to the financial system is unduly
Agencies on, formal or informal security efforts to prevent the flow of constrained as a result of
enforcement or supervisory actions in illicit funds, identify and prosecute inappropriately tailored AML/CFT
regard to banks.149 criminals, and detect and deter illicit programs is also non-trivial. Recent
activity. To the extent that the proposed studies report that in 2023, 4.2 percent
c. Law Enforcement and National rule would enhance the current of U.S. households and six percent of
Security Agencies effectiveness of AML/CFT programs, surveyed adults were unbanked.153 This
The proposed rule is intended to this could benefit the public by equates to approximately 5.6 million
support the efforts of law enforcement reducing the instances of harm (via households and 15.5 million adults.154
and national security agencies by effective deterrence) or reducing the Because the extent to which unbanked
promoting AML/CFT program design severity of harm (when illicit activity or underbanked status is exclusively
and implementation that is responsive can be identified and prosecuted). attributable to AML/CFT program
and better tailored to these entities’ While the annual cost of crime in concerns is unclear, these values should
evolving needs. Law enforcement and general, and financial crimes, be considered upper bounds on the
national security agencies can directly specifically, are generally inestimable, potentially affected subpopulation.
access and use reports and data certain published statistics indicate that
ii. Regulatory Baseline
provided to FinCEN in compliance with the scale is staggering.151 This effect is
the AML/CFT program requirements not only significant in its economic As part of its baseline analysis,
and other applicable BSA requirements magnitude but affects a substantial FinCEN considered the variation in
after entering a memorandum of fraction of the U.S. population. requirements under the current
understanding with FinCEN. As of fiscal Considering only one type of illicit regulatory framework for the covered
year 2024, 432 Federal, State, and local activity combatted by effective AML/ financial institutions that would be
law enforcement; regulatory; and CFT programs, a recent study suggests affected by the proposed rule. This
that approximately one in five adults includes concurrent statutory
national security agencies had access to
may be the victim of a financial fraud requirements, regulatory requirements
BSA reports and BSA Search, and the
or scam.152 Generalized to the at the State level, or other regulatory
BSA Portal had over 12,000 users.150
regimes with which a covered financial
d. General Public 151 Estimates of the annual cost of crime, institution must concurrently comply.
generally, are usually measured in trillions of
FinCEN expects the general public to dollars (see, e.g., David A. Anderson, ‘‘The 2024), https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/
be affected by the proposed rule, with Aggregate Cost of Crime in the United States,’’ The 2025-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-
certain subpopulations affected more Journal of Law and Economics, vol 64 no. 4 (2021)) 2024-banking-and-credit.htm.
directly than others. In particular, and financial crimes specifically in billions of 153 See FDIC, 2023 FDIC National Survey of
dollars (see, e.g., the Federal Trade Commission, Unbanked and Underbanked Households (Nov.
FinCEN considered two groups that it Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2024 (Mar.
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
2024), https://www.fdic.gov/household-survey/
2025), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ 2023-fdic-national-survey-unbanked-and-
149 See supra sections V.F.2 and 3. csn-annual-data-book-2024.pdf). underbanked-households-report; see also SHED
150 See FinCEN, Financial Crimes Enforcement 152 Of participants in the FRB’s 2024 Survey of Report 2024, https://www.federalreserve.gov/
Network (FinCEN) Year in Review for Fiscal Year Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED), publications/2025-economic-well-being-of-us-
2024, p. 5, https://www.fincen.gov/system/files/ 21 percent reported being the victim of financial households-in-2024-banking-and-credit.htm.
2025-08/FinCEN-Infographic-Public-2025-508.pdf. fraud or a scam involving their money, of which, 154 See U.S. Census Bureau, Age and Sex
Note that not all users are from external agencies. eight of those percent did not involve credit cards. Composition in the United States: 2023, https://
FinCEN employees are also among the users with See FRB, Report on the Economic Well-Being of www.census.gov/data/tables/2023/demo/age-and-
access to the BSA Portal. U.S. Households in 2024—May 2025 (SHED Report sex/2023-age-sex-composition.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules 18731
In particular, FinCEN considered: (1) Independent AML Program Training 169—Several covered
the current program rule requirements Testing 161—The requirements for some financial institution types’ existing
that the proposed rulemaking would financial institutions (i.e., banks, broker- requirements specify that training must
amend and to which it would add new dealers, mutual funds, and FCMs and be ongoing (i.e., for broker-dealers,
requirements and (2) the broader IBCs) simply specify that independent mutual funds, insurance companies,
framework of AML compliance testing for compliance must be FCMs and IBCs, DPMSJs, loan or
requirements 155 that each type of conducted by personnel or an outside finance companies, and housing
covered financial institutions’ program party,162 while the requirements for GSEs),170 while for the others, the
is meant to guide and ensure are met.156 other financial institution types (i.e., requirements simply specify that
Table 3 presents an overview of features MSBs, insurance companies, DPMSJs, training must be conducted.171 Further,
of the current program requirements operators of credit card systems, loan or the language regarding the training
that the proposed rule would further finance companies, and housing GSEs) requirement for some covered financial
harmonize as well as their current specify that the entities must provide for institution types (i.e., insurance
organization and sequencing in the independent review or testing to companies, loan or finance companies,
respective sections of the regulatory monitor and maintain an adequate and housing GSEs) specifies an entity
text. program.163 Some requirements (e.g., may choose to train appropriate persons
As summarized in table 3, all covered those for insurance companies, DPMSJs, directly or they can choose to verify
financial institution types face broadly operators of credit card systems, loan or ‘‘that such persons have received
comparable program requirements with finance companies, and housing GSEs) training by a competent third party.’’ 172
respect to developing and include further language about the CDD 173—While it is understood that
operationalizing internal policies, scope and frequency of the testing, all categories of financial institutions
procedures, and controls; independent which must be commensurate with have obligations to be diligent in
testing; designation of key individuals; risk.164 developing an understanding of their
training; and CDD (to the extent CDD is Designated Individual(s) 165—Banks clients or customers, generally, and
currently required for respective must designate ‘‘an individual or often in the ordinary course of business,
covered financial institution types). individuals responsible for coordinating only certain financial institution types
Nevertheless, a level of variation in not and monitoring day-to-day have programmatic CDD requirements.
just the organization/ordering of the compliance,’’ 166 whereas broker- These include banks, irrespective of
core requirements but also the specific dealers, mutual funds, and FCMs and FFR; broker-dealers; mutual funds; and
language in each provision may lead IBCs must designate person(s) FCMs and IBCs. The language
different categories of covered financial ‘‘responsible for implementing and describing the CDD requirements for
institutions to interpret the monitoring the operations and internal these covered financial institution types
harmonization and standardization of controls’’ of a program.167 Others (i.e., is nearly identical across financial
requirements in the proposed rule to insurance companies, DPMSJs, institution type.174 Other covered
represent a departure from current operators of credit card systems, loan or financial institutions do not have an
standards that is not uniform across finance companies, and housing GSEs) explicit CDD requirement but have
types. To illustrate, FinCEN notes the must designate a compliance officer certain CDD-like requirements,
following examples of variation as a who is responsible for ensuring that (1) including casinos and operators of
non-exhaustive list of instances where the AML program is implemented credit card systems.175 For example,
the standardization of regulatory text in effectively and updated as necessary casinos must have procedures for
the proposed rule departs differentially and (2) appropriate persons are determining ‘‘the name, address, social
from preceding regulatory language. educated and trained.168 security number, and other
Internal Policies, Procedures, and
Controls 157—Current rules require that 161 See supra section V.D.2 for a discussion of systems, 31 CFR 1029.210(b)(2) for loan or finance
the internal controls of banks and proposed amendments to the independent testing companies, and 31 CFR 1030.210(b)(2) for housing
casinos ‘‘assure ongoing requirements. GSEs.
162 See 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(2)(ii) for banks with 169 See supra section V.D.4 for a discussion of the
compliance,’’ 158 while for MSBs, the an FFR, 31 CFR 1020.210(b)(2)(ii) for banks without proposed amendments to the training requirements.
requirement is simply to ensure that the an FFR, 31 CFR 1023.210(b)(2) for broker-dealers, 170 See 31 CFR 1023.210(b)(4) for broker-dealers,
MSB complies.159 Meanwhile for 31 CFR 1024.210(b)(2) for mutual funds, and 31 31 CFR 1024.210(b)(4) for mutual funds, 31 CFR
broker-dealers, internal policies, CFR 1026.210(b)(2) for FCMs and IBCs. 1025.210(b)(3) for insurance companies, 31 CFR
163 See 31 CFR 1022.210(d)(4) for MSBs, 31 CFR 1026.210(b)(4) for FCMs and IBCs, 31 CFR
procedures and controls must be
1025.210(b)(4) for insurance companies, 31 CFR 1027.210(b)(3) for DPMSJs, 31 CFR 1029.210(b)(3)
‘‘reasonably designed to achieve 1027.210(b)(4) for DPMSJs, 31 CFR 1028.210(b)(4) for loan or finance companies, and 31 CFR
compliance.’’ 160 for operators of credit card systems, 31 CFR 1030.210(b)(3) for housing GSEs.
1029.210(b)(4) for loan or finance companies, and 171 See 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(2)(iv) for banks with
155 Although some financial institutions covered 31 CFR 1030.210(b)(4) for housing GSEs. an FFR, 31 CFR 1020.210(b)(2)(iv) for banks without
164 See 31 CFR 1025.210(b)(4) for insurance an FFR, 31 CFR 1021.210(b)(2)(iii) for casinos, 31
by this change have already incorporated awareness
of and response to CFT issues into their programs companies, 31 CFR 1027.210(b)(4) for DPMSJs, 31 CFR 1022.210(d)(3) for MSBs, and 31 CFR
(see infra table 4), for the purposes of this analysis, CFR 1028.210(b)(4) for operators of credit card 1028.210(b)(3) for operators of credit card systems.
FinCEN is employing the term ‘‘AML/CFT systems, 31 CFR 1029.210(b)(4) for loan or finance 172 See 31 CFR 1025.210(b)(3) for insurance
program’’ for programs that would be adopted companies, and 31 CFR 1030.210(b)(4) for housing companies, 31 CFR 1029.210(b)(3) for loan or
should this rulemaking become effective. GSEs. finance companies, and 31 CFR 1030.210(b)(3) for
156 See supra section V.D for a description of 165 See supra section V.D.3 for a discussion on the housing GSEs.
current program requirements and the proposed proposed AML/CFT officer amendments. 173 See supra section V.D.1.iii for a discussion of
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
amendments. 166 See 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(2)(iii) for banks with proposed amendments to the CDD requirements.
157 See supra section V.D.1 for a discussion of an FFR and 31 CFR 1020.210(b)(2)(iii) for banks 174 See 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(2)(v) for banks with an
proposed amendments to internal policies, without an FFR. FFR, 31 CFR 1020.210(b)(2)(v) for banks without an
procedures, and controls requirements. 167 See 31 CFR 1023(b)(3) for broker-dealers, 31 FFR, 31 CFR 1023.210(b)(5) for broker-dealers, 31
158 See 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(2)(i) for banks with an
CFR 1024.210(b)(3) for mutual funds, and 31 CFR CFR 1024.210(b)(5) for mutual funds, 31 CFR
FFR, 31 CFR 1020.210(b)(2)(i) for banks without an 1026.210(b)(3) for FCMs and IBCs. 1026.210(b)(5) for FCMs and IBCs.
FFR, and 31 CFR 1021.210(b)(2)(i) for casinos. 168 See 31 CFR 1025.210(b)(2) for insurance 175 See 31 CFR 1021.210(b)(2)(v)(A) for casinos
159 See 31 CFR 1022.210(d)(1).
companies, 31 CFR 1027.210(b)(2) for DPMSJs, 31 and 31 CFR 1028.210(b)(1)(i) and (ii) for operators
160 See 31 CFR 1023.210(b)(1). CFR 1028.210(b)(2) for operators of credit card of credit card systems.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18732 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
information’’ of a person and verifying Finally, while all covered financial broker-dealers, mutual funds, and FCMs
that information when required.176 institution types are required to have an and IBCs would be required to account
Table 4 further illustrates additional effective AML/CFT program, the scope for CIP requirements, SAR and CTR
features associated with the current of requirements, obligations, and filing requirements, and other activities
program requirements that the proposed activities those programs cover, and like additional due diligence (e.g., due
hence, the number of components to be diligence programs for correspondent
rule would standardize, including
integrated and addressed by a program’s accounts for foreign financial
whether the program must be written,
design, risk assessment processes, and institutions and for private banking
whether it must newly incorporate training, among other things, differs accounts as set forth in 31 CFR 1010.610
language to articulate program coverage across covered financial institution and 1010.620, respectively). Other
of terrorist financing risks or the types. This variation in scope of covered financial institution types have
financing of terrorist activities, as well programmatic components is illustrated fewer of these obligations, and hence
as who must approve the program and with a non-exhaustive list of examples the scope of what would need to be
to whom a copy of the written program in table 5. Table 5 highlights, for accounted for in their AML/CFT
must be made available upon request. instance, that the programs of banks, programs may be narrower.
TABLE 3—CURRENT PROGRAM COMPONENT REQUIREMENTS
Internal
31 CFR Independent
policies, Designating
Covered financial institution type chapter X AML program Training CDD
procedures, individuals
section testing
and controls
Banks:
with an FFR ................................. 1020.210 (a)(2)(i) .............. (a)(2)(ii) ........... (a)(2)(iii) ........... (a)(2)(iv) .......... (a)(2)(v)
without an FFR ............................ (b)(2)(i) .............. (b)(2)(ii) ........... (b)(2)(iii) ........... (b)(2)(iv) .......... (b)(2)(v)
Casinos ............................................... 1021.210 (b)(2)(i) .............. (b)(2)(ii) ........... (b)(2)(iv) .......... (b)(2)(iii) ........... (a)
MSBs .................................................. 1022.210 (d)(1) ................. (d)(4) ............... (d)(2) ............... (d)(3).
Broker-Dealers ................................... 1023.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(2) ............... (b)(3) ............... (b)(4) ............... (b)(5)
Mutual Funds ...................................... 1024.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(2) ............... (b)(3) ............... (b)(4) ............... (b)(5)
Insurance Companies ........................ 1025.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(4) ............... (b)(2) ............... (b)(3).
FCMs and IBCs .................................. 1026.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(2) ............... (b)(3) ............... (b)(4) ............... (b)(5)
DPMSJs .............................................. 1027.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(4) ............... (b)(2) ............... (b)(3).
Operators of Credit Card Systems ..... 1028.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(4) ............... (b)(2) ............... (b)(3) ............... ( b)
Loan or Finance Companies .............. 1029.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(4) ............... (b)(2) ............... (b)(3).
Housing GSEs .................................... 1030.210 (b)(1) ................. (b)(4) ............... (b)(2) ............... (b)(3).
a While the current casino AML program requirements do not include an itemized CDD subsection, they include some customer-specific re-
quirements. See, e.g., 31 CFR 1021.210(b)(2)(v)(A).
b Despite the absence of a CDD AML program requirement for operators of credit card systems, compliance with the AML program require-
ments necessitates some CDD-like activities. See 31 CFR 1028.210(b)(1)(i) and (ii).
TABLE 4—CURRENT PROGRAM ATTRIBUTES
31 CFR Addresses To whom a written copy of a
Covered financial institution type chapter X Written terrorist Approved by program should be made available
section financing to upon request
Banks:
with an FFR ................................... 1020.210 ✓a .................... Board of directors or equivalent gov- Not applicable.
erning body a.
without an FFR .............................. ✓ .................... Board of directors or equivalent gov- FinCEN or its designee.
erning body.
Casinos ................................................. 1021.210 ✓ ✓ .............................................................. Not specified.
MSBs (Principals and Agents) .............. 1022.210 ✓ ✓ .............................................................. Department of the Treasury.
Broker-Dealers ...................................... 1023.210 ✓ .................... Senior management ............................ Not specified.b
Mutual Funds ........................................ 1024.210 ✓ ✓ Board of directors or trustees .............. SEC.
Insurance Companies ........................... 1025.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ Department of the Treasury, FinCEN,
or its designee.
FCMs and IBCs .................................... 1026.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ Not specified.
DPMSJs ................................................ 1027.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ Department of the Treasury through
FinCEN or its designee.
Operators of Credit Card Systems ....... 1028.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ Department of the Treasury or appro-
priate Federal regulator.
Loan or Finance Companies ................ 1029.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ FinCEN or its designee.
Housing GSEs ...................................... 1030.210 ✓ ✓ Senior management ............................ FinCEN or its designee.
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
a The applicable regulations of the several Federal banking regulators specify these elements of a bank’s AML program. See 12 CFR 208.63(b) (FRB), 21.21(c)(1)
(OCC), 326.8(b) (FDIC), 748.2(b) (NCUA). FinCEN regulations indirectly impose these requirements by deeming a bank with an FFR to be in compliance with
FinCEN’s AML program requirement if it complies with comparable regulations of its FFR. 31 CFR 1020.210(a)(3).
b FinCEN has delegated authority to examine broker-dealers’ compliance with FinCEN regulations to the SEC (see 31 CFR 1010.810(b)(6)). Thus, while the
FinCEN regulation regarding broker-dealer AML programs, 31 CFR 1023.210, does not itself grant SEC authority to examine a broker-dealer’s AML program, the
SEC has authority pursuant to 31 CFR 1010.810(b)(6), in combination with 31 CFR 1023.210, to request a written copy of a broker-dealer’s AML program.
176 See 31 CFR 1021.210(b)(2)(v)(A).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules 18733
TABLE 5—OTHER CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Required reports
31 CFR Additional
Covered financial institution type chapter CIP CTR or due
X part Form 8300 a SAR diligence b
Banks (with and without an FFR) ........................................ 1020 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Casinos ................................................................................ 1021 (c) ✓ ✓ ........................
Principal MSBs:
Providers or sellers of prepaid access programs d ...... 1022 (e) ✓ ✓ ........................
Others ........................................................................... ........................ ✓ ✓ ........................
Agent MSBs ......................................................................... ........................ ✓ ✓ ........................
Broker-Dealers ..................................................................... 1023 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Mutual Funds ....................................................................... 1024 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Insurance Companies .......................................................... 1025 ........................ ✓ ✓ ........................
FCMs and IBCs ................................................................... 1026 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
DPMSJs ............................................................................... 1027 ........................ ✓ ........................ ........................
Operators of Credit Card Systems ...................................... 1028 (f) ✓ ........................ ........................
Loan or Finance Companies ............................................... 1029 ........................ ✓ ✓ ........................
Housing GSEs ..................................................................... 1030 ........................ ✓ ✓ ........................
a Certain financial institutions (i.e., banks, casinos, MSBs, broker-dealers, mutual funds, and FCMs and IBCs) are required to report currency
transactions over $10,000 conducted by, or on behalf of, one person and multiple currency transactions that aggregate to be over $10,000 per
day in a CTR. The remaining covered financial institutions are required to report cash payments over $10,000 that are received in a trade or a
business using Form 8300.
b Additional due diligence requirements as set forth in 31 CFR 1010.610, and due diligence requirements for private banking accounts, as de-
scribed in 31 CFR 1010.620, are included in program requirements.
c While there is no directly comparable CIP section to the casino AML program requirements, there are CIP-like requirements in 31 CFR
1021.210(b)(2)(v)(A), as a casino’s program must include procedures for determining and verifying relevant information related to persons.
d A provider or seller of prepaid access includes principal MSBs as defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(ff)(4)(i) and (ii) for providers, 31 CFR
1010.100(ff)(7) for sellers.
e While there is no directly comparable CIP section to the MSB program requirements, there are CIP-like requirements for providers and sellers
of prepaid access in 31 CFR 1022.210(d)(1)(i) through (iv).
f The program rules applicable to operators of credit card systems do not contain a formal CIP requirement; however, program compliance in
certain cases necessitates some CIP-like activities. See 31 CFR 1028.210(b).
iii. Current Practices institutions and, in some cases, of proposed rule.179 Nevertheless, this
FinCEN made efforts to account for perceived limited value.178 However, analysis includes FinCEN’s best efforts
current practices when estimating the publicly available data with which to at quantification with certain
expected incremental impact of the form a robust estimate of the aggregate qualifications. FinCEN continues to
proposed rule. In the subsections below, burden of program compliance—to the request more comprehensive, precise,
FinCEN describes select key features of U.S. economy, generally, or to the and/or generalizable information on
current practices of covered financial unique industry groups to which the financial institutions’ compliance
institutions, regulators, and law proposed rule would apply, burden and costs in its routine OMB
enforcement agencies considered salient specifically—as it has been understood control number renewals,180 in its
to its analysis. FinCEN requests forthcoming survey,181 and as part of
and operationalized to date, is scarce.
comment on the existence of other this rulemaking.182
Absent more reliable comprehensive As in the 2024 Program NPRM,
aspects of current practice that should baseline data, FinCEN is constrained in
have been considered or further FinCEN continues to believe that the
its ability to estimate total current aggregate costs of BSA compliance,
information about the aspects economic costs with any meaningful
considered that should be included.177 including AML program requirements,
degree of certainty, or assess the may be several billion dollars per
a. Current Market Practices substitutability of current and expected year.183 This estimate (1) is generally
FinCEN took certain data and features compliance activities under the
of financial institutions’ current proposed regulation, or quantify the 179 Nevertheless, such changes in expenditures
potential for aggregate cost savings that may benefit some financial institutions (See infra
practices into consideration when section X.A.4.i.a).
estimating the expected incremental covered institutions might privately 180 See 60-day notice for OMB Control No. 1506–
impact of the proposed rule. Among benefit from in complying with the 0020, 1506–0030, and 1506–0035: FinCEN, Anti-
these features were the presence of Money Laundering Programs for Certain Financial
Institutions (for banks lacking an FFR, principal
third-party services, industry-specific 178 See Comments to the Advance Notice of MSBs, agent MSBs, mutual funds, insurance
associations, or other organizations that Proposed Rulemaking, FinCEN, Anti-Money companies, DPMSJs, operators of credit card
currently facilitate compliance with Laundering Program Effectiveness, 85 FR 58023 systems, and loan or finance companies), 89 FR
BSA/AML requirements as well as (Sept. 17, 2020), https://www.regulations.gov/ 29427 (Apr. 22, 2024). See also 60-day notice for
OMB Control No. 1506–0051: FinCEN, Anti-Money
information about the costs of currently docket/FINCEN-2020-0011/comments. See also
Laundering Program Requirements for Casinos, 89
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
operating AML/CFT programs. Comments to the Request for Information, FinCEN,
FR 65977 (Aug. 13, 2024).
Public commentary has at times Review of Bank Secrecy Act Regulations and 181 See FinCEN, Agency Information Collection
suggested that general compliance with Guidance, 86 FR 71201 (Dec. 15, 2021), https:// Activities: Proposed New Information Collection;
www.regulations.gov/document/FINCEN-2021- Survey of the Costs of AML/CFT Compliance;
the BSA and maintaining an AML 0008-0001. See also Comments to the NPRM, Comment Request, 90 FR 47132 (Sept. 30, 2025).
program under current practice is costly FinCEN, Anti-Money Laundering and Countering 182 See infra section X.F #5.
and burdensome to covered financial the Financing of Terrorism Programs, 89 FR 55428 183 See FinCEN, Anti-Money Laundering/
(July 3, 2024), https://www.regulations.gov/ Countering the Financing of Terrorism Programs, 89
177 See infra section X.F #4. document/FINCEN-2024-0013-0001/comment. Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18734 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
consistent with FinCEN’s estimate that affect current supervisory and associated with these activities are
the aggregate annual costs of the portion enforcement practices to varying degree understood to be a fraction of the
of BSA compliance burden that are by category of affected financial Agencies’ reported aggregate expenses
attributable to reporting and institution. Thus, FinCEN took into on conducting supervision and
recordkeeping activities alone (PRA consideration its own and other FFRs’— enforcement. In its survey of the most
activities) is over $6 billion and (2) particularly, the Agencies’—current recent publicly available information,
tracks data interpolated from both a supervisory and enforcement processes. FinCEN noted that in total spending on
2020 U.S. Government Accountability In its capacity as the administrator of supervision: (1) the FDIC allocated
Office (GAO) study of bank AML the BSA, FinCEN has delegated its $1.35 billion to supervision in its 2026
programs 184 and a 2018 St. Louis authority to the FFRs, including the proposed operating budget; 190 (2) the
Federal Reserve report on the regulatory Agencies, to examine financial FRB spent nearly $2.2 billion on
burden on community banks.185 institutions for compliance with the supervision and regulation in 2024 and
Extrapolating from the survey results in BSA and its implementing proposed allocating nearly $2.4 billion
these studies, FinCEN estimates that the regulations.187 In connection with this in its 2025 budget; 191 and (3) the OCC
comparable aggregate annual program delegation, FinCEN has entered into reported spending $1.2 billion in costs
costs for FDIC-insured banks and certain memoranda of understanding associated with its supervision program
NCUA-regulated credit unions, as a with the FFRs that enable FinCEN and in fiscal year 2025.192 Using this data 193
unique subpopulation of all financial the FFRs to share information with one to form a crude approximation, FinCEN
institutions subject to program another on a routine basis about estimates that a change in total
requirements, would have been over $4 relevant financial institutions’ expenditures or reallocation of current
billion at the time of the surveys, with compliance with the BSA and its expenditures of less than two percent,
the average bank spending implementing regulations. FinCEN and would, independent of all other
approximately $500 thousand or just the FFRs also regularly engage one expected economic effects of the rule,
under two percent of operating another in supervisory dialogue, constitute a significant economic impact
expenses, on program compliance. regarding both specific issues related to in any given year.194
These results broadly comport with a particular financial institution’s Based on consultation with the
recent research findings that in non- compliance and broader patterns or Agencies, FinCEN anticipates changes
financial industries, approximately 1.3 trends in financial institutions’ general of this magnitude to be unlikely because
percent of the average firm’s wage bill compliance with the BSA. Although the proposed rulemaking is not
is expended on regulatory compliance such information sharing and expected to require substantial
activities.186 Using a methodological supervisory dialogue may include alterations to the Agencies’ supervisory
approach similar to the 2020 and 2018 matters that the proposed rule would expenditures or to require significant
studies, but applied to data as available define as significant supervisory actions additional resources to develop,
at end of calendar year 2024, FinCEN or enforcement actions,188 these current implement, and maintain the
estimates that the size-weighted mean practices do not entail consultation by enforcement and supervisory action
(median) bank or credit union currently the Federal banking regulators with consultation process with FinCEN. As
spends approximately $598,700 FinCEN to the same extent as the such, any reallocative effects that flow
($414,300) on program compliance proposed rule would require. from the proposed rule through changes
annually, which is equivalent to an With respect to the Agencies, FinCEN in supervisory and enforcement
aggregate annual expenditure level understands that these agencies practices are likely to be more
between $3.7 and $5.4 billion for banks examine banks’ BSA/AML compliance pronounced for FinCEN than for those
with an FFR. programs every 12 to 18 months using
Congressional Research Service, CRS Report
risk-focused procedures outlined in the R46648 (Dec. 28, 2020), https://www.congress.gov/
b. Current Supervisory and Enforcement
FFIEC BSA/AML Examination Manual. crs-product/R46648.
Practices
If violations are found or they have 190 See FDIC, Proposed 2026 FDIC Operating
The proposed rule is expected to serious supervisory concerns that are Budget, Exhibit 6, Proposed 2026 Corporate
introduce certain changes that could Operating Budget by Business Line (Jan. 9, 2026),
not timely addressed, the Agencies may https://www.fdic.gov/financial-reports/fdic-budget.
take actions ranging from informal 191 See FRB, Annual Report—2024, Federal
FR 55428, 55458–55463 (July 3, 2024). In section corrective measures to formal Reserve System Budgets, Table D.3 and D.9, https://
VII.A.2.C., Current Market Practices, FinCEN www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2024-ar-
estimated an annual burden between $5.1 and $7.5
enforcement actions such as cease-and-
federal-reserve-system-budgets.htm. FinCEN
billion in AML Program and SAR reporting costs. desist orders.189 The baseline costs calculated the total budgets as the sum of the
184 See GAO, Anti-Money Laundering:
budgets for the Board of Governors and the Federal
Opportunities Exist to Increase Law Enforcement 187 31 CFR 1010.810(b).
Reserve Banks.
Use of Bank Secrecy Act Reports, and Banks’ Costs 188 FinCEN has not delegated to the Agencies its 192 See OCC, 2025 Annual Report, p. 25, https://
to Comply with the Act Varied, GAO–20–574 (Sept. ability to enforce the BSA and undertakes its own www.occ.gov/publications-and-resources/
2020), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-574.pdf. enforcement investigations and actions, as publications/annual-report/files/2025-annual-
185 See Drew Dahl, Jim Fuchs, Andrew Meyer, appropriate (see supra note 45). However, FinCEN report.html.
and Michelle Neely, Compliance Costs, Economies generally undertakes a materially lower volume of 193 FinCEN was unable to obtain comparable data
of Scale and Compliance Performance: Evidence BSA-related enforcement actions than the Agencies, on the NCUA’s expenditures on supervisory or
from a Survey of Community Banks, Federal including because FinCEN’s enforcement mandate examinations activities but anticipates that it would
Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Apr. 2018), https:// encompasses all types of financial institutions be significantly smaller given that the NCUA’s
www.communitybanking.org/-/media/files/ subject to the BSA (i.e., it is not limited to banks entire operating budget for 2025 was less than $423
communitybanking/compliance-costs-economies- and depository institutions). million in 2025. See NCUA, 2026–2027 Staff Draft
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
of-scale-and-compliance-performance.pdf?sc_ 189 For more detail, see, e.g., GAO 2020 report Budget (Sept. 2025), p. 11, https://ncua.gov/files/
lang=en&hash=19C682B5EFB86B37D6A8604DE90 (supra note 184), see also OCC, Examination publications/budget/budget-justification-proposed-
87DA6. Process: Bank Supervision Process Comptroller’s 2026-2027.pdf.
186 See Francesco Trebbi, Miao Ben Zhang, and Handbook (Sept. 2019), https://www.occ.gov/ 194 This estimated percentage does not include an
Michael Simkovic, The Cost of Regulatory publications-and-resources/publications/ estimate of expenditures by the NCUA, but given
Compliance in the United States, U.S.C. Marshall comptrollers-handbook/files/bank-supervision- their expected order of magnitude (see supra note
School of Business Research Paper (Oct. 23, 2024), process/pub-ch-bank-supervision-process.pdf; see 193), this exclusion is not expected to affect the
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ also, David W. Perkins, Bank Supervision by general magnitude of change required to exceed a
id=4331146. Federal Regulators: Overview and Policy Issues, $100 million significance threshold.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules 18735
to whom it has delegated examination enforcement of matters not otherwise has not assigned an expected economic
authority. pursued by Federal or State agencies effect, the reason for doing so is briefly
directly. The study also surveyed 5,257 described below.
c. Current Use of BSA Information by
investigators, analysts, and prosecutors The description of proposed
Law Enforcement and National Security
at six Federal law enforcement agencies requirements below is organized by the
Agencies
and found that these agencies used BSA scope and anticipated potential
While results may not be published, data extensively, estimating that
FinCEN both routinely receives magnitude of economic effects, starting
approximately 72 percent of personnel
reports 195 and conduct surveys 196 that with the proposed changes, applicable
conducting investigations from 2015 to
speak to the use and usefulness of BSA to the broadest scope of financial
2018 used BSA reports to support their
information to law enforcement and work.198 institutions, that are expected to be the
national security agencies. An older, but least substantive and concluding with
broadly analogous, publicly available 3. Description of Proposed Regulatory the proposed changes, concentrated on
report from the GAO found that in 2018, Changes the narrowest scope of affected parties,
a majority of Federal and State law For purposes of the RIA, FinCEN that have the greatest potential to result
enforcement agencies had direct access considered the various components of in substantive changes. To balance the
to FinCEN’s BSA database (i.e., 85 the proposed rule—including its completeness of the RIA with the desire
percent of federal agencies and 54 proposed amendments to existing rules for expositional clarity and ease of
percent of State agencies), though fewer and proposed new requirements—with tractability between the proposed
than one percent of local law a view towards the specific features or regulatory text and sections V (section-
enforcement agencies did.197 FinCEN elements that are expected to generate, by-section analysis) and X (regulatory
believes these survey results may either directly or indirectly, an impact analysis), FinCEN has included
underrepresent the extent to which local economic benefit or cost or lead to table 6, to provide a mapping of the
law enforcement may benefit from BSA changes in market participant incentives various components of the proposed
information insofar as the GAO study in a way that may generate economic rulemaking as presented in the section-
could not directly account for the benefits or costs.199 For components of by-section analysis to their analogous
incidence of referrals to local law the proposed rule that FinCEN analysis categorization in the RIA.
TABLE 6—OVERVIEW/MAPPING OF REGULATORY TEXT AND ANALYSES
Scope of Considered in
The proposed rule would . . . Section V analysis Proposed regulatory text location
affected entities RIA subsection(s)
Generally Applicable to Insert ‘‘CFT’’ to standardize references to V.A, V.G ....................... X.A.3.i .......................... various (regulatory titles, CIP regu-
all Financial Institu- ‘‘AML/CFT’’ as in ‘‘AML/CFT Program,’’ re- lations, etc.)
tions. placing ‘‘AML program’’ or ‘‘BSA/AML pro-
gram’’.
Remove program-related compliance dates that V.G.3 ............................ X.A.3.i .......................... n/a, text removed
are no longer relevant.
Conceptually define program ‘‘effectiveness’’ .... V.B, V.C ....................... X.A.3, X.A.4 ................. 10XX.210(a)
Introduce a two-prong program framework of V.C. .............................. X.A.3, X.A.4 ................. 10XX.210(a)(1) and (2) and (c)
compliance with program requirements.
Encourage adoption of new technology or other V.B, V.D.1, V.F.4, X.A.3.i, X.A.4.i.a, n/a
innovative approaches, while removing pre- V.G.2. X.A.4.ii.a.
scriptive requirements.
Standardize requirements that a program’s in- V.D.1 ............................ X.A.3.i .......................... 10XX.210(b)(1)
ternal policies, procedures, and controls be
reasonably designed to: (1) identify, assess,
and document ML/TF risks through risk as-
sessment processes; (2) mitigate ML/TF risks
consistent with its risk assessment proc-
esses; and, if applicable (3) conduct ongoing
CDD.
Require that internal policies, procedures, and V.D.1.i .......................... X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(1)(i)
controls identify, assess, and document ML/
TF risks through risk assessment processes.
Require that internal policies, procedures, and V.D.1.ii ......................... X.A.3.i, X.A.4.i.a, 10XX.210(b)(1)(ii)
controls mitigate ML/TF risks consistent with X.A.4.ii.a.
a financial institution’s risk assessment proc-
esses (including appropriate allocation toward
higher-risk customers).
Require that risk assessment processes (1) V.D.1.i.a, b, c ............... X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(1)(i)(A), (B), and (C)
evaluate ML/TF risks from business activities;
(2) consider AML/CFT Priorities; and (3) up-
date promptly responsive to significant
changes to ML/TF risks.
Standardize language describing program re- V.D.2 ............................ X.A.3.i .......................... 10XX.210(b)(2)
quirements for independent testing.
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
Require independent testing .............................. V.D.2 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(2)
195 FY21 NDAA, section 6201 (Annual reporting Renewal Without Change of the Generic Clearance 197 GAO conducted the survey from November 9,
requirements), https://www.congress.gov/116/ for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on 2019, through March 16, 2020. See supra note 184.
plaws/publ283/PLAW-116publ283.pdf. Agency Service Delivery, 88 FR 30383 (May 11, 198 Based on a response rate of approximately 57
196 FinCEN, Agency Information Collection 2023). percent.
Activities: Proposed Renewal; Comment Request; 199 See infra section X.A.4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18736 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—OVERVIEW/MAPPING OF REGULATORY TEXT AND ANALYSES—Continued
Scope of Considered in
The proposed rule would . . . Section V analysis Proposed regulatory text location
affected entities RIA subsection(s)
Standardize program requirements regarding V.D.3.i .......................... X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(3)
the designated individual responsible for es-
tablishing, implementing, and coordinating
day-to-day program compliance.
Require that the designated individual is lo- V.D.3.ii ......................... X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(3)
cated in the United States.
Require that the designated individual is acces- V.D.3.ii ......................... X.A.3.i .......................... 10XX.210(b)(3)
sible to, and subject to oversight and super-
vision by, FinCEN and the appropriate FFR.
Require that the designated individual is re- V.D.3 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(3)
sponsible for establishing and implementing
the AML/CFT program and coordinating and
monitoring day-to-day compliance.
Standardize language describing program re- V.D.4 ............................ X.A.3.i .......................... 10XX.210(b)(4)
quirements for ongoing employee training.
Require ongoing employee training ................... V.D.4 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(b)(4)
Require the AML/CFT program to be written .... V.E.1 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(d)
Require the AML/CFT program to be made V.E.1 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a .......... 10XX.210(d)
available upon request to FinCEN or its des-
ignee.
Require the AML/CFT program to be approved V.E.2 ............................ X.A.3.i, X.A.4.ii.a, X.E .. 10XX.210(d)
by the financial institution’s board of directors
or an equivalent governing body within the fi-
nancial institution, or appropriate senior man-
agement.
Applicable to Covered Integrate CDD-related program requirements V.D.1.iii ......................... X.A.3.ii, X.E .................. 1020.210(b)(1)(iii),
FIs Only. into the ‘‘establishment prong’’ of the pro- 1023.210(b)(1)(iii),
posed new program framework. 1024.210(b)(1)(iii),
1026.210(b)(1)(iii), and
1028.210(b)(1)(iii)
Applicable to Banks Consolidate 31 CFR 1020.210(a) and (b) into a V.G.1 ............................ X.A.3.iii ......................... n/a, text consolidated
Only. single set of rules applicable to all banks.
Remove redundant regulatory text affirming the V.G.4 ............................ X.A.3.iii ......................... n/a, text removed
requirement that banks must comply with the
rules of their FFRs.
Define the terms/phrases ‘‘AML/CFT enforce- V.F.1 ............................ X.A.3.iii, X.A.4.ii.a ........ 1020.221(a)
ment action,’’ ‘‘AML/CFT requirement,’’ and
‘‘significant AML/CFT supervisory action’’.
Provide that a bank with an AML/CFT program V.F.2 ............................ X.A.3.iii, X.A.4.i.a ......... 1020.221(b)(1)
established in accordance with proposed 31
CFR 1020.210(b) would not be subject to an
AML/CFT enforcement action or significant
AML/CFT supervisory action absent a signifi-
cant or systemic failure to implement said
program within the meaning of proposed 31
CFR 1020.210(c).
Provide that the proposed 31 CFR V.F.2 ............................ X.A.3.iii, X.A.4.i.a, 1020.221(b)(2)
1020.221(b)(1) provisions do not apply when X.A.4.ii.a.
there is a failure to establish a bank program
within the meaning of proposed 31 CFR
1020.210(b).
Provide that in determining to take, or in review V.F.4 ............................ X.A.3.iii, X.A.4.i.a, 1020.221(d)
of, an AML/CFT enforcement action or signifi- X.A.4.i.b, X.A.4.ii.b.
cant AML/CFT supervisory action, the Direc-
tor would take into account factors under 31
U.S.C. 5318(h)(2)(B) and the bank’s unique
ability and efforts to advance AML/CFT Prior-
ities.
Applicable to Bank Require FFIRA consultation with the Director V.F.3 ............................ X.A.3.iv, X.A.4.i.a, 1020.221(c)(1)
FFIRAs. before any significant AML/CFT supervisory X.A.4.i.b, X.A.4.ii.a,
action pursuant to delegated authority is initi- X.A.4.ii.b.
ated.
Require, generally, an FFIRA to provide written V.F.3 ............................ 1020.221(c)(2)(i)
notice to the Director of any intent to take a
significant AML/CFT supervisory action pur-
suant to delegated authority at least 30 days
in advance of the proposed action.
Require, to the extent reasonably practicable, V.F.3 ............................ 1020.221(c)(2)(ii)
that an FFIRA respond to requests from the
Director for additional information regarding a
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
proposed significant AML/CFT supervisory
action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules 18737
i. Generally Applicable to All Financial published version 204 of the AML/CFT obligations.207 FinCEN has long held
Institutions Priorities is being referenced.205 The that this ‘‘fifth pillar’’ is itself composed
In this NPRM, FinCEN proposes to extent to which defining the priorities of four core elements,208 including three
introduce a number of technical changes this way may affect expected burdens (in addition to beneficial ownership
that include new definitions and new or would depend on how path-dependent identification and verification) that are
amended language that seek to improve programmatic best practices would integral to the design and execution of
the clarity and congruence of the otherwise be and the magnitude of a compliant AML program.209 This
current regulatory text across all changes in AML/CFT Priorities between NPRM includes a proposed, non-
categories of financial institutions. one publication and the next. substantive change in the structural
Many of these are expected to be non- Additionally, the proposed rule organization of program requirements
substantive changes, but some might includes certain linguistic changes that that would move CDD core elements
reasonably be expected to result in are to a greater extent intended to three and four from their current
novel or alternative activities being demarcate intended changes in standalone textual positions to become
undertaken by at least some affected conceptual framing and accountability nested in the ‘‘establishment prong’’ of
parties. For completeness, the full scope mechanisms than introduce new AML/CFT program requirements.
of changes is reviewed in the section requirements for financial As explained in section V.D.1.iii, this
below; however, only those changes that institutions.206 The novel imposition of change is intended to simply better
could foreseeably result in non- these specific semantic distinctions reflect how covered financial
negligible changes in the activities of a between ‘‘establish’’ and ‘‘maintain’’ are institutions operationalize such ongoing
meant to create an evaluative framework CDD as part of their overall AML
non-trivial subpopulation of affected
that would enable an evaluator or programs and would not be expected to
parties are further discussed in section
evaluated entity to meaningfully engender novel incremental burden. It is
X.A.4.
Changes that are not foreseen to be distinguish between facially similar therefore not further discussed in
substantive include updating 31 CFR observed errors, omissions, or other section X.A.4 below. However, FinCEN
chapter X to insert the term ‘‘CFT’’ into failures that impede a program’s has, in the course of analysis
the program rules; 200 the effectiveness by causal attribution (to undertaken in connection with several
standardization of the ordering and either a flaw in program design or in recent rulemakings and its review of its
language used to describe the necessary program execution). This causal PRA obligations, taken note of certain
distinction, in turn, would afford certain clerical errors and omissions that
‘‘four pillars’’ required of all financial
protections from excessive supervisory caused the existing recordkeeping
institution types’ AML/CFT
and/or enforcement action by regulators burden associated with CDD core
programs,201 and other technical
or other compliance examiners and elements three and four to be omitted
amendments to program attributes.202
relieve a given financial institution from from certain pre-existing OMB control
FinCEN is also proposing to amend
the need, real or perceived, to numbers. As a result, the PRA analysis
certain existing definitions to
prophylactically undertake excessive in section X.E below includes a line
incorporate non-substantive,
program activities for the exclusive item associated with CDD program
modernizing updates.203
Other changes might reasonably be purpose of mitigating such excessive obligations that would address the
expected to result, to varying degrees, in supervisory or enforcement action risks. previous omission. This administrative
novel or alternative activities being correction does not reflect, in either
ii. Applicable to Covered Financial level or proportion, an anticipated need
undertaken by affected parties and are Institutions
identified as such for further for catholic changes to covered financial
consideration in section X.A.4 below. As discussed in section X.A.2.ii, institutions’ baseline due diligence
These include the introduction of while all financial institutions must practices.
certain definitions, concepts, textual exercise diligence when developing an
iii. Applicable to Banks
reorganizations, and express understanding of their clients or
customers, only a select subset of When assessing the potential
requirements. economic impact of the incremental
FinCEN proposes to define ‘‘AML/ financial institutions subject to the BSA
have express ‘‘fifth pillar,’’ or CDD portions of the proposed rule unique to
CFT priorities’’ such that when the term
banks, FinCEN considered both the
is used throughout 31 CFR chapter X, it
204 See AML/CFT Priorities (June 30, 2021),
is clear that only the most recently https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen- 207 See supra table 3 for covered financial
issues-first-national-amlcft-priorities-and- institutions; i.e., those with CDD obligations.
200 See supra section V.A.
accompanying-statements. As required by 31 U.S.C. 208 FinCEN, Customer Due Diligence
201 See, e.g., with respect to regulatory language 5318(h)(4)(C), the AML/CFT priorities are Requirements for Financial Institutions, 81 FR
used to describe program-related training consistent with Treasury’s National Strategy for 29398 (May 11, 2016), (stating, ‘‘FinCEN believes
requirements supra sections V.D.4 and X.A.2.ii. See Combating Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing that there are four core elements of customer due
also, with respect to regulatory language used to (May 16, 2024), https://home.treasury.gov/news/ diligence (CDD)[. . . ]: (1) Customer identification
describe independent testing requirements supra press-releases/jy2346. The AML/CFT Priorities are and verification, (2) beneficial ownership
sections V.D.2 and X.A.2.ii. See with respect to supported by Treasury’s National Risk Assessments identification and verification, (3) understanding
regulatory language used to describe a designated on Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and the nature and purpose of customer relationships to
individual supra sections V.D.3.i and X.A.2.ii. Proliferation Financing (Feb. 7, 2024), https:// develop a customer risk profile, and (4) ongoing
202 See discussion of the documentation home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2080. As monitoring for reporting suspicious transactions
requirements for programs supra section V.E.1; see also required by 31 U.S.C. 5318(h)(4)(B), the and, on a risk-basis, maintaining and updating
also supra table 4. See also discussion of the Secretary, in consultation with the Attorney customer information.’’).
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
removal from regulatory text of automated data General, Federal functional regulators, relevant 209 Id. (Referring to the core elements: ‘‘The first
processing requirements for casino and MSBs supra State financial regulators, and relevant national is already an AML program requirement [. . . t]he
section V.G.2, of no longer binding compliance security agencies, must update the AML/CFT third and fourth elements are already implicitly
deadlines supra section V.G.3, and of cross- Priorities not less frequently than once every four required for covered financial institutions to
references to other regulations that are binding years. 31 U.S.C. 5318(h)(2)(B). comply with their suspicious activity reporting
independent of FinCEN regulations supra V.G.4. 205 See supra section V.D.1.i.b.
requirements. The AML program rules for all
203 See supra section V.G for description of 206 See supra sections V.B and C (describing the covered financial institutions are being amended by
definitional changes at 31 CFR 1010.100(e), (r), intent and mechanics of proposed 31 CFR the final rule in order to include the third and
(nnn), and (ooo). 10XX.210(a)). fourth elements as explicit requirements.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:54 Apr 09, 2026 Jkt 268001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10APP4.SGM 10APP4
18738 Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 69 / Friday, April 10, 2026 / Proposed Rules
portions of the proposed regulatory text FinCEN also expects proposed 31 CFR would be third order at best, and
that pertain to requirements placed on 1020.221(d) to affect banks’ incentives difficult to distinguish from the effects
banks directly as well as portions of the because it provides that in determining of other incremental components of the
proposed regulatory text that may to take, or in review of, an AML/CFT proposed rule. Thus, despite
prescribe activities for parties other than enforcement action or significant AML/ acknowledging that economic effects of
banks but are reasonably expected to CFT supervisory action, the Director the proposed regulatory changes
have an impact on banks. The would take certain factors into applicable to the Agencies may reach to
distinction in causal channels, while consideration, including facts and banks and the general public, they are
recognized in this section, is not circumstances unique to the bank in not itemized or further considered for
maintained in section X.A.4 below in question. In particular, section 221(d)(2) these affected parties in their respective
cases where the economic effects of the would require the Director to consider sections below.
proposed regulatory text on banks are the bank’s demonstrable efforts to
4. Anticipated Economic Effects
not reliably separable or such advance AML/CFT Priorities such as its
incremental analysis would not enrich production of highly useful information, Ideally, conducting an RIA would
the analysis. analytics, or other innovations. If these enable FinCEN to identify and monetize
efforts would newly be, or to a markedly all of a proposed regulation’s most
Additionally, certain proposed
greater extent than they currently are, salient economic effects with a high
changes are not discussed further in
allowed to weigh in the bank’s favor degree of certainty so that policymakers
section X.A.4 below because it is
when under consideration for an AML/ and the commenting public would be
unclear that they would have either
CFT enforcement action or significant able to comparatively evaluate different
independent incremental effects or any
AML/CFT supervisory action, FinCEN regulatory options’ benefits and costs
economic effect at all. These changes
expects that the proposed regulation and advocate for the option with the
include the proposals: (1) to combine
could reasonably be expected to greatest net benefits. In practice,
the two bank program rules—for banks
generate economic effects because it however, financial regulations include
with an FFR and those without an benefits and costs that cannot be
FFR—into one framework; 210 (2) to would likely change the scope or nature
of activities undertaken and/or quantified with any degree of certainty,
remove regulatory text affirming the making simple benefit-cost comparisons
requirement for banks to comply with investments made.
potentially misleading, ‘‘because the
the rules of their FFRs; 211 and (3) to iv. Applicable to Federal Financial calculation of net benefits in such cases
define the terms/phrases ‘‘AML/CFT Institutions Regulatory Agencies does not provide a full evaluation of all
enforcement action,’’ ‘‘AML/CFT As described above in section V.F.3, relevant benefits and costs.’’ 217 In its
requirement,’’ and ‘‘significant AML/ the proposed rule would introduce new analysis, FinCEN has therefore sought to
CFT supervisory action’’ for purposes of notice,213 consultation,214 include an evaluation of certain
proposed 31 CFR 1020.221.212 consideration,215 and response 216 foreseeable non-quantified economic
In the proposed rule, the supervision requirements for the Agencies before effects in addition to certain quantified
and enforcement requirements would initiating significant AML/CFT costs to more comprehensively assess
apply only to banks and the Agencies. supervisory actions. FinCEN anticipates the potential net benefit of the proposed
Of the proposed requirements, FinCEN that the proposed consultation process rule and select alternatives.
anticipates that proposed 31 CFR is likely to have direct economic effects Additionally, because program rules
1020.221(b)(1) is likely to have the most on both FinCEN and the Agencies, are a minimum standard,218 FinCEN
substantive impact on banks, while, by further discussed below in sections preemptively qualifies its analysis as
contrast section 221(b)(2), in practice, X.A.4.i.b (expected benefits) and ii.b likely to overstate both the benefits and
represents the least difference from (expected costs). The proposed process costs of the proposed rule for covered
status quo. Notwithstanding that the could also reasonably be expected to financial institutions that already strive
framework of proposed § 10XX.210(a) have indirect effects on the banks for best practices or whose programs
and the proposed requirements/ subject to supervision and examination already meet or surpass the proposed
provision of § 10XX.210(b)(1)(ii) (to by Federal banking regulators to the requirements. However, because the
allocate program resources and attention extent that the consultative process is lack of an incremental effect for these
by risk level) apply to all categories of successful in better aligning supervisory institutions would affect both benefits
regulated financial institutions, the and enforcement activities with the and costs, it should not, in theory, affect
economic effects of the proposed efficient establishment and maintenance an assessment of the overall net effects,
evaluative framework are expected to be of AML/CFT programs. Finally, while as the differences on both sides should
greatest where supervisory and further downstream economic effects offset each other. FinCEN requests
enforcement commitment to abide by may also flow to the general public from comment on the reasonableness of this
the framework is perceived by affected this improved alignment, these effects expectation and solicits data or
financial institutions to be the most information, if available, that would
credible. For this reason, banks 213 See proposed 31 CFR 1020.221(c)(2)(i) improve the accuracy of its assessment
regulated by the Agencies may be (generally requiring FFIRAs to provide written of impact if this reliance on theory is
notice to the Director of any intent to take a
uniquely affected among the categories significant AML/CFT supervisory action pursuant not appropriate.219
of financial institutions that would be to delegated authority at least 30 days in advance
i. Expected Benefits
subject to the proposed rule because of the proposed action).
214 See proposed 31 CFR 1020.221(c)(1) (requiring The proposed rule is anticipated to
lotter on DSK8BHNXB4PROD with PROPOSALS4
they are the only financial institutions
FFIRA consultation with the Director before any result in certain nonquantifiable
with companionate regulation binding significant AML/CFT supervisory action pursuant
the parties supervising and enforcing to delegated authority is initiated). benefits to covered financial
their compliance. 215 Id.
217 See OMB, Circular A–4, at 10. (2003), https://
216 See proposed 31 CFR 1020.221(c)(2)(ii)
(requiring, to the extent reasonably practicable, that www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/
210 See supra section V.G.1. CircularA-4.pdf.
an FFIRA respond to requests from the Director for
211 See supra section V.G.4. 218 See supra section V.B.
additional information regarding a proposed
212 See supra section V.F.1. significant AML/CFT supervisory action).