Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 47141

1Section 402(b) of the Money Laundering

Suppression Act states simply that in administering

the new statutory exemption procedures

the Secretary of the Treasury shall seek to reduce,

within a reasonable period of time, the number of

reports required to be filed in the aggregate by

depository institutions pursuant to section 5313(a)

of title 31 * * * by at least 30 percent of the

number filed during the year preceding [September

23, 1994,] the date of enactment of [the Money

Laundering Suppression Act].

2The Interim Rule used the term bank to define

the class of financial institutions to which the

Interim Rule applied. As defined in 31 CFR

103.11(c), that term includes both commercial

banks and other classes of depository institutions at

which the language of 31 U.S.C. 5313 is directed.

§ 914.16 [Amended]

3. Section 914.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraphs (cc)

and (dd).

[FR Doc. 97–23725 Filed 9–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

31 CFR Part 103

RIN 1506–AA11

Financial Crimes Enforcement

Network; Amendment to the Bank

Secrecy Act Regulations—Exemptions

From the Requirement To Report

Transactions in Currency

AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement

Network, Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document contains a

final rule amending the Bank Secrecy

Act regulations. The amendment will

eliminate the requirement to report

transactions in currency in excess of

$10,000 between depository institutions

and certain classes of ‘‘exempt persons’’

defined in the rule. It will modify (and,

as modified, will supersede), an interim

rule on the same subject, to reflect the

comments that were requested when the

interim rule was published.

There appears elsewhere in today’s

edition of the Federal Register a notice

of proposed rulemaking that would

further modify the rules for granting

exemptions from the currency

transaction report filing requirements.

The final rule and the notice of

proposed rulemaking are additional

steps in a process intended to achieve

the reduction set by the Money

Laundering Suppression Act of 1994 in

the number of Bank Secrecy Act

currency transaction reports required to

be filed annually by depository

institutions.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Djinis, Associate Director,

FinCEN, (703) 905–3819; Charles

Klingman, Financial Institutions Policy

Specialist, FinCEN, (703) 905–3602;

Stephen R. Kroll, Legal Counsel,

Cynthia L. Clark, on detail to the Office

of Legal Counsel, and Albert R. Zarate,

Attorney-Advisor, Office of Legal

Counsel, FinCEN, (703) 905–3590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Statutory Provisions

The Bank Secrecy Act, Titles I and II

of Pub. L. 91–508, as amended, codified

at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951–

1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–5330,

authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury,

inter alia, to issue regulations requiring

financial institutions to keep records

and file reports that are determined to

have a high degree of usefulness in

criminal, tax, and regulatory matters,

and to implement counter-money

laundering programs and compliance

procedures. Regulations implementing

Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act

(codified at 31 U.S.C. 5311–5330)

appear at 31 CFR Part 103. The

authority of the Secretary to administer

Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act has been

delegated to the Director of FinCEN.

The reporting by financial institutions

of transactions in currency in excess of

$10,000 has long been a major

component of the Department of the

Treasury’s implementation of the Bank

Secrecy Act. The reporting requirement

is imposed by 31 CFR 103.22, a rule

issued under the broad authority

granted to the Secretary of the Treasury

by 31 U.S.C. 5313(a) to require reports

of domestic coins and currency

transactions.

Four new provisions (31 U.S.C.

5313(d) through (g)) concerning

exemptions were added to 31 U.S.C.

5313 by the Money Laundering

Suppression Act of 1994 (the ‘‘Money

Laundering Suppression Act’’), Title IV

of the Riegle Community Development

and Regulatory Improvement Act of

1994, Pub. L. 103–325 (September 23,

1994). According to subsection (d)(1),

the Treasury must exempt a depository

institution from the requirement to

report currency transactions with

respect to transactions between the

depository institution and the following

categories of entities:

(A) Another depository institution.

(B) A department or agency of the United

States, any State, or any political subdivision

of any State.

(C) Any entity established under the laws

of the United States, any State, or any

political subdivision of any State, or under

an interstate compact between 2 or more

States, which exercises governmental

authority on behalf of the United States or

any such State or political subdivision.

(D) Any business or category of business

the reports on which have little or no value

for law enforcement purposes.

Subsection (d)(2) requires the

Treasury to publish at least annually a

list of entities whose currency

transactions are exempt from reporting

under the mandatory rules. The

companion provisions of 31 U.S.C.

5313(e) authorize the Secretary to

permit a depository institution to grant

additional, discretionary, exemptions

from the currency transaction reporting

requirements. Subsection (f) places

limits on the liability of a depository

institution in connection with a

transaction that has been exempted from

reporting under either subsection (d) or

subsection (e) and provides for the

coordination of any exemption with

other Bank Secrecy Act provisions,

especially those relating to the reporting

of suspicious transactions. Subsection

(g) defines ‘‘depository institution’’ for

purposes of the new exemption

provisions.

The enactment of 31 U.S.C. 5313 (d)

through (g) reflects a congressional

intention to ‘‘reform * * * the

procedures for exempting transactions

between depository institutions and

their customers.’’ See H.R. Rep. 103–

652, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 186 (August

2, 1994).1 The administrative exemption

procedures at which the statutory

changes are directed are found in 31

CFR 103.22 (b)–(g).

Several reasons have been given for

the administrative exemption system’s

lack of success in eliminating routine

currency transactions from operation of

the Bank Secrecy Act rules. The first is

the retention by banks of liability for

making incorrect exemption

determinations. The second is the

complexity of the administrative

exemption procedures. Finally,

advances in technology have made it

less expensive for some banks to report

all currency transactions than to incur

the administrative costs and risks of

exempting customers and then

administering the terms of particular

exemptions properly.

II. The Interim Rule

On April 24, 1996, an interim rule

(the ‘‘Interim Rule’’) adding a new

paragraph (h) to the currency

transaction reporting rules in 31 CFR

103.22 was published in the Federal

Register. See 61 FR 18204. The Interim

Rule exempted, from the requirement to

report transactions in currency in excess

of $10,000, transactions occurring after

April 30, 1996, between banks 2 and
47142 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

3The broad definition of ‘‘United States’’ in

section 103.11(nn) applies.

4Again, the broad definition of ‘‘United States’’

applies.

5The NASDAQ category did not include stock

listed under the separate ‘‘Nasdaq Small-Cap

Issues’’ category.

6FinCEN has already issued a notice, FinCEN

Notice 97–1, to deal with one such uncertainty.

That notice makes clear that an institution may

decide, after August 15, 1996, that it wishes to

adopt the new exemption system for particular

customers, even if it did not do so, for existing

customers, before that date, so long as the necessary

exemption identifications are filed within 30 days

of the first transaction in currency that is sought to

be exempted under the new exemption procedures.

customers who fall into one of five

classes of exempt persons:

1. Banks, to the extent of their

banking operations and transactions

within the United States; 3

2. Departments and agencies of the

United States and of states and their

political subdivisions;

3. Any entity established under the

laws of the United States 4 or of any

state or its political subdivisions, or

under an interstate compact, that

exercises governmental authority on

behalf of the United States or any such

state or political subdivision;

4. ‘‘Listed corporations,’’ that is,

corporations whose common stock is

listed on the New York Stock Exchange

or the American Stock Exchange or has

been designated as a Nasdaq National

Market Security listed on the Nasdaq

Stock Market; 5

5. Subsidiaries of listed corporations

that are consolidated with such

corporations for federal income tax

purposes.

See 31 CFR 103.22(h)(2) (i)–(v). The

first three categories of exempt persons

specified above are those to whom an

exemption is required to be granted by

31 U.S.C. 5313(d)(1) (A)–(C). The final

two categories are those entities who are

exempted pursuant to the authority

contained in 31 U.S.C. 5313(d)(1)(D).

To treat a customer as exempt under

the Interim Rule, a bank must file a

single form (the same form now used by

banks to report a transaction in

currency) that identifies the exempt

person and the bank involved and must

generally take such steps to assure itself

that a person is an exempt person that

a reasonable and prudent bank would

take to protect itself from loan or other

fraud or loss based on misidentification

of a person’s status. Treatment of a

customer as an exempt person under the

Interim Rule protects a bank generally

from any penalty for failure to file a

currency transaction report with respect

to the exempt person’s currency

transactions, but it does not affect the

obligation of banks to file suspicious

activity reports. Currency transactions,

like other transactions, between a bank

and an exempt person remain subject to

the suspicious activity reporting

requirements of 31 CFR 103.21, as well

as the suspicious activity reporting

requirements of the federal bank

supervisory agencies. See also 12 CFR

21.11 (Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency); 12 CFR 208.20 (Federal

Reserve System); 12 CFR 353.3 (Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation); 12 CFR

563.180 (Office of Thrift Supervision);

12 CFR 748.1 (National Credit Union

Administration).

Because the Interim Rule

implemented certain provisions of the

Bank Secrecy Act and granted

significant relief from existing

regulatory requirements, it was made

effective on May 1, 1996, less than 30

days after its publication date. The

Interim Rule was, however,

accompanied by a request for comments

on the Rule’s terms.

It appears that the Interim Rule did

not immediately have the intended

effect of reducing the number of routine

currency transactions filed by

depository institutions. This may have

been attributable, at least in part, to

banks’ reluctance to use the new

exemption procedures until the Interim

Rule and proposals for the projected

second stage of currency transaction

filing relief (as to which comments were

solicited by the preamble to the Interim

Rule) were made final. Deferral of a

change in a bank’s procedures would

permit the automated systems on which

many institutions rely to be altered to

take account of all the revised currency

transaction filing rules at one time.

Unfamiliarity with and uncertainty

about the meaning of certain provisions

of the Interim Rule may also have

initially retarded the Rule’s use.6

Statistics based on the first half of this

year indicate that banks are making the

transition to the new, streamlined

exemption procedures set forth in the

Interim Rule. The number of CTR filings

for each of the months of February,

March, April, May, and June of 1997 is

less than the number of filings for those

same months in 1996. (FinCEN does not

yet have complete information

concerning CTR filings for July 1997.)

Thus, it appears that the Interim Rule is

beginning to have some effect on

decreasing the number of CTR filings.

FinCEN anticipates that banks will

continue to make the transition to the

new exemption procedures as they

become better acquainted, and more

comfortable, with the terms of the new

procedures. FinCEN also hopes that the

clarifications contained in this

document will continue to aid in that

transition.

III. Summary of Comments and

Revisions

A. Comments on the Notice—Overview

FinCEN received fifty-eight written

comments on the Interim Rule. Of these,

forty-four comments were submitted by

banks or bank holding companies, six

by banking trade associations, four by

credit unions, one by a credit union

trade association, and one each by a

compliance consulting firm, an

accounting firm, and a law firm, each on

its own behalf.

The commenters generally applauded

FinCEN’s efforts to improve the

exemption process. One bank

commenter, for example, noted with

approval ‘‘the scope and aggressiveness

of the Interim Rule’’ and found the Rule

‘‘a major step in reducing the Bank

Secrecy Act’s burden on financial

institutions without compromising the

BSA’s effectiveness’’ because it

permitted banks to eliminate the cost of

reporting ‘‘large denomination,

repetitive transactions with public

entities and major corporations engaged

in legitimate retail activity.’’ At the

same time, the commenters suggested a

number of ways in which the Interim

Rule might be improved, and they

raised several operating issues that

banks had encountered in applying the

Interim Rule.

Comments on the Interim Rule

focused primarily on five subjects: the

definition of an exempt subsidiary of a

listed corporation; other aspects of the

definition of exempt person; the time

frame within which a bank was

permitted to designate an existing

customer as an exempt person; the need

to clarify the relationship between the

provisions of paragraph (h) and the

terms of the administrative exemption

provisions of 31 CFR 103.22(b)–(g); and

the interplay between the Interim Rule

and previous regulatory guidance

provided by the Department of the

Treasury with respect to the currency

transaction reporting requirements. The

specifics of the comments and an

explanation of resulting modifications

to paragraph (h) are outlined below.

After full and careful consideration of

all the comments, 31 CFR 103.22(h), as

contained in the Interim Rule, is

modified, and, as modified, is adopted

as a final rule.

B. Final Rule

The format and substance of the final

rule and the Interim Rule are generally

the same. The final rule reflects the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 47143

7 Deletion of the reference to a specific date is not

intended in any way to alter the effective date of

this change in the Bank Secrecy Act regulations.

8Banks are permitted by 31 CFR 103.22(b)(2)(iii)

to grant a broader exemption for transactions by

government agencies.

following significant modifications to

the Interim Rule:

1. The definition of exempt person

has been clarified to make clear that

banks are eligible to be treated as

exempt persons because they are banks,

and then only with respect to their

domestic operations; a bank that is, or

is a subsidiary of, a listed company does

not for that reason obtain a second

ground for exemption;

2. The definition of exempt person

has been amended to treat as a ‘‘listed

entity’’ and entity, rather than just a

corporation, whose common stock or

analogous equity interests are listed on

an applicable stock exchange;

3. The definition of exempt person

has been amended to include any

subsidiary of a listed entity that is

organized under the laws of the United

States or a state and at least 51 percent

of whose common stock is owned by the

listed entity as shown in a reasonably

authenticated corporate officer’s

certificate, a reasonably authenticated

photocopy of Internal Revenue Service

Form 851 (Affiliation Schedule), or in

the Annual Report or Form 10–K that is

filed by the listed entity with the

Securities and Exchange Commission;

4. The definition of exempt person

has been amended to make clear that an

exempt person includes a financial

institution, other than a bank, that is a

listed entity or a subsidiary of a listed

entity, but only to the extent of such

entity’s domestic operations;

5. The time frame for designating a

customer as an exempt person has been

clarified to provide that a designation

may be made, for any customer, by the

close of the 30-day period beginning

after the day of the first reportable

transaction in currency with that person

that is sought to be exempted from

reporting under the terms of paragraph

(h);

6. Examples of entities exercising

governmental authority have been

added to the Interim Rule; and

7. A paragraph has been added to

make clear that, absent knowledge of a

loss of an exempt person’s status as

such, a bank satisfies its obligations

under paragraph (h) by verifying the

continued status of exempt persons at

least annually.

The changes adopted in the final rule

are intended to improve, clarify, and

refine the rule’s provisions in light of

the objectives FinCEN outlined when

the Interim Rule was published. Those

objectives are reducing the burden of

currency transaction reporting,

requiring reporting only of information

that is of value to law enforcement and

regulatory authorities, and, perhaps

most importantly, creating an

exemption system that is cost-effective

and that works. See 61 FR 18205.

IV. Specific Comments and Explanation

of Revisions

A discussion of the significant

comments on the Interim Rule appears

below. As noted, many of the comments

raised questions about the interaction

between the terms of paragraph (h) and

various operating requirements of the

administrative exemption system.

A. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(1)—Transactions in

Currency of Exempt Persons With Banks

Paragraph (h)(1) states that general

rule that no report is required under 31

CFR 103.22(a)(1) with respect to any

transaction in currency between an

exempt person and a bank. The only

changes made to this paragraph are

ministerial: the phrase ‘‘currency

transactions’’ in the title of paragraph

(h)(1) has been revised to read

‘‘transactions in currency,’’ and the

phrases ‘‘occurring after April 30,

1996,’’ in the title of paragraph (h) and

in the title of paragraph (h)(1), and ‘‘that

is conducted after April 30, 1996,’’ at

the end of paragraph (h)(1), have been

deleted as unnecessary in a final rule.7

For consistency, the phrase ‘‘occurring

after April 30, 1996’’ has also been

deleted as unnecessary in paragraph

(a)(1).

It should be noted that the exemption

language of the final rule is

fundamentally different from that of the

administrative exemption system.

Sections 103.22(a)(1) and 103.22(h)(1)

state affirmatively that the reporting

requirements of the section do not apply

to the transactions described in

paragraph (h). In contrast, the

administrative exemption provision, 31

CFR 103.22(b)(2), simply states that a

bank ‘‘may exempt’’ transactions

described in that paragraph from

reporting. Although, as noted in the

preamble to the Interim Rule, see 61 FR

18206, the provisions of paragraph

(h)(1) do not affirmatively prohibit

banks from continuing to report routine

currency transactions with exempt

persons (and the requirement that

exempt persons be designated as such

provides banks with operational

discretion to determine whether or not

to recognize the new provisions), banks

that continue to report such routing

transactions are supplying the

government with information that is not

required under the Bank Secrecy Act

regulations.

1. Use of Word ‘‘Bank’’ Rather Than

‘‘Depository Institution’’

FinCEN received no comment on its

use of the term ‘‘bank’’ instead of

‘‘depository institution’’ to define the

class of financial institutions, subject to

the Bank Secrecy Act, that are exempted

from the requirement to report

transactions in currency by paragraph

(h)(1), and the final rule continues to

use the former term. Although 31 U.S.C.

5313(d) refers to mandatory exemptions

for certain transactions in currency with

‘‘depository institutions,’’ the broad

definition of bank contained in 31 CFR

103.11(c) appears to include all

categories of institutions included in the

statutory ‘‘depository institution’’

definition, so that a change in

terminology was neither necessary nor

advisable (in view of the Bank Secrecy

Act regulations’ general use of the work

‘‘bank’’ for the classes of institutions

involved).

2. Coverage of all ‘‘Transactions in

Currency’’

At least one commenter asked

whether paragraph (h), intended to

exempt from reporting all ‘‘transactions

in currency’’ between exempt persons

and banks, despite the fact that the

administrative exemption system rules

of 31 CFR 103.22(b)(2) (i)–(ii) permit

banks to exempt from currency

transactions reporting only deposits and

withdrawals, of currency from existing

and specified accounts.8 The use of the

broader term is intentional, as paragraph

(h) seeks to elimate all transactions in

currency between exempt persons and

banks from the reporting rules of section

103.22 (subject to the limitation on

exemption for transactions carried out

by an exempt person as an agent for

another person, as set forth in paragraph

(h)(5)). As noted in more detail below,

however, the changes made to section

103.22 have no impact on the

requirement to report suspicious

transactions under 31 CFR 103.21, and

the fact that an exempt person wishes to

conduct a transaction other than a

deposit or withdrawal, or a transaction

that does not involve an existing

account with the bank involved, may

merit further investigation, and perhaps

reporting, under the rules of section

103.21.

3. Transactions by Exempt Persons With

Financial Institutions Other Than Banks

At least one commeter sought to

broaden the scope of subsection (h) to

include transactions between exempt
47144 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

9The term Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is itself

defined in § 103.11(rr).

persons and financial instituons other

than banks. No such change has been

made. Although, as noted below, banks

are permitted, in a change from prior

practice, to recognize ‘‘listed’’ non-bank

financial institutions as exempt persons,

a general grant of automatic exemption

for all transactions in currency in excess

of $10,000 between exempt persons, on

the one hand, and, for example, brokers

and dealers in securities, money

transmitters, or currency exchange

houses, on the other, is neither within

the Money Laundering Suppression Act

statutory mandate nor justified by the

realities of the operation of those

businesses.

B. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(2)—Definition of

Exempt Person

Paragraph (h)(2) continues to contain

the definition of those classes of

‘‘exempt persons’’ whose transactions in

currency with banks are exempt from

reporting under the final rule.

1. Banks

The Interim Rule defines an exempt

person to include a bank, to the extent

of the bank’s domestic operations. One

commenter asserted that the treatment

of banks as exempt persons ‘‘to the

extent of their domestic operations’’ is

less broad than the present exemption

provided for banks by section

103.22(b)(1)(ii). However the language

of paragraph (h)(2)(i) is simply a

restatement of the language of section

103.22(b)(1)(ii), when the latter

definition is read together with the

definition of ‘‘domestic’’ in section

103.11(k).

The final rule revises paragraphs

(h)(2)(iv) and (h)(2)(v) to make clear that

a bank is eligible to be treated as an

exempt person only with respect to its

domestic operations; a bank that is a

listed entity or a subsidiary of a listed

entity does not for that reason obtain a

second ground for exemption.

2. Subsidiaries or Affiliates of Banks

At least one commenter asked

whether the exempt person definition

included subsidiaries or affiliates of

banks (so that a transaction in currency

between a bank subsidiary and a second

bank would be exempt from reporting in

the same manner as a transaction

between the subsidiary’s bank parent

and the second bank.) The bank Secrecy

Act regulations do not generally treat

bank subsidiaries as falling within the

definition of bank for purposes of the

regulations, and until that basic concept

is re-evaluated, it is premature to extend

automatic relief for currency transaction

reporting purposes to non-bank

subsidiaries and affiliates of banks.

3. Government Entities

Paragraph (h)(2)(ii), which treats

various federal, state, and local

government departments and agencies

as exempt persons, is unchanged.

Several commenters asked about the

status of tribal governments and tribal

enterprises under paragraph (h). The

definition of ‘‘United States’’ in section

103.11(nn) includes ‘‘the Indian lands

(as that term is defined in the Indian

Gaming Regulatory Act),’’ 9 so that tribal

governments are eligible to be exempt

persons under paragraph (h); whether

particular enterprises conducted on

tribal lands, for example tribal casinos,

are themselves exempt depends upon

the manner in which they are organized

and operated. Thus, a tribal casino that

is operated as a department of a tribal

government would generally qualify as

an exempt person, but an independently

operated management company for such

a casino, or a corporation of which the

tribe was a shareholder, would likely

not so qualify. While FinCEN would be

pleased to provide further guidance on

that question on the basis of the facts of

a particular situation, it is not feasible

on the current state of the record do so

in the Bank Secrecy Act regulations

themselves.

One commenter argued that the

definition of government agency in

paragraph (h)(2)(ii) would exclude

exemption for agencies of the District of

Columbia. That is not the result of the

definition, since the definition of

‘‘United States’’ in section 103.11(nn)

includes the District of Columbia.

4. Entities That Exercise Governmental

Authority

Paragraph (h)(2)(iii), which treats as

exempt persons entities established by

federal, state, or local governments, or

by interstate compact, that exercise

governmental authority, also is

unchanged.

5. Listed Entities

The Interim Rule defines an exempt

person to include corporations listed on

national securities exchanges. Several

commenters suggested that the

definition of exempt person be

broadened to include partnerships and

other non-corporations listed on those

exchanges. One commenter pointed out

that the rationale FinCEN gave for

exempting listed corporations—i.e., the

scale of enterprises listed on the

nation’s largest securities exchanges,

and the variety of internal and external

controls to which they are subject, make

their use for money laundering

sufficiently unlikely to permit

relaxation of the current transaction

reporting rules—applies to any listed

entity regardless of its form. After

consideration of such comments,

Treasury has amended the Interim Rule

to expand the definition of an exempt

person in paragraph (h)(2)(iv) to include

any entity listed on an applicable

national securities exchange.

A number of commenters cited the

difficulty of determining whether a

customer was listed on one of the three

cited stock exchanges or was a

subsidiary of a company so listed. As

noted in the preamble to the Interim

Rule, it is impossible to reduce the

volume of currency transaction reports

to the extent that the Interim Rule tries

to do without creating some temporary

inconvenience as the terms of the

system change. The determinations

required are straightforward and are to

be based on easily available

information, especially for financial

professionals. FinCEN continues to

believe that the degree of effort involved

in researching whether a company’s

stock is listed as a national stock

exchange, or whether a corporation is a

subsidiary of a public company, is well

within the scope of what a prudent bank

should know about its customers and

their activities.

There is no limit on the ‘‘listed

entity’’ definition based on the nature of

a particular company’s business. Thus,

for example, a listed company that is a

gaming enterprise or that issues

traveler’s checks or money orders or

engages in a money remittance business

as a principal is not for that reason

denied exempt status. See, however, the

limitation on exemption for transactions

carried out by an exempt person as an

agent for another person, as set forth in

paragraph (h)(5).

6. Subsidiaries of Listed Entities

The Interim Rule treats as an

‘‘exempt’’ subsidiary any subsidiary that

is included in the consolidated federal

income tax return of a listed

corporation. FinCEN sought alternative

formulations that bank employees

would find easy to apply and that

would accomplish the goals of the

Interim Rule more effectively than the

consolidated return formulation. At

least one commenter stated that an

entity that is listed as a subsidiary on a

listed entity’s SEC report 10K or an

annual report should be considered an

exempt person. After consideration of

these comments, FinCEN has amended

the definition of an exempt subsidiary

to include any subsidiary that is

organized under the laws of the United

States or of any state and at least 51 per
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 47145

10Several commenters suggested that non-profit

corporations generally be added to the list of

exempt persons. FinCEN does not believe that a

blanket provision of this sort would be workable or

in keeping with the balance of objectives outlined

in 31 U.S.C. 5313 (d)–(g), given the variety of

organizations that can claim non-profit status.

cent of whose common stock is owned

by the listed entity. Evidence of such

ownership may be shown by any of the

ways listed in paragraph (h)(4)(iv),

including reliance upon a listed entity’s

Annual Report or Form 10–K, filed in

each case by the listed entity with the

Securities and Exchange Commission.10

7. Financial Institutions Other Than

Banks

New paragraph (h)(2)(vi), which

relates to financial institutions other

than banks, has been added to the

Interim Rule. This new paragraph

clarifies that non-bank financial

institutions that are, or are subsidiaries

of, listed entities, are exempt persons

only to the extent of their domestic

operations.

C. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(3)—Designation of

Exempt Person

Paragraph (h)(3) sets forth the

procedures for designating an exempt

person. A few commenters sought

clarification of the time frame in which

a bank could designate an exempt

person. At least one commenter stated

that the Interim Rule could be

interpreted as precluding a bank from

designating an existing customer as an

exempt person after August 15, 1996.

After consideration of such comments,

FinCEN has amended the Interim Rule,

in accord with FinCEN Notice 97–1, to

make clear that a bank can designate

any customer as an exempt person by

the close of the 30-day period beginning

after the day of the first reportable

transaction in currency with that person

that is sought to be exempted from

reporting under the terms of paragraph

(h).

At least one commenter also

requested that FinCEN amend the

Interim Rule to allow banks, when

designating exempt persons, to file a list

of its domestic bank customers instead

of filing a form that identifies such a

customer as an exempt person. As set

forth in new paragraph (h)(3)(iii), a

bank, when designating an exempt

person, may either file an Internal

Revenue Form 4789 in which line 36 is

marked appropriately or filed, in such a

format and manner as FinCEN may

specify, a current list of its domestic

bank customers.

At least one commenter further

suggested that it would be efficient for

banks simply to file designations for all

their government customers (as well as

their bank customers), regardless of

whether those customers engage in

transactions in excess of $10,000.

FinCEN will consider making such a

change to paragraph (h) for government

entities at an appropriate time in the

future.

D. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(4)—Operating

Rules for Designating Exempt Persons

Paragraph (h)(4) continues to state

general operating rules for designating

exempt persons. Changes to the details

of the operating rules are outlined

below.

1. General Standard

A number of commenters asked for

greater specificity about the manner in

which the determination that a

customer is an exempt person should be

made and documented. Specific

questions included, for example,

whether a bank was required to keep an

‘‘exemption list’’ of exempt persons,

whether a signed customer statement

was required for each exempt person,

whether paper copies of filings

designating exempt persons should be

maintained by a bank, and how long

records relevant to the exemption

determination must be retained.

The language of paragraph (h)(4)(i)

has been revised to make explicit the

general requirement, implicit in the

original language, that a bank must

document, in the manner that a

reasonable and prudent bank would do,

its determination that a customer is

eligible to be treated as an exempt

person, in compliance with the terms of

paragraph (h). A new paragraph

(h)(4)(v), discussed below, has been

added to deal specifically with record

retention.

FinCEN believes that specific

additional language is unnecessary and

would be contrary to the spirit of the

changes in the currency transaction

filing rules that FinCEN is working with

the banking industry to make. Because

the situation of each bank is different,

any uniform set of rules can only stifle

creativity and efficiency in building

whatever record an individual bank’s

situation and determinations warrant.

Thus, for example, it would certainly be

prudent for a bank to maintain, or to be

able to retrieve, in a central location a

list of the customers that it treats as

exempt persons; but whether the list is

separately maintained, or simply

retrievable from general records upon

need, is a matter for each bank to

determine. Similarly many institutions,

as a general rule, retain copies of

documents filed with the Treasury

Department; however, whether forms

filed magnetically must be converted

into paper copies for examination

purposes is a matter that should be

decided in accordance with general

bank policies, rather than in a universal

regulatory document.

As in other situations, FinCEN

believes that too much attention has in

the past been paid to mechanical

compliance with particular ‘‘check list’’

requirements, rather than to the spirit of

compliance and the monitoring

necessary effectively to deter or detect

money laundering at the nation’s

financial institutions. Thus, it hesitates,

in attempting to re-engineer the

currency transaction reporting system,

to recreate the defects of the system

being replaced. FinCEN intends to

communicate the policy determinations

behind the changes in the rules to the

federal financial institution supervisory

agencies, whose authority includes the

authority to examine for compliance

with Bank Secrecy Act requirements, to

assure, insofar as possible, that the

expectations of compliance examiners

are in accord with the terms and spirit

of the new rules.

At least one commenter suggested that

FinCEN should bear the burden of

listing all the entities falling within the

classes of exempt persons set forth in

paragraph (h)(2). This suggestion has

not been adopted in the final rule. The

list requirement is a flexible one and is

amply met by reliance on publiclyavailable sources. For FinCEN to

publish a list of particular exempt

customer ab initio would amount to a

licensing requirement that would

neither be efficient nor feasible.

At the same time, as indicated in the

preamble to the Interim Rule, see 61 FR

18208, FinCEN is exploring the

possibility of producing a nationwide

list of exempt persons from filed

designations. FinCEN also is exploring

the possibility of linking its own Web

Site to those of the national securities

exchanges.

2. Governmental Entities

A few commenters requested that

FinCEN provide examples of those

entities established under U.S., state, or

local law, under an interstate compact,

that exercise governmental authority. A

sentence has been added to paragraph

(h)(4)(ii) to cite the New Jersey Turnpike

Authority and the Port Authority of

New York and New Jersey as examples

of entities that exercise governmental

authority.

3. Listing Information

Language has been added to

paragraph (h)(4)(iii) to make it clear that

a bank may rely, in determining

whether a company is a listed company,
47146 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

on information available from the

‘‘Edgar’’ electronic information system

maintained by the Securities and

Exchange Commission (http://

www.sec.gov/edgarhp.htm), and on

information contained in the Web Sites

maintained by the New York Stock

Exchange ((http://www.nyse.com), the

American Stock Exchange (http://

www.amex.com), and the National

Association of Securities Dealers (http:/

/www.nasdaq.com).

4. Subsidiary Status

Paragraph (h)(4)(iv) has been

amended to provide banks with the

additional options, when determining

whether a person is exempt as a

subsidiary of a listed entity, of relying

upon the listed entity’s Annual Report

or Form 10–K (filed with the Securities

and Exchange Commission) for

designation of the listed entity’s

subsidiaries.

5. Records Maintenance

New paragraph (h)(4)(v) has been

added to the Interim Rule to make clear

that records maintained by a bank to

document its administration of the rules

of this paragraph (h) must be

maintained in accordance with the

terms of 31 CFR 103.38, which, inter

alia, requires that records be maintained

for a period of five years.

E. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(5)—Limitation on

Exemption

Paragraph (h)(5) states that the

exemption from reporting contained in

paragraph (h)(1) does not apply to a

transaction carried out by an exempt

person as an agent of another person

who is the beneficial owner of the funds

that are the subject of a transaction in

currency. At least one commenter

requested that FinCEN eliminate this

limitation. This requested change has

not been adopted in the final rule. Such

a change would allow an exempt person

to lend its status to any person’s

transactions, thereby circumventing the

purposes of carefully defining the

classes of exempt persons.

At least one commenter noted a

difficulty involved in tracking deposits

from large grocery stores, because some

of the deposits involved may be monies

sent to holding accounts for money

order or traveler’s check companies for

which the grocery stores act as agent.

Although FinCEN recognizes that

distinguishing between the two (or

more) sources of deposits represents an

additional effort, it believes that the

holding accounts are ultimately

relatively easy to distinguish from the

store’s own operating accounts and do

not commingle operating funds and

funds used to pay for money service

products sold by grocery stores as agents

for other concerns. To the extent that

the industry still finds that the

limitation set forth in paragraph (h)(5)

will result in unnecessary

inconvenience, FinCEN will consider

additional comments on this subject

when it considers comments to the

notice of proposed rulemaking on

exemptions that appears elsewhere in

today’s edition of the Federal Register.

F. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(6)—Effect of

Exemption: Limitation on Liability

Paragraph (h)(6) continues to state the

general rule that once a bank has

complied with the terms of paragraph

(h), it is protected from any penalty for

failure to file a currency transaction

report concerning a transaction in

currency by an exempt person. The

language set forth in paragraph (h)(6)(i)

of the Interim Rule has been deleted in

the final rule; the issue of when a bank

must designate customers it has

previously treated as exempt, is

addressed in the notice of proposed

rulemaking regarding exemptions.

At least one commenter expressed the

concern that the ‘‘automatic revocation’’

provisions of paragraph (h)(8), in effect,

force banks to maintain a constant vigil

of the status of entities they have

designated as exempt persons. New

paragraph (h)(6)(ii) has been added to

clarify that, absent specific knowledge

of any information that would be

grounds for revocation, a bank is

required to verify the status of those

entities it has designated as exempt

persons only once each year.

A bank may, at present, elect to treat

a person as exempt under either the

administrative exemption system rules

of sections 103.22(b)–(g) or the rules of

section 103.22(h). As outlined in the

Interim Rule, and as confirmed above,

the exemption procedures for each

system are independent of the other.

Thus, if a bank treats a person as exempt

under the new exemption procedures

set forth in paragraph (h), it need not

place that person on its exempt list

under the administrative exemption

system rules, see sections 103.22(b)–(g),

but, conversely, the fact that a person is

on an exemption list (whether it is a

bank, a government entity, or a listed

company), does not eliminate the

obligation of a bank that wants to adopt

the new system from filing the single

form designating the customer as an

exempt person.

The limitation on liability set forth in

paragraph (h)(6) does not apply if a bank

chooses to exempt a person on a basis

as provided by the administrative

exemption system. One comment found

this result slightly puzzling, since the

Interim Rule is clearly designed to

designate those entities whose routine

transactions is currency with banks are

of little or no law enforcement value.

However, even the Interim Rule

involves some trade-off in policy

outcomes, and the proper designation of

exempt persons, to provide the

Department of the Treasury with a list

of exempt entities, is an important part

of the overall system of which the

Interim Rule is a component. The

statutory liability limitation of 31 U.S.C.

5313(f) does not extend to banks that

continue to use the administrative

exemption system during the pendency

of the rulemaking that would reform

that system.

One commenter on the Interim Rule

argued that ‘‘the process of exempting a

business and the liability for same

should be primarily borne by the

customer and FinCEN.’’ That is neither

the scheme of the Bank Secrecy Act nor

of this rule, and such an approach

would place the Treasury Department,

in effect, directly on the banking floor

in dealing with a bank’s customers. The

final rule, like the notice of proposed

rulemaking also issued today, is an

effort to work with the banking industry

to fashion an effective and workable

exemption system.

G. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(7)—Obligation to

File Suspicious Activity Reports, Etc

No changes were made to this

paragraph. Paragraph (h)(7) continues to

state that the new exemption procedures

set forth in paragraph (h) do not create

any exemption, or have any effect at all,

on the requirement that banks file

suspicious activity reports with respect

to transactions that satisfy the

requirements of the rules of FinCEN, 31

CFR 103.21, and the federal bank

supervisory agencies relating to

suspicious activity reporting. Similarly,

a customer’s status under paragraph (h)

has no impact on other Bank Secrecy

Act requirements relating to record

retention or reporting. Thus, for

example, the fact that a customer is an

exempt person for purposes of the

currency transaction reporting rules has

no effect on the obligation of a bank to

retain records of funds transfers by such

person, to the extent required by 31 CFR

103.33(e), or to retain records in

connection with an issuance or sale of

bank or cashier’s checks, money orders

or traveler’s checks to such person, as

required by 31 CFR 103.29.

H. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(8)—Revocation

Paragraph (h)(8) continues to provide

that the status of an exempt person

automatically ceases, without any action
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 47147

or notice by the Department of the

Treasury, when an entity ceases to be

listed on the applicable stock exchange

or a subsidiary of a listed entity ceases

to have at least 51 per cent of its

common stock owned by a listed entity.

Paragraph (h)(8) explicitly refers back to

the limitation on liability set forth in

paragraph (h)(6)(ii), to make clear that

absent specific knowledge that would be

grounds for revocation, a bank is

required to verify the status of those

entities it has designated as exempt

persons only once each year.

I. 31 CFR 103.22(h)(9)—Transitional

Rule

New paragraph (h)(9) states the

transitional rule for applying new

paragraph (h)(2)(vi). The rule provides

that during the period ending May 1,

1998, no penalty will be imposed on a

bank that treats as an exempt person a

non-bank financial institution, to an

extent beyond that institution’s

domestic operations, that is a listed

entity or a subsidiary of a listed entity.

V. Regulatory Matters

A. Executive Order 12866

The Department of the Treasury has

determined that this final rule is not a

significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866.

B. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

Statement

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), Pub. L.

104–4 (March 22, 1995), requires that an

agency prepare a budgetary impact

statement before promulgating a rule

that includes a federal mandate that

may result in expenditure by state, local

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or by the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any one year. If a budgetary

impact statement is required, section

202 of the Unfunded Mandates Act also

requires an agency to designate and

consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule. FinCEN has

determined that it is not required to

prepare a written statement under

section 202 and has concluded that on

balance this final rule provides the most

cost-effective and least burdensome

alternative to achieve the objectives of

the rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act relating to an initial and

final regulatory flexibility analysis (5

U.S.C. 604) are not applicable to this

final rule because the agency was not

required to publish a notice of proposed

rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553 or any

other law.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

By expanding the applicable

exemptions from an information

collection that has been reviewed and

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) under control

number 1505–0063, the final rule

significantly reduces the existing

burden of information collection under

31 CFR 103.22. Thus, although the final

rule advances the purposes of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44

U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and its

implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part

1320, the Paperwork Reduction Act

does not require FinCEN to follow any

particular procedures in connection

with the promulgation of the final rule.

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 103

Administrative practice and

procedure, Authority delegations

(Government agencies), Banks and

banking, Currency, Foreign banking,

Foreign currencies, Gambling,

Investigations, Law enforcement,

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Securities, Taxes.

Amendment

For the reasons set forth above in the

preamble, the interim rule amending 31

CFR Part 103, which was published at

61 FR 18204 on April 24, 1996, is

adopted as a final rule with the

following changes:

PART 103—FINANCIAL

RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING

OF CURRENCY AND FOREIGN

TRANSACTIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 103

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951–1959;

31 U.S.C. 5311–5330.

2. Section 103.22 is amended by

revising the second sentence in

paragraph (a)(1) and by revising

paragraph (h) to read as follows:

§ 103.22 Reports of currency transactions.

(a)(1) * * * Transactions in currency

by exempt persons with banks are not

subject to this requirement to the extent

provided in paragraph (h) of this

section. * * *

* * * * *

(h) No filing required by banks for

transactions by exempt persons.

(1) Transactions in currency of

exempt person with banks.

Notwithstanding the provisions of

paragraph (a)(1) of the section, no bank

is required to file a report otherwise

required by that section, with respect to

any transaction in currency between an

exempt person and a bank.

(2) Exempt person. For purposes of

this section, an exempt person is:

(i) A bank, to the extent of such bank’s

domestic operations;

(ii) A department or agency of the

United States, of any state, or of any

political subdivision of any state;

(iii) Any entity established under the

laws of the United States, of any state,

or of any political subdivision of any

state, or under an interstate compact

between two or more states, that

exercises governmental authority on

behalf of the United States or any such

state or political subdivision;

(iv) Any entity, other than a bank,

whose common stock or analogous

equity interests are listed on the New

York Stock Exchange or the American

Stock Exchange or whose common stock

or analogous equity interests have been

designated as a Nasdaq National Market

Security listed on the Nasdaq Stock

Market (except stock or interests listed

under the separate ‘‘Nasdaq Small-Cap

Issues’’ heading);

(v) Any subsidiary, other than a bank,

of any entity described in paragraph

(h)(2)(iv) of this section (a ‘‘listed

entity’’) that is organized under the laws

of the United States or of any state and

at least 51 per cent of whose common

stock is owned by the listed entity; and

(vi) Notwithstanding paragraphs

(h)(2)(iv) and (h)(2)(v) of this section,

any financial institution other than a

bank, that is an entity described in

paragraph (h)(2)(iv) or (h)(2)(v) of this

section, to the extent to such financial

institution’s domestic operations.

(3) Designation of exempt persons. (i)

A bank must designate each exempt

person with whom it engages in

transactions in currency by the close of

the 30-day period beginning after the

day of the first reportable transaction in

currency with that person that is sought

to be exempted from reporting under the

terms of paragraph (h) of this section.

(ii) Except where the person sought to

be exempted is another bank as

described in paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this

section, designation of an exempt

person shall be made by a single filing

of Internal Revenue Service Form 4789,

in which line 36 is marked ‘‘Designation

of Exempt Person’’ and items 2–14 (Part

I, Section A) and items 37–49 (Part III)

are completed, or by filing any form

specifically designated by FinCEN for

this purpose. The designation must be

made separately by each bank that treats

the person in question as an exempt

person.

(iii) When designating another bank

as an exempt person, a bank must make

either the filing as described in
47148 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 173 / Monday, September 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of this section or

file, in such a format and manner as

FinCEN may specify, a current list of its

domestic bank customers. In the event

that a bank files its current list of

domestic bank customers, the bank must

make the filing as described in

paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of this section for

each bank that is a new customer and

for which an exemption is sought under

this paragraph (h).

(iv) The designation requirements set

forth in this paragraph (h)(3) apply

whether or not the particular exempt

person to be designated has previously

been treated as exempt from the

reporting requirements of section

103.22(a) under the rules contained in

paragraph (b) or (e) of this section.

(4) Operating rules for designating

exempt persons. (i) Subject to the

specific rules of this paragraph (h), a

bank must take such steps to assure

itself that a person is an exempt person

(within the meaning of applicable

provisions of paragraph (h)(2) of this

section), and to document the basis for

its conclusions and its compliance with

the terms of this paragraph (h), that a

reasonable and prudent bank would

take and document to protect itself from

loan or other fraud or loss based on

misidentification of a person’s status.

(ii) A bank may treat a person as a

governmental department, agency, or

entity if the name of such person

reasonably indicates that it is described

in paragraph (h)(2)(ii) or (h)(2)(iii) of

this section, or if such person is known

generally in the community to be a

State, the District of Columbia, a tribal

government, a Territory or Insular

Possession of the United States, or a

political subdivision or a wholly-owned

agency or instrumentality of any of the

foregoing. An entity generally exercises

governmental authority on behalf of the

United States, a State, or a political

subdivision, for purposes of paragraph

(h)(2)(iii) of this section, only if its

authorities include one or more of the

powers to tax, to exercise the authority

of eminent domain, or to exercise police

powers with respect to matters within

its jurisdiction. Examples of entities that

exercise governmental authority

include, but are not limited to, the New

Jersey Turnpike Authority and the Port

Authority of New York and New Jersey.

(iii) In determining whether a person

is described in paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of

this section, a bank may rely on any

New York, American or Nasdaq Stock

Market listing published in a newspaper

of general circulation, or any commonly

accepted or published stock symbol

guide, on any information contained on

the Securities and Exchange

Commission ‘‘Edgar’’ System, or on any

information contained in an Internet

World-Wide Web site or sites

maintained by the New York Stock

Exchange, the American Stock

Exchange, or the National Association of

Securities Dealers.

(iv) In determining whether a person

is described in paragraph (h)(2)(v) of

this section, a bank may rely upon:

(A) Any reasonably authenticated

corporate officer’s certificate;

(B) Any reasonably authenticated

photocopy of Internal Revenue Service

Form 851 (Affiliation Schedule) or the

equivalent thereof for the appropriate

tax year; or

(C) A person’s Annual Report or Form

10–K, as filed in each case with the

Securities and Exchange Commission.

(v) The records maintained by a bank

to document its compliance with and

administration of the rules of this

paragraph (h) shall be kept in

accordance with the provisions of

section 103.38.

(5) Limitation on exemption. A

transaction carried out by an exempt

person as an agent for another person

who is the beneficial owner of the funds

that are the subject of a transaction in

currency is not subject to the exemption

from reporting contained in paragraph

(h)(1) of this section.

(6) Effect of exemption; limitation on

liability. (i) No bank shall be subject to

penalty under this part for failure to file

a report required by section 103.22(a)

with respect to a transaction in currency

by an exempt person with respect to

which the requirements of this

paragraph (h) have been satisfied, unless

the bank:

(A) Knowingly files false or

incomplete information with respect to

the transaction or the customer engaging

in the transaction; or

(B) Has reason to believe that the

customer does not meet the criteria

established by this paragraph (h) for

treatment of the transactor as an exempt

person or that the transaction is not a

transaction of the exempt person.

(ii) Absent specific knowledge of any

information that would be grounds for

revocation as provided in paragraph

(h)(8) of this section, a bank is required

to verify the status of those entities it

has designated as exempt persons only

once each year.

(iii) A bank that files a report with

respect to a currency transaction by an

exempt person rather than treating such

person as exempt shall remain subject,

with respect to each such report, to the

rules for filing reports, and the penalties

for filing false or incomplete reports that

are applicable to reporting of

transactions in currency by persons

other than exempt persons. A bank that

continues to treat a person described in

paragraph (h)(2) as exempt from the

reporting requirements of section

103.22(a) on a basis other than as

provided in this paragraph (h) shall

remain subject to the rules governing an

exemption on such other basis and to

the penalties for failing to comply with

the rules governing such other

exemption.

(7) Obligation to file suspicious

activity reports, etc. Nothing in this

paragraph (h) relieves a bank of the

obligation, or alters in any way such

bank’s obligation, to file a report

required by section 103.21 with respect

to any transaction, including any

transaction in currency, or relieves a

bank of any reporting or recordkeeping

obligation imposed by this Part (except

the obligation to report transactions in

currency pursuant to this section to the

extent provided in this paragraph (h)).

(8) Revocation. The status of any

person as an exempt person under this

paragraph (h) may be revoked by

FinCEN by written notice, which may

be provided by publication in the

Federal Register in appropriate

situation, on such terms as are specified

in such notice. Without any action on

the part of the Treasury Department and

subject to the limitation on liability set

forth in paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of this

section:

(i) The status of an entity as an

exempt person under paragraph

(h)(2)(iv) of this section ceases once

such entity ceases to be listed on the

applicable stock exchange; and

(ii) The status of a subsidiary as an

exempt person under paragraph (h)(2)(v)

of this section ceases once such

subsidiary ceases to have at least 51 per

cent of its common stock owned by a

listed entity.

(9) Transitional rule. No penalty will

be imposed for the failure to apply

paragraph (h)(2)(vi) of this section, if a

bank treats a person described in

paragraph (h)(2)(iv) or (h)(2)(v) of this

section as an exempt person during the

period ending May 1, 1998.

Dated: August 27, 1997.

Stanley E. Morris,

Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement

Network.

[FR Doc. 97–23643 Filed 9–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4820–03–M