Mark Motivans, Ph.D.

BJS Statistician

During 2001, 1,477 defendants were

charged in U.S. district courts with

money laundering as the most serious

offense filed. These defendants

comprised 1.8% of all cases filed 

in U.S. district courts. 

Of cases concluded in 2001, 1,243

defendants were convicted of a money

laundering offense.1

 Federal defendants sentenced for money laundering

in 2001 were convicted of laundering

amounts ranging from less than $2,000

to more than $100 million.2

 About 20%

of the cases involved over $1 million. 

Offenders convicted of money laundering face prison terms of up to 20 years,

fines up to $500,000 or twice the value

of the property involved, and possible

criminal and civil forfeiture related to the

value of the property or funds involved. 

Federal money laundering statutes

differentiate between monetary record

and reporting offenses requiring financial institutions to maintain reports and

records of financial transactions

• Between 1994 and 2001 about

18,500 defendants were charged in

U.S. district court with money laundering as any charge. Over this same

7-year period, 10,610 were charged

with money laundering as the most

serious offense filed; 9,169 money

laundering defendants were

convicted.

• Nearly half of all Federal money

laundering matters were referred in

the six geographic areas defined as

High Intensity Financial Crimes Areas

by the U.S. Departments of Treasury

and Justice. 

• About 60% of laundering/racketeering (Title 18) offenses prosecuted

involved an underlying property

offense (embezzlement or fraud);

about 17% involved drug trafficking;

and about 7% involved racketeering 

or violations of customs laws.

• About 9 in 10 defendants prosecuted

for money laundering were convicted,

with 9 in 10 convictions occurring by

guilty plea. Nearly 3 out of 4 convicted

defendants received a prison term, 

with the average sentence of just 

over 4 years.

• In 2001 the 22 commercial defendants charged with money laundering

included auto dealerships, grocery

stores, banks, furniture stores,

construction firms, and beauty shops.

They represented a small fraction 

of money laundering defendants.

Highlights

From 1994 to 2001 almost 18,500 defendants faced a money

laundering-related charge filed in a U.S. district court 

1994 1996 1998 2000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

Number of defendants with money laundering

Laundering/

Monetary record and

2001

reporting (Title 31)

racketeering (Title 18)

as any offense charged

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report

1

Money laundering is defined as “the process by

which criminals or criminal organizations seek to

disguise the illicit nature of their proceeds by

introducing them into the stream of legitimate

commerce and finance.” 2000-2005, Strategic

Plan. U.S. Department of the Treasury, page 1. 2

Monetary instruments include U.S. or foreign

coins and currency, travelers’ checks, personal

checks, bank checks, money orders, investment

securities and negotiable instruments 

(18 U.S.C. § 1956 (c)(5)).

 July 2003, NCJ 199574 Federal Justice Statistics Program

Money Laundering Offenders,

1994-2001
involving more than $10,000 (originating from the 1970 Bank Secrecy Act)3

and laundering/racketeering offenses in

which financial transactions involve the

proceeds of specified unlawful activities

(originating from the Money Laundering

Control Act of 1986).4

 The monetary

record and reporting statutes focus on

tracking illicit assets via financial institution reporting requirements while the

laundering/racketeering statutes focus

on the conversion of illicit assets and

their use to promote additional crimes.

The bulk of Federal money laundering

enforcement focuses on the underlying

criminal offenses that produce the

funds to be laundered. Law enforcement uses a ”follow-the-money”

approach to trace illicit proceeds from

such crimes as drug trafficking, health

care fraud, and terrorism.5

 U.S. attorneys may apply the laundering/racketeering statutes when a financial transaction involves the proceeds and/or

concealment of the source of proceeds

for any of over 250 offenses or “specified unlawful activities” (SUA’s).6

This report uses data from the Federal

Justice Statistics Program (FJSP) to

describe the criminal case processing

of money laundering offenders in the

Federal criminal justice system. Unless

indicated otherwise, the designations

“lead charge”7

 and “primary” or “most

serious filing offense”8 describe money

laundering violators across prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing. The

exception to these designations occurs

where money laundering is described

as any offense filed in U.S. district

court. (See Highlights figure.)

During 2001 the laundering/racketeering statutes comprised the bulk of

defendants charged with a money

laundering offense as the most serious

offense (84%). Three in five of these

Title 18 money laundering violations

were associated with property-related 

SUA’s such as bank embezzlement,

fraud, transportation of stolen property,

and counterfeiting (63%). Drug trafficking offenses were the second most

common SUA’s (16%), followed by

public-order (7%) (including racketeering, witness tampering, customs laws,

and other offenses) and violent

offenses (4%).9

In 2001 monetary record and reporting

offenses made up the remaining 16%

of defendants charged with a money

laundering offense. Monetary record

and reporting offenses do not require a

specified unlawful activity or underlying

offense. Rather, these Bank Secrecy

Act (BSA) statutes, by requiring

records of currency transactions,

provide a paper trail which enables

enforcement agencies to uncover the

illicit concealment of monetary instruments. In addition to financial institutions, BSA reporting requirements

apply to securities brokers and dealers,

casinos, and money exchange

businesses.10

Referrals to U.S. attorneys 

for prosecution

During 2001, 1,437 suspects were

referred to U.S. attorneys with money

laundering as the lead charge (down

34.4% from 2,191 referrals in 1994).

These suspects comprised 1.2% of the

total 121,818 referred. Money laundering included 1,073 defendants investigated for laundering/racketeering

2 Federal Justice Statistics Program

Money laundering offenses in this report

are defined according to Title 18 (Chapter

95, Racketeering) and Title 31 (Chapter

53, Monetary Transactions) of the

Federal criminal code:

Title 18 statutes 

(Laundering/racketeering)

Laundering of monetary instruments

(18 U.S.C. § 1956) involves intending 

to transport or transfer monetary funds

knowing that property represents the 

proceeds of unlawful activity.

Engaging in monetary transactions in 

property derived from specified unlawful activity (18 U.S.C. § 1957) involves 

knowingly engaging in a monetary 

transaction involving criminally derived 

property valued at more than $10,000.

Prohibition of unlicensed money 

transmitting businesses (18 U.S.C. § 

1960) involves failing to comply with 

Treasury regulations (that is, business

registration and other required information) pertaining to money transmitting

businesses (that is, currency dealers and

exchangers, check cashers, and money

transmittal businesses). 

Title 31 statutes

(Monetary record and reporting)

Reporting on exporting and importing

monetary instruments (31 U.S.C. §

5316) involves the failure to file a Report 

of International Transportation of Currency or Other Monetary Instruments (CMIR)

when conveying such instruments of

more than $10,000 at one time out of,

into, or through the United States. 

Structuring transactions to evade

reporting requirement (31 U.S.C. §

5324) involves causing a domestic financial institution to fail to file a required

report or to file a report that contains an

omission or misstatement of fact, or to

structure any transaction. Structuring

involves conducting financial transactions

with the purpose of evading reporting

requirements (that is, “breaking down a

single sum of currency exceeding

$10,000 into smaller transactions to

evade reporting requirements”). See 31

C.F.R. 103.11.

Failure to file a currency transaction

report (CTR) on cash transactions

involving more than $10,000 (31 U.S.C.

§ 5313) .

Selected Federal money laundering statutes

7

“Lead charge” is the substantive statute that 

is the primary basis for investigation by U.S.

attorneys and is not necessarily the charge 

with the greatest potential sentence. 

8

“Most serious offense” is the filing offense that

yields the statutory maximum penalty. See the

methodology section in the Compendium of

Federal Justice Statistics, 2000 (NCJ 194067).

3

31 U.S.C. §§ 5311-5332.

4

18 U.S.C. §§ 1956, 1957, and 1960.

5

See Lester M. Joseph, “Money Laundering

Enforcement: Following the Money,” Economic

Perspectives: An Electronic Journal of the U.S.

Department of State, 6, 2, 2001, and R.T. Naylor, Follow-the-Money Methods in Crime Control

Policy, Nathanson Centre of Organized Crime

and Corruption, York University, Toronto, 1999. 6

See Money Laundering Statutes and Related

Materials, Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, U.S. Department of Justice, April

2002. 

9

Title 18 money laundering counts generally

involve a SUA. Information on SUA’s was

missing in 10% of cases due in part to sting

cases in which an associated unlawful activity

does not apply (18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(3)) and/or

instances in which information was not recorded

during court processing. 

10 31 C.F.R. 103. 
 Money Laundering Offenders, 1994-2001 3

Targeting money laundering enforcement efforts 

High Intensity Financial Crimes Area (HIFCA) designations were

enacted as a part of the Money Laundering Strategy Act of 1998,

(P.L. 105-310) to prioritize law enforcement efforts in areas

where money laundering and related financial crimes present a

greater need. 

To date, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General

have named six HIFCA’s: 

• New York/New Jersey

• San Juan/Puerto Rico

• Los Angeles

• the southwestern border including Arizona and Texas 

• the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) 

• the Northern District of California (San Francisco). 

Of the 1,437 matters referred to U.S. attorneys where money

laundering was the lead charge, 625 (44%) were referred from

judicial districts associated with an HIFCA designation. 

Related to HIFCA’s are the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas

(or HIDTA’s). Congress established the HIDTA program to

operate under the direction of the Office of National Drug Control

Policy (ONDCP) by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 

(P.L.100-690) and the ONDCP Reauthorization Act of 1998.

HIDTA’s were created to counter drug trafficking in areas 

where drug enforcement needs are greatest to include the money

laundering-drug trafficking nexus. All six HIFCA’s were also designated as HIDTA’s. 

10 Federal judicial districts with largest number of matters referred with money laundering 

as most serious charge, 2001

All Federal districts 121,818 1,437 1.2

Northern District of California 1,769 45 2.5

Central District of California 3,433 49 1.4

District of New Jersey 1,537 52 3.4

District of Arizona 5,099 53 1.0

Middle District of Florida 3,237 55 1.7

Southern District of Texas 6,075 64 1.1

Eastern District of New York 2,838 71 2.5

District of Puerto Rico 1,724 78 4.5

Southern District of New York 3,160 83 2.6

Southern District of Florida 3,880 106 2.7%

Money

laundering

matters as

a percent of

all matters

referred

Number 

of money

laundering

matters

referred

Total

number 

of matters

Judicial district referred

 Percent of money laundering matters referred by offense type 

Laundering/racketeering

Monetary record

and reporting

75

74

76

83

53

87

78

46

63

84

75%

Title 18

percent

of total

Matters referred to U.S. attorneys with money 

laundering as most serious charge, by Federal judicial

district, 2001

New York/

New Jersey

PUERTO RCOI

VIRGINSLANDS I

1 to 25

26 to 75

75 to 200

No referrals

Number referred

Source: Executive Office for the U.S. Attorneys, central system file

San Juan, PR

San Francisco

Los Angeles

Southwest Border

Chicago

 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
(down 33% from 1994) and 364 for

record and reporting offenses in 2001

(down 37% from 1994).

Half the money laundering-related

referrals to U.S. attorneys in 2001 

were from 10 judicial districts. The 

U.S. attorney in the Southern District 

of Florida received the most referrals

(106), followed by the Southern District

of New York (83), Puerto Rico (78),

and the Eastern District of New York

(71).

Federal agency referral of matters

evaluated for prosecution 

Multiple Federal agencies are involved

in investigating money laundering violations and referring matters to U.S.

attorneys for prosecution.11 In fiscal

year 2001 U.S. attorneys evaluated

1,573 suspects for prosecution for

alleged money laundering violations,

representing 1.3% of the 118,977

Federal matters concluded by U.S.

attorneys in 2001. More than 30

Federal, State, and local agencies

provided referrals, with the majority

coming from agencies of the Departments of Treasury or Justice (table 1).

Referrals by agencies of Treasury 

During 2001 the Treasury Department

referred 896 (57%) suspects to U.S.

attorneys in matters with money

laundering-related charges. Treasury

referred more than three-quarters of

monetary record and reporting

suspects. 

From 1994 to 2001 the total of Treasury referrals decreased 46% from

1,645. The largest part of the decrease

occurred in monetary record and

reporting violations (down 59% from

663 matters referred in 1994 to 274 

in 2001). 

Of all referring agencies, the U.S.

Customs Service (USCS) had the most

referrals for monetary record and

reporting offenses during 2001 (54% 

or 192). Money laundering matters

referred to U.S. attorneys comprised

4.2% of all matters referred by the

USCS (not shown in table). Charged in

part with enforcing money laundering

laws at U.S. borders, the USCS

accounted for the bulk of importing/

exporting monetary instrument violations (31 U.S.C. § 5316) referred for

prosecution in 2001. Of 178 matters

concluded in which importing/exporting

monetary instruments was charged, the

USCS had referred 96% (171).

The Financial Investigations Division 

of the USCS conducts undercover drug

money laundering operations. Since

the terrorist attacks of September 11,

2001, the division has coordinated

“Operation Green Quest” to “identify

and dismantle” the financial structure

used to fund terrorist activity (U.S.

Customs Service Annual Report,

Fiscal Year 2001).

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

referred 28% of suspects with a money

laundering-related charge in matters

concluded during 2001. IRS investigators deal with complex financial crimes

(including money laundering and tax

evasion and asset forfeiture). Money

laundering comprised 21% of all

matters referred by the IRS in 2001

4 Federal Justice Statistics Program

--Less than 0.5%. 

a

Reflects agency designations prior to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

b

Includes Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Secret Service, and joint State/local task forces.

c

Includes Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Marshals Service, and joint

State/local task forces.

d

Includes U.S. Postal Service, Food and Drug Administration, Securities and Exchange 

Commission.

Data source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, central system file.

Otherd 63 38 60.3% 25 39.4%

 All other Justice 52 52 100.0 0 -- c

 Drug Enforcement Administration 139 132 95.0 7 5.0

 Federal Bureau of Investigation 423 376 88.9 47 11.1

Department of Justice 614 560 91.2% 54 8.8%

 All other Treasury 76 70 92.1 6 7.9 b

 Internal Revenue Service 444 368 82.9 76 17.1

 U.S. Customs 376 184 48.9 192 51.1

Department of Treasury 896 622 69.4% 274 30.6%

All agencies 1,573 1,220 77.6% 353 22.4%

agency Total Number Percent Number Percent a

Monetary records 

and reporting

Laundering/ 

racketeering

Referring

law enforcement

Table 1. Matters concluded by U.S. attorneys with money laundering 

as lead charge, by investigating agency, 2001

1994 1996 1998 2000

0

200

400

600

800

Suspects referred for

U.S. Department of Treasury

U.S. Department of Justice

Title 31 offenses

2001 1994 1996 1998 2000

0

250

500

750

1,000

Suspects referred for 

U.S. Department of Treasury

U.S. Department of Justice

Title 18 offenses

2001

From 1994 to 2001 the number of Treasury referrals declined 59% for record/

reporting violations (Title 31) and 37% for laundering/racketeering violations

(Title 18)

Note: The money laundering referral was the lead charge.

Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, central system file.

Figures 2 and 3

11The provisions of the Homeland Security Act of

2002 (P.L. 107-296), transferred the Treasury

Department's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,

Firearms and Explosives in the Department of

Justice. Treasury’s Secret Service became a

part of the Department of Homeland Security.
(not shown in table). The number of

suspects whom the IRS referred for

money laundering offenses decreased

59% from 1,077 in 1994 to 444 in

2001. Reduction in referrals was greater for monetary record and reporting

violations (-83%) than for laundering/

racketeering offenses (-41%). 

The Secret Service investigates financial fraud schemes and currency

counterfeiting. During 2001 the Secret

Service referred 8 money laundering

matters, down from 19 in 2000. The

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms referred 26 money laundering

matters to U.S. attorneys during 2001.

Referrals by Justice agencies

During 2001 law enforcement agencies

of the Department of Justice referred

614 (39%) money laundering suspects

to U.S attorneys, the bulk of which

were for laundering/racketeering

offenses with specified unlawful activities (91%). The number of Justice

referrals with a laundering/racketeering

violation peaked in 1995 with 725 referrals and decreased in 1998 (425)

before increasing to 650 during 2001. 

The FBI was the source of the largest

number of Title 18 referrals (31%). The

FBI has primary or dual jurisdiction

over most of the specified unlawful

activities listed under the money

laundering statutes. The FBI’s Money

Laundering Unit uncovers money

laundering schemes which are a part 

of drug trafficking, organized crime,

violent crime, and white collar crime. 

 Money Laundering Offenders, 1994-2001 5

The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (BSA)

gave Treasury authority to require

monetary record and reporting by financial

institutions. The intent was to prevent

criminals from using financial institutions

to conceal or launder money generated

from crime. (See 31 U.S.C. §§

5311-5332.) Initially used to deter tax

evasion and money laundering by organized crime, the BSA statutes are applied in

the investigation of an array of offenses

ranging from drug trafficking to financing

terrorist acts. 

BSA regulations enable the detection of

criminal, tax, and regulatory violations by

providing a paper trail that follows the flow

of money. Financial institutions are

required to report transactions involving —

• currency of more than $10,000

(Currency Transaction Report) 

• transportation of more than $10,000 in

currency into or out of the United States

(Currency or Other Monetary Instruments

Report)

• suspicious activity that may indicate a

law has been broken (Suspicious Activity

Report). 

The Money Laundering Control Act of

1986 criminalized money laundering,

creating the first Federal money laundering laws (18 U.S.C. §§ 1956, 1957). The

offenses included knowingly helping to

launder money from criminal activity,

knowingly engaging in a monetary transaction of more than $10,000 with property

derived from criminal activity, and structuring transactions to avoid BSA reporting

requirements. The act also enumerated

SUA’s.

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988

enhanced reporting requirements (stricter

identification and record keeping when

using cash to buy monetary instruments)

and expanded criminal and civil penalties

against money laundering. It also provided

the Treasury with authority to require

geographically targeted currency transaction reports.

The Money Laundering Suppression

Act of 1994 created more stringent

requirements on the procedures used by

financial institution examiners and

expanded examiner training to improve

detection of laundering in financial 

institutions. 

The Money Laundering and Financial

Crimes Strategy Act of 1998 focused on

counter-money laundering support at the

State and local levels. The act created the

following: 

• The National Money Laundering Report.

Treasury, together with Justice, set forth a

national plan for all levels of government

to coordinate anti-money laundering activities. The 2002 objectives included

enhancing law enforcement of money

laundering organizations and systems,

improving State and local law enforcement

efforts, and measuring the effectiveness

of anti-money laundering activities. 

• Designation of areas at a high risk for

financial crimes/money laundering activity

(High Intensity Financial Crime Areas)

• Financial Crime-Free Communities

support programs that provide “seed

money” of up to $300,000 to State and

local programs to counter money

laundering.

The Strengthening America Act by

Providing Appropriate Tools Required

to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism

(USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001 toughened

accountability of U.S. banks in their

dealings with foreign correspondent

banks, strengthened laws responding to

the problem of terrorist financing and its

connection with money laundering, and

strengthened asset forfeiture laws in

matters involving funding of terrorist activities. 

In addition, the USA PATRIOT Act created

a new money laundering statute: Bulk

cash smuggling (18 U.S.C. § 5332). The

new statute prohibits the concealment and

transfer of more than $10,000 across the

border with the intent to evade reporting

requirements. Convicted defendants are

subject to a greater sentence than a

reporting violation (that is, 18 U.S.C. §

5316) and all property involved in bulk

cash smuggling is subject to criminal

and/or civil forfeiture.

Money

Laundering and

Related Federal

Legislation

.The Money

Laundering

Control Act

(1986)

The AntiDrug Abuse

Act (1988)

.

The Money

Laundering

and Financial

Crimes

Strategy Act

(1998)

.

.Bank

Secrecy Act

(1970)

USA

PATRIOT

Act (2001)

.

The Money

Laundering

Suppression Act

(1994)

.
Of the 30,708 total matters referred by

the FBI for prosecution during 2001,

1.4% had money laundering as the

lead charge.

The Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA) often works in conjunction with

other agencies in investigating money

laundering as it pertains to drug offending. During 2001 the DEA referred to

U.S. attorneys 139 matters with money

laundering as the lead charge. These

comprised about 1% of the 16,844

DEA referrals.

Referrals by other agencies 

As a money service business, though a

non-banking institution, the U.S. Postal

Service (USPS) is required to comply

with the Bank Secrecy Act reporting

requirements. The USPS also investigates the illicit use of postal financial

products to include money laundering.

The USPS referred 25 money laundering matters to U.S. attorneys for prosecution (less than 1% the 4,010 referrals

for all matters referred by the USPS). 

Matters prosecuted

Of money laundering matters

concluded during 2001, 54% were

declined for further prosecution. Forty

percent of laundering/racketeering

matters were prosecuted in U.S. district

court, and 64% of monetary record and

reporting violations were prosecuted.

(Exporting/importing monetary instruments had the highest prosecution rate

of the component offenses that

comprise money laundering: 87%.)

From 1994 to 2001 the prosecution

rate for monetary record and reporting

offenses increased from 38% to 64%

while the prosecution rate for

laundering/racketeering declined

slightly (from 46% in 1994 to 40% in

2001).

• Of the 855 declinations for prosecution, 13% were prosecuted by other

6 Federal Justice Statistics Program

Reporting of suspicious activity 

From 1997 to 2001 the number of 

Suspicious Activity Reports submitted

increased 206%. States with the highest

suspicious activity reporting rates per

100,000 persons in the general 

population were New York, Nevada, 

and California (derived from FinCEN,

SAR Activity Report, 2002).

The New York metropolitan area had 

more than an estimated 14,000 Suspicious Activity Reports filed in fiscal years

1998 and 1999, with a reported aggregate

amount of over $33 billion (National Drug

Intelligence Center, 2001). In the same

period, Los Angeles had the second

highest number, 5,171, with an aggregated value of more than $7 billion.

Suspicious Activity Reports filed 

for money laundering violations,

1997-2001

Suspicious Activity Reports filed for

money laundering violations per 100,000

State residents, 2001

SAR filing rate per 100,000 population

< 15

16-30

31-50

Figure 4 > 50 Source: Financial Crimes Enforce-

 ment, U.S. Department of the 

 Treasury, The SAR Activity Review, 3.

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

0

40,000

80,000

120,000

Number of SAR filings

April 1 March 31

--Less than 0.5%. 

a

630 defendants were charged with a money laundering-related offense as a secondary offense.

b

Not reported on indictment because cases were sting cases in which SUA did not apply or information was not recorded during court processing.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

Failure to file Currency Transaction Report (CTR) (31 U.S.C. § 5313) 3 --

Structuring monetary transactions (31 U.S.C. § 5324) 94 6.4

Exporting/importing monetary instruments (31 U.S.C. § 5316) 135 9.1

232 16.0%

Monetary record and reporting offenses 

(Title 31, Bank Secrecy Act offenses)

Illegal money changing business (18 U.S.C. § 1960) 5 --

Unknown/not reported 17 1.2 b

Public-order 40 2.7

Drug 2 --

Property 39 2.6

Violent 42 2.8

Specified unlawful activity (SUA) associated with money laundering

140 9.5

Engaging in transactions using property derived 

from specified unlawful activities (18 U.S.C. § 1957)

Unknown/not reported 133 8.9 b

Public-order 75 5.1

Drug 175 11.8

Property 693 47.1

Violent 24 1.6

Specified unlawful activity (SUA) associated with money laundering

Laundering of monetary instruments (18 U.S.C. § 1956) 1,100 74.5

Laundering/racketeering offenses (Title 18 offenses) 1,245 84.0%

Totala 1,477 100.0%

Most serious offense charged Total Percent

Table 2. Defendants charged in U.S. district court with a money laundering

offense, by most serious offense charged, 2001
authorities or prosecuted on other

charges (not shown in table).

• 23% of matters were declined for lack

of criminal intent, 19% due to insufficient or weak evidence, and 17% at the

request of the referring agency (not

shown in table).

Cases filed in U.S. district court

During 2001, 1,477 defendants were

charged with money laundering.

Laundering/racketeering offenses

comprised 84% (laundering of

monetary instruments, 74.5% and

engaging in monetary transactions

using property derived from specified

unlawful activity, 9.5%), and monetary

record and reporting 16% of cases

(exporting/importing monetary instruments, 9%, structuring financial transactions, 6%) (table 2).

The principal money laundering

statutes (18 U.S.C. § 1956 and 1957)

apply in cases where transactions

involved proceeds from a broad range

of specified unlawful activities. During

2001, 1,100 defendants were charged

with laundering of monetary

instruments.

Of these defendants, 63% were also

charged with a property offense (for

example, bank fraud, embezzlement,

and counterfeiting); 16%, with a drug

offense (for example, importing/exporting controlled substance and selling or

distributing marijuana). Public-order

offenses (for example, racketeering,

bribery, and extortion) comprised 7% 

and violent offenses (includes kidnaping and bank robbery) 2% of cases in

which money laundering was the most

serious offense filed. Specified unlawful activities information was not

indicated in 12% of cases. 

Of the 140 defendants charged with

engaging in monetary transactions

using property derived from specified

unlawful activity, the most common

SUA’s included bank robbery and

kidnaping (30%) followed by publicorder (29%) and property offenses

(28%).

Adjudication of money laundering

defendants in U.S. district court

About 88% of 1,420 adjudicated defendants were convicted. Of the 1,243

convicted defendants, 91% had

pleaded guilty, and 9% were found

guilty at trial (table 3).

Of the 177 cases that did not result 

in a conviction, most (82%) were

dismissed. Ninety-four percent of

defendants adjudicated for

exporting/importing monetary instruments were convicted, and of those

convicted, 98% had pleaded guilty.

Monetary reporting and recording

offenses had a slightly higher conviction rate (92%) compared to

laundering/racketeering offenses

(87%). 

 Money Laundering Offenders, 1994-2001 7

Matters concluded in fiscal year.

Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys,

1994 1996 1998 2000

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percent of matters prosecuted

Monetary record and reporting

Laundering/racketeering

2001

central system file.

1994 1996 1998 2000

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percent of cases convicted

2001

Cases terminated in fiscal year.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S.

Laundering/racketeering

Monetary record and reporting

Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

From 1994 to 2001 the percentage

prosecuted of those suspected 

of monetary record and reporting

offenses (as lead charge) increased

from 38% to 64%. Prosecutions for

laundering/racketeering declined from

46% to 40% of suspects considered.

In 1994, 77% of defendants 

adjudicated for monetary record and

reporting were convicted; in 2001,

92% were convicted. The percent of

laundering/racketeering defendants

convicted rose from 81% to 87%.

Figures 5 and 6

 Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

Failure to report currency transaction 5 80.0 4 4 0 1 1 0

Structuring transactions 96 90.6 87 85 2 9 7 2

Exporting/importing monetary instruments 140 93.6 131 129 2 9 8 1

Monetary record and reporting 241 92.1 222 218 4 19 16 3

Prohibition of money exchange 6 100.0 6 6 0 0 0 0

Engaging in transactions 130 92.3 120 107 13 10 10 0

Laundering of monetary instrument 1,043 85.8 895 799 96 148 119 29

Laundering/racketeering 1,179 86.6 1,021 912 109 158 129 29

Total 1,420 87.5% 1,243 1,130 113 177 145 32

Most serious offense filed Total convicted Total Guilty plea Trial Total Dismissed Trial

Percent Convicted Not convicted

Number of defendants in criminal cases terminating during 2001 who were —

Table 3. Disposition of cases adjudicated in U.S. district court, by money laundering as most serious offense, 2001
Case processing time

During 2001, the average processing

time from filing to disposition was 17

months for money laundering defendants. Of money laundering cases

adjudicated, trials took an average of

22 months (from case filing to disposition), compared to an average of 15

months for cases which were the result

of a guilty plea (of the 1,420 criminal

cases terminating in U.S. district courts

in 2001). Laundering/racketeering

offenses were processed on average

within 18 months, 7 months longer than

monetary records and report violations.

Characteristics of defendants

convicted of money laundering

Defendants sentenced for money

laundering as the most serious filing

offense were primarily male (80%),

U.S. citizens (77%), over age 35

(70%), and white (52%) (table 4). One

in three defendants convicted of money

laundering had a prior adult conviction.

Defendants with a monetary record and

reporting filing offense were less apt to

be U.S. citizens (52%) and comparatively less likely to have a prior criminal

history (21%) than laundering/racketeering defendants. A greater share of

defendants with a monetary record and

reporting offense were female (29%)

and Hispanic (48%) than defendants

convicted of laundering/racketeering

offenses.

8 Federal Justice Statistics Program

Money laundering as a secondary

offense

In addition to the 1,477 defendants

charged with money laundering as the

primary charge during 2001, money

laundering was a secondary offense in

630 cases. Of these 630 cases, the most

serious offense charged was drug-related

(90%), followed by property (6%), publicorder (4%), and violent offenses (1%).

 

Between 1994 and 2001 the number of

defendants with any money launderingrelated charges filed in U.S. district court

reached a peak in 1998 at 2,712 cases

(an increase of 42.5% from 1994),

followed by a decrease to 2,107 cases in

2001 (but an overall increase of 10.7% in

number of cases from 1994). The number

of defendants with money laundering as a

secondary charge increased 11%, and the

number of defendants with money

laundering as the most serious offense

increased 10%.

Ninety-two percent of the 623 defendants

adjudicated for money laundering as a

secondary offense during 2001 were

convicted. Of those convicted, 6% of

convictions were obtained via trial verdicts.

Drug trafficking had the highest rate of

conviction (92%).

About 90% of defendants

convicted of money laundering 

as a secondary offense received

a prison sentence. Rates of

imprisonment varied across the

types of offenses (drug offenses,

90%; property offenses, 73%; 

and public-order offenses, 72%).

Defendants with a drug offense 

as the most serious offense

received prison terms with an

average 97 months, compared 

to 44 months for property offenders. Prison terms for public-order

offenses (including racketeering/

extortion) had an average 

of 70 months. 

Note: Detail excludes observations missing a particular characteristic.

--Not calculated, too few cases.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts criminal master file, fiscal year.

Public-order 25 84.0 18 3 0 69.5

Drug 560 92.1 465 33 18 97.3

Property 34 88.3 25 5 0 43.8

Violent 4 100.0 4 0 0 --

Total 623 91.7% 512 41 18 93.5

sentence 

Other (in months)

Probation

only

Any

prison

Percent

convicted

Total

adjudicated

Most serious

offense filed

Mean imposed

prison

Number of persons

sentenced to —

Most serious offense of defendants adjudicated and sentenced with

money laundering as a secondary offense, 2001

Between 1994 and 2001 defendants charged

with money laundering as either a primary or

secondary offense were most often charged

with money laundering as their primary offense 

1994 1997 2000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Number of defendants with money

Laundering/racketeering

Drug trafficking

Violent

Property

laundering as primary or secondary offense

Public-order

2001

 reporting

 Monetary recordand

Figure 7

During 2001, 80% of monetary

record and reporting offenses 

and about 50% of laundering/

racketeering offenses were

disposed of in 1 year or less

0 12 24 36 48

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Percent of cases disposed

Months from filing to disposition

60

Monetary record

and reporting

Laundering/

racketeering

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S.

1994 1996 1998 2000 Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

0

20

40

60

Average number of months 

Laundering/racketeering

Monetary record and reporting

of prison imposed

2001

The average prison term for a Federal

money laundering offense increased

from 44 months in 1994 to 48 months

in 2001

Figure 8 Figure 9
Sentencing outcomes

During 2001, of the 1,243 defendants

convicted for money laundering, 72%

received a sentence to a prison term,

and 24% received probation only (table

5). Defendants convicted of laundering/

racketeering (79%) were more likely

than defendants convicted of monetary

record and reporting violations (40%)

to receive a term of imprisonment. 

Eighty percent of defendants convicted

of laundering of monetary instruments

or of engaging in transactions from

unlawful activity received a sentence to

prison. Imprisonment was less likely 

for defendants convicted of exporting/

importing monetary instruments (41%)

and structuring illegal financial transactions (38%).

The average prison sentence imposed 

for defendants convicted of money

laundering was 48 months. The 712

defendants that received a prison

sentence for laundering of monetary

instruments received a longer prison

term, on average, than for other money

laundering offenses (53 months). More

than half of defendants convicted of

structuring financial transactions

received probation only as a sentence.

Probation terms imposed were greatest, on average, for laundering of

monetary instruments (44 months) and

least, for structuring financial transactions (31 months). A total of 256 defendants with money laundering as the

most serious offense of conviction

received an average fine of $40,808.

The median fine amount was $2,750.

 Money Laundering Offenders, 1994-2001 9

Note: Detail excludes defendants for whom a particular characteristic was not reported.

*

A criminal record is limited to prior adult convictions. For some defendants in this table, it is further limited 

to the portion that is relevant for calculating sentences under the Federal sentencing guidelines.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file was merged with Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) and

U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) data files. These latter two files contain information on characteristics of defendants.

Prior adult convictions 381 33.4 338 36.2 43 20.9

No convictions 759 66.6% 596 63.8% 163 79.1%

Prior criminal history*

Non-U.S. citizen 265 23.4 168 18.1 97 47.8

U.S. citizen 867 76.6% 761 81.9% 106 52.2%

Citizenship

60 or older 103 9.1 88 9.5 15 7.4

45-59 yr 335 29.7 289 31.2 46 22.6

35-44 yr 350 31.0 286 30.9 64 31.4

25-34 yr 286 25.3 231 25.0 55 27.0

18-24 yr 55 4.9% 31 3.4% 24 11.8%

Age

Other 62 5.5 52 5.6 10 4.9

Hispanic 292 25.8 193 20.8 99 48.3

Black non-Hispanic 186 16.4 162 17.5 24 11.7

White non-Hispanic 593 52.3% 521 56.1% 72 35.1%

Race/ethnicity

Female 228 20.0 168 18.0 60 29.1

Male 912 80.0% 766 82.0% 146 70.9%

Gender

Total 1,243 100.0% 1,021 100.0% 222 100.0%

characteristics Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Monetary record and reporting

(Title 31 offenses)

Laundering/racketeering

Defendant Total (Title 18 offenses)

Table 4. Characteristics of convicted money laundering defendants, 2001

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, fiscal year.

Note: Detail excludes observations for which a particular characteristic was not reported.

--Not calculated, too few cases.

Failure to report currency transaction 4 50.0 50.0 0.0 8.5 -- 30.0 -- 0 -- --

Structuring transactions 87 37.9 54.0 8.0 13.4 10.0 30.9 36.0 41 7,044 2,500

Exporting/importing 131 40.5 46.6 13.0 19.6 47.5 32.6 36.0 25 2,694 2,000

Monetary record and reporting 222 39.6 49.5 10.8 17.0 12.0 31.8 36.0 66 5,397 2,000

Prohibition of money exchange 6 0.0 100.0 0.0 -- -- 24.0 -- 6 1,417 --

Engaging in transactions 120 79.2 19.2 1.7 41.6 33.0 40.1 36.0 27 33,916 4,000

Laundering of monetary instruments 895 79.6 17.3 3.1 53.2 50.8 43.6 36.0 157 58,386 3,000

Laundering/racketeering 1,021 79.0 18.0 2.9 51.9 37.0 42.6 36.0 190 53,109 3,000

Total 1,243 72.0 23.7 4.3 48.4 36.0 38.5 36.0 256 $40,808 $2,750

Other Mean Median Mean Median Total Mean Median

Probation

only

Any

Most serious offense filed Total prison

Fine

Probation 

(in months)

Imposed prison

Percent sentence (in months)

Table 5. Type of sentence imposed following a conviction for a money laundering offense, 2001
Defendants convicted of money

laundering are also subject to criminal

forfeiture (18 U.S.C. § 982). During

2001, 85 defendants convicted of a

money laundering offense were also

charged under the criminal forfeiture

statute. All property may be forfeitable,

even legitimate funds that were

commingled with illicit assets. 

All property associated with the money

laundering offense is also subject to

civil forfeiture. Civil (and criminal)

forfeiture penalties can be assessed 

for monetary record and reporting

violations (for conduct violating 31

U.S.C. §§ 5313, 5316, or 5324)12 and in

violation of laundering/racketeering

statutes (18 U.S.C. §§ 1956, 1957, or

1960).13

Defendants sentenced under the

U.S. Sentencing Commission’s

Money Laundering Guidelines

During 2001, 951 defendants were

sentenced for money laundering under

the three money laundering sentencing

guidelines.14

Sixty-five percent of defendants were

sentenced for laundering of monetary

instruments. Thirteen percent were

sentenced for engaging in monetary

transactions using property derived

from unlawful activities, and 22% were

sentenced for exporting/importing

monetary instruments, structuring

transactions to evade reporting requirements, or failing to file a currency transaction report.

10 Federal Justice Statistics Program

State activities against money

laundering

In 1985 Arizona became the first State 

to adopt legislation against money

laundering. Since then, 35 other States

have adopted similar legislation.

States follow four models to some degree:

• the Federal statute (31 USC §§ 1956-

1957) (used notably by New York) 

• the President’s Commission on Model

State Drug Laws (1993), including money

laundering, money transmitting, asset

forfeiture, and related provisions 

• the Money Transmitter Regulators

Association, a State regulator group and

publisher of a model statute

• the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, model

statutes.

State legislation varies widely, covering a 

spectrum from specified unlawful

activities, such as racketeering or corrupt

activities and crime for profit, to any

felony. The basis of culpability across

States with statutes is a transaction 

involving the proceeds of a statutorily

defined unlawful activity. 

Transactions involving criminal proceeds

with the intent to conceal the source of the

proceeds are frequently coupled with the

requirement that the actor know that the

proceeds were derived from specified

unlawful activity. In some States the transaction has to have taken place in a bank;

in others, any transaction qualifies.

Transportation is included in some State

statutes to criminalize the movement of

proceeds without an intervening transaction. 

Following the enactment of the USA

PATRIOT Act, 10 States (Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland,

Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and New

York) adopted new or amended legislation

to regulate the money transmitter industry.

In fiscal years 2000 and 2001, 17 sites

were awarded Financial Crime-Free

Community grants from a total of $2.9

million allocated. This money is used to

enhance intrastate efforts against money

laundering — to include developing

capabilities to detect and prosecute

money laundering.

36 States have adopted money laundering legislation since 1985 

Adopted money laundering statutes

Commercial defendants and

money laundering

Businesses comprised less than 2% of 

all money laundering-related defendants

adjudicated during 2001. The 22

businesses charged with money

laundering as the most serious offense

included auto dealerships, grocery

stores, banks, furniture stores, restaurants, physicians’ offices, construction

firms, beauty shops, and research firms.

Of the 22 charged, 15 were convicted

(68.2%); 13 received probation (with an

average term of 38.8 months), and 8

were fined (an average of $68,454). 

Individuals comprised at least 98% 

of defendants charged with money

laundering offenses, 1994-2001

1994 1997 2000

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

Number of defendants

Businesses

Individuals

Money laundering was the most serious

offense filed.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S.

Courts, criminal master file.

1231 U.S.C. § 5317 

1318 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A) 

14The primary guideline at sentencing is used 

for reporting money laundering defendants

sentenced. The Sentencing Guidelines were

amended on November 1, 2001, effectively

consolidating sections 2S1.1 (laundering of

monetary instruments) and 2S1.2 (engaging in

monetary transactions in property derived from

unlawful activity) and more closely tying money

laundering violations to the underlying offense.

Figure 10
The guidelines permit a longer

sentence if a defendant organized,

managed, or led the money laundering.

Of defendants sentenced under the

money laundering guidelines, 84%

received no upward adjustment; 5%

received a sentence adjustment for

playing a role as manager, organizer,

supervisor or leader; 4%, an adjustment for managing five or more participants (not specifically organizing or

leading); and 7%, an adjustment for

leading or organizing five or more

people (table 6). 

Of the 951 defendants sentenced

under the money laundering guidelines,

51% were convicted for laundering less

than $200,000, 44% were convicted of

laundering between $200,000 and $10

million, and 4% had laundered more

than $10 million (not shown in table). 

Methodology

The source of the data used in this

report is the BJS Federal Justice

Statistics Program (FJSP) database. 

The FJSP compiles comprehensive

information on individuals and corporations processed through the Federal

justice system from source files

provided by the Executive Office of

United States Attorneys (EOUSA), the

Administrative Office of the United

States Courts (AOUSC), the U.S.

Marshals Service (USMS), the Drug

Enforcement Administration (DEA), the

United States Sentencing Commission

(USSC), and the Federal Bureau of

Prisons (BOP). 

In this report, money laundering offenders were defined according to selected

Federal criminal statutes. (See page

2.) For suspects in matters referred

and concluded, the “lead charge” was

used to describe money laundering

suspects. This pool includes criminal

referrals for which the assistant U.S.

attorneys indicated a money laundering

statute as the “lead charge” or primary

basis for investigation and for which at

least 1 hour of investigation time was

spent.

The AOUSC provided U.S. district

court data on money laundering defendants in criminal cases filed, adjudicated, and sentenced. The “most

serious offense” is the filing offense

with the statutory maximum penalty.

Money laundering violations from all

offenses filed for a particular defendant

were also reported. Specified Unlawful

Activities (SUA’s) were aggregated to

BJS offense categories as shown in

Appendix table 1 and reported in table

2. 

Data from the USSC showing defendants with money laundering as the

primary sentencing guideline overlaps

with, but does not represent the same

pool of defendants described in the AO

data. Both datasets include defendants

for whom the offense of money

laundering resulted in the longest

sentence though differences arise as

defendants could be sentenced under

more than one guideline. Checks were

made on the two data series for 2001, 

and money laundering defendants

were found to share a comparable

profile.

 Money Laundering Offenders, 1994-2001 11

Racketeering-liquor

Extortion-racketeering threats

Racketeering-robbery

Intimidation of witnesses

Obscene material

Other Federal statutes

Gambling-lottery-transmit wager

Trading with the enemy

Custom laws

Bribery

Marijuana-manufacture

Marijuana-sell/distribute/dispense

Controlled substance-import/export

Controlled substance-manufacture 

Controlled substance-sell/distribute/dispense

Narcotics-import/export

Narcotics-substance-sell/distribute/dispense

Bank embezzlement

Embezzlement of public money

Bank fraud

Bankruptcy fraud

Postal-interstate wire-radio fraud

Counterfeiting

Transportation of stolen property

Larceny and theft-bank

Other interstate commerce

Bank robbery

 Kidnaping

Violent offenses Property offenses Drug offenses Public-order offenses

Appendix table 1. Detail of BJS offense categories used to group specified unlawful activities in table 2

The Bureau of Justice Statistics is

the statistical agency of the U.S.

Department of Justice. Lawrence A.

Greenfeld is director.

Mark Motivans, BJS Statistician,

wrote this report under the supervision of Steven K. Smith. The following individuals reviewed this report

and provided substantive comments:

Stefan Cassella, Alice Dery, John

Hyland, and Les Joseph of the Asset

Forfeiture and Money Laundering

Section of the Department of

Justice; Julie Samuels and Clara

Dunn of the Department of Justice

Criminal Division; Lou Reedt, Courtney Semisch, and Paula Desio of the

U.S. Sentencing Commission; and,

Pragati Patrick and Marika Litras of

the Administrative Office of the U.S.

Courts. William Adams, Avi Bhati,

Barbara Parthasarathy, and Juliet

Scarpa of the Urban Institute verified

this report. Thomas Judd, BJA

consultant, and Carol Ferguson, of

the Office of the Arizona Attorney

General compiled the information on

state money laundering statutes.

Carolyn Williams and Tom Hester

edited the report.

July 2003, NCJ 199574

Note: In 2001, 951 defendants were sentenced

with money laundering as the primary sentencing guideline. Detail excludes observations

where a particular characteristic was not

reported. 

Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 

FY 2001 datafile.

69 7.3

Leader or organizer of 5 

or more participants

36 3.8

Manager of 5 or more

participants

supervisor or leader 51 5.4

Manager, organizer

No adjustment 794 83.6

Total* 951 100%

Role in offense Number Percent

Sentenced

defendants

Table 6. Sentencing adjustment for

money laundering defendants

sentenced in 2001, by role in offense
Survey of State and Federal inmates

Of the more than 55,000 drug offenders in

Federal prison during 1997, 4% indicated

they had been laundering drug money at

the time of arrest, compared to 3% of the

217,000 drug offenders in State prison. 

Of State and Federal inmates serving time

for a drug offense, about half (144,364)

indicated that at the time of their arrest

they were either selling to users or distributing drugs to dealers.

About 11% of State and Federal inmates

who reported having sold drugs at the time

of arrest indicated that they had been

involved in running drug money. (Thirteen

percent of drug traffickers in Federal

prisons and 11% of State traffickers

reported having engaged in running drug

money.)

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of Inmates in State and Federal 

Correctional Facilities, 1997.

 State inmates 116,222 10.7

 Federal inmates 28,142 13.4

All inmates 144,364 11.2%

Drug traffickers Total Percent

Transported drug money

(Of inmates arrested for distributing drugs to users and/or dealers)

“At the time of your arrest were you a money runner?” 

 State inmates 217,028 2.9

 Federal inmates 55,742 4.4

All inmates 272,770 3.2%

Drug offenders Total Percent

Laundered drug money

Questions posed to a 1997 sample of State and Federal inmates serving a drug sentence: 

“At the time of your arrest were you laundering drug money?”

Estimated percentage of drug offenders in State and Federal prisons 

reporting to have laundered and/or transported drug money

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/BJS

Permit No. G-91

NCJ 199574 U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300