英国的反洗钱制度“值得吗”?初步的成本效益分析

IF 1.3 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
P. Sproat
{"title":"英国的反洗钱制度“值得吗”?初步的成本效益分析","authors":"P. Sproat","doi":"10.1108/jmlc-02-2023-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to raise, and consider, first-order questions about the United Kingdom’s anti-money laundering (AML) regime.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe paper contrasts the original rationale for introducing AML and asset recovery to the UK with data on the assets recovered from organised crime and those involved in drug trafficking. It does this by analysing historical and contemporaneous literature – both official and academic.\n\n\nFindings\nWhen assessed against its original aims of combating drugs and organised crime, the tentative conclusion is that the UK’s AML system does not appear to be worth the candle.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nWhile based upon publicly available information that is far from ideal, the analysis raises credible questions as to whether the UK’s AML regime is worthwhile and whether it could be done differently.\n\n\nPractical implications\nRaises the question of whether the impact of the AML regime could be made worthwhile by investing a great deal more in those law enforcement agencies that use the suspicious activity reporting regime. It also raises the question as to whether the AML regime could be re-purposed to achieve aims that are different from the original.\n\n\nSocial implications\nGiven the financial costs, which run into billions of pounds, and the fact that the regime has failed to have a significant impact on the level of drug trafficking or the revenue of organised criminals, the paper raises questions as to when the policy can be re-designed or abandoned.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWhile most other analytical work simply makes suggestions as to how to improve the number of inputs into the AML system, this paper provides a critical analysis of the costs and benefits of the AML regime in the UK.\n","PeriodicalId":46042,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Money Laundering Control","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the UK’s anti-money laundering regime “worth the candle”? A tentative cost-benefit analysis\",\"authors\":\"P. Sproat\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jmlc-02-2023-0027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to raise, and consider, first-order questions about the United Kingdom’s anti-money laundering (AML) regime.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe paper contrasts the original rationale for introducing AML and asset recovery to the UK with data on the assets recovered from organised crime and those involved in drug trafficking. It does this by analysing historical and contemporaneous literature – both official and academic.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nWhen assessed against its original aims of combating drugs and organised crime, the tentative conclusion is that the UK’s AML system does not appear to be worth the candle.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nWhile based upon publicly available information that is far from ideal, the analysis raises credible questions as to whether the UK’s AML regime is worthwhile and whether it could be done differently.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nRaises the question of whether the impact of the AML regime could be made worthwhile by investing a great deal more in those law enforcement agencies that use the suspicious activity reporting regime. It also raises the question as to whether the AML regime could be re-purposed to achieve aims that are different from the original.\\n\\n\\nSocial implications\\nGiven the financial costs, which run into billions of pounds, and the fact that the regime has failed to have a significant impact on the level of drug trafficking or the revenue of organised criminals, the paper raises questions as to when the policy can be re-designed or abandoned.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nWhile most other analytical work simply makes suggestions as to how to improve the number of inputs into the AML system, this paper provides a critical analysis of the costs and benefits of the AML regime in the UK.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Money Laundering Control\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Money Laundering Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmlc-02-2023-0027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Money Laundering Control","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmlc-02-2023-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在提出并考虑有关英国反洗钱(AML)制度的一级问题。设计/方法/方法本文对比了在英国引入“反洗钱”和资产追回的原始理由,以及从有组织犯罪和涉及贩毒的资产追回的数据。它通过分析历史和同时代的文献——包括官方的和学术的——来做到这一点。与打击毒品和有组织犯罪的最初目标相比,初步结论是,英国的“反洗钱”体系似乎并不值得。研究局限性/影响尽管基于公开可得的信息远非理想,但该分析提出了可信的问题,即英国的“反洗钱”制度是否值得,以及是否可以采取不同的做法。实际影响提出了一个问题:如果对那些使用可疑活动报告制度的执法机构投入更多资金,“反洗钱”制度的影响是否值得?这也提出了一个问题,即“反洗钱”制度是否可以被重新利用,以实现与原来不同的目标。社会影响考虑到高达数十亿英镑的财政成本,以及该政权未能对毒品贩运水平或有组织犯罪的收入产生重大影响的事实,该论文提出了一个问题,即该政策何时可以重新设计或放弃。原创性/价值虽然大多数其他分析工作只是就如何提高“反洗钱”制度的投入数量提出建议,但本文对英国“反洗钱”制度的成本和收益进行了批判性分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is the UK’s anti-money laundering regime “worth the candle”? A tentative cost-benefit analysis
Purpose This paper aims to raise, and consider, first-order questions about the United Kingdom’s anti-money laundering (AML) regime. Design/methodology/approach The paper contrasts the original rationale for introducing AML and asset recovery to the UK with data on the assets recovered from organised crime and those involved in drug trafficking. It does this by analysing historical and contemporaneous literature – both official and academic. Findings When assessed against its original aims of combating drugs and organised crime, the tentative conclusion is that the UK’s AML system does not appear to be worth the candle. Research limitations/implications While based upon publicly available information that is far from ideal, the analysis raises credible questions as to whether the UK’s AML regime is worthwhile and whether it could be done differently. Practical implications Raises the question of whether the impact of the AML regime could be made worthwhile by investing a great deal more in those law enforcement agencies that use the suspicious activity reporting regime. It also raises the question as to whether the AML regime could be re-purposed to achieve aims that are different from the original. Social implications Given the financial costs, which run into billions of pounds, and the fact that the regime has failed to have a significant impact on the level of drug trafficking or the revenue of organised criminals, the paper raises questions as to when the policy can be re-designed or abandoned. Originality/value While most other analytical work simply makes suggestions as to how to improve the number of inputs into the AML system, this paper provides a critical analysis of the costs and benefits of the AML regime in the UK.
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
Journal of Money Laundering Control
Journal of Money Laundering Control CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
27.30%
发文量
59
×
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