根据UCC 4A考虑遵守制裁

Michael Zytnick, Alaina Gimbert
{"title":"根据UCC 4A考虑遵守制裁","authors":"Michael Zytnick, Alaina Gimbert","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.10.2.considering","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of a bank’s financial crime compliance program, it is increasingly common to screen and halt the processing of a payment order for compliance investigation where reference is made to a potential, but unconfirmed, target of United States economic sanctions. This essay discusses challenges under Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code concerning the timing of such an investigation and the creation of potential liability where a bank wrongly accepts by execution a previously halted payment order received from a sender following five funds transfer business days after the relevant execution date or payment date of that order. In Part II, this paper presents a brief overview of the use of funds transfers in the United States and reviews the application of Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, including rejection, acceptance, cancellation, and amendment of a payment order. In Part III, the paper overviews United States economic sanctions, the implementation by banks of technology designed to identify and halt the processing of a payment order referencing a potential sanctions target, and the timeframe that may be required to investigate a halted payment order. In Part IV, the paper reviews application of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation and “money back guarantee” provisions where a payment order under its purview is wrongly effected and loss allocation between funds transfer parties for such events. Part V describes possible contractual and legislative changes to address the balance of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation of an unaccepted payment order after five funds transfer business days, sanctions compliance efforts undertaken by banks, and the policy goal of completing funds transfers efficiently.","PeriodicalId":177599,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Considering Sanctions Compliance in Light of UCC 4A\",\"authors\":\"Michael Zytnick, Alaina Gimbert\",\"doi\":\"10.36639/mbelr.10.2.considering\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As part of a bank’s financial crime compliance program, it is increasingly common to screen and halt the processing of a payment order for compliance investigation where reference is made to a potential, but unconfirmed, target of United States economic sanctions. This essay discusses challenges under Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code concerning the timing of such an investigation and the creation of potential liability where a bank wrongly accepts by execution a previously halted payment order received from a sender following five funds transfer business days after the relevant execution date or payment date of that order. In Part II, this paper presents a brief overview of the use of funds transfers in the United States and reviews the application of Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, including rejection, acceptance, cancellation, and amendment of a payment order. In Part III, the paper overviews United States economic sanctions, the implementation by banks of technology designed to identify and halt the processing of a payment order referencing a potential sanctions target, and the timeframe that may be required to investigate a halted payment order. In Part IV, the paper reviews application of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation and “money back guarantee” provisions where a payment order under its purview is wrongly effected and loss allocation between funds transfer parties for such events. Part V describes possible contractual and legislative changes to address the balance of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation of an unaccepted payment order after five funds transfer business days, sanctions compliance efforts undertaken by banks, and the policy goal of completing funds transfers efficiently.\",\"PeriodicalId\":177599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.10.2.considering\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.10.2.considering","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为银行金融犯罪合规计划的一部分,在涉及潜在但未经证实的美国经济制裁目标的合规调查中,对支付令进行筛选并停止处理的情况越来越普遍。本文讨论了《统一商法典》第4A条下的挑战,涉及此类调查的时机,以及银行在相关执行日期或付款日期后5个资金转移工作日后错误地接受发件人发出的先前已停止的付款订单时,可能产生的责任。在第二部分中,本文简要概述了美国资金转移的使用情况,并回顾了《统一商法典》第4A条的适用情况,包括拒绝、接受、取消和修改支付令。在第三部分中,本文概述了美国的经济制裁,银行实施旨在识别和停止处理涉及潜在制裁目标的支付订单的技术,以及调查被暂停的支付订单可能需要的时间框架。第四部分考察了第4A条自动撤销和“退款保证”规定在其管辖范围内的支付令错误生效以及此类事件中资金转移方之间损失分摊的适用情况。第五部分描述了可能的合同和立法变更,以解决第4A条在五个资金转移工作日后自动取消未接受的支付订单、银行采取的制裁合规努力以及有效完成资金转移的政策目标之间的平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Considering Sanctions Compliance in Light of UCC 4A
As part of a bank’s financial crime compliance program, it is increasingly common to screen and halt the processing of a payment order for compliance investigation where reference is made to a potential, but unconfirmed, target of United States economic sanctions. This essay discusses challenges under Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code concerning the timing of such an investigation and the creation of potential liability where a bank wrongly accepts by execution a previously halted payment order received from a sender following five funds transfer business days after the relevant execution date or payment date of that order. In Part II, this paper presents a brief overview of the use of funds transfers in the United States and reviews the application of Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code, including rejection, acceptance, cancellation, and amendment of a payment order. In Part III, the paper overviews United States economic sanctions, the implementation by banks of technology designed to identify and halt the processing of a payment order referencing a potential sanctions target, and the timeframe that may be required to investigate a halted payment order. In Part IV, the paper reviews application of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation and “money back guarantee” provisions where a payment order under its purview is wrongly effected and loss allocation between funds transfer parties for such events. Part V describes possible contractual and legislative changes to address the balance of Article 4A’s automatic cancellation of an unaccepted payment order after five funds transfer business days, sanctions compliance efforts undertaken by banks, and the policy goal of completing funds transfers efficiently.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信