Jump to content
MooseInTime

Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA)

Recommended Posts

I was watching a documentary on Netflix about HSBC and their violations of various acts around money laundering and the above TWEA, resulting in a > 1 bn USD fine for them in 2012.

It got me thinking, how will banks ensure they comply with the regulations if they start accepting XRP?  Could they "blacklist" enemy wallets?

Admittedly HSBC chose to ignore their own internal warnings on some deposits from Enemy accounts, or changed the names slightly (adding hyphens eg. TAJ-CO versus TAJCO was one example) but what's to stop a blacklisted account holder setting up a new wallet and sending from that?

NB This is not FUD - I'm a HODLER,  just a discussion on how banks could approach this with - any - blockchain, but specifically the RCL since that's what we are interested in here?

Edited by MooseInTime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, MooseInTime said:

I was watching a documentary on Netflix about HSBC and their violations of various acts around money laundering and the above TWEA, resulting in a > 1 bn USD fine for them in 2012.

It got me thinking, how will banks ensure they comply with the regulations if they start accepting XRP?  Could they "blacklist" enemy wallets?

Easy, don't employ people like James Comey.

https://geopolitics.co/2017/03/21/fbi-dir-james-comey-board-member-of-hsbc-clinton-foundation-drug-cartel-launderer/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Ripple hired Benjamin Lawsky, one of my first thoughts was "Oh great, they must be working on a solution to address the problem of terrorism financing". If you go back and watch the Banking on Bitcoin documentary, it's one of the key points he makes against Bitcoin during the BitInstant trial. I'm sure the exact mechanism to implement compliance is currently under wraps (and being tested to sort out all the kinks) but I'm fairly confident they must have something in the works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MooseInTime said:

It got me thinking, how will banks ensure they comply with the regulations if they start accepting XRP?  Could they "blacklist" enemy wallets?

The wallets would most likely get added to the OFAC list and the banks would blacklist them. This is what happens with a lot of institutions right now. I've personally written c# code to purge transactions that matched people/entities/vessels on the OFAC list taken by companies before they are batched to be sent to banks on nightly jobs.

Edited by gtyj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BBS said:

Honestly, all the article has to offer is that Comey served in positions where he came into contact with people committing fraud. There is a mile between that and evidence was involved. Outside directors of companies are not normally involved in the day to day operations at all.HSBC likely brought him on as a board member to help them appear compliant and to ensure reasonable compliance systems were in place. 

What do you think the odds are that HSBC actually provided an outside director with a law enforcement background documents or information relating to their crimes?

Not to mention Corey was a major factor in losing Clinton the election. If he was such a great friend to the Clintons why did he publicly comment on an ongoing investigation in violation of FBI policy?

You can write this kind of thing about literally anyone who worked at high-levels of multiple organizations over a long career.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MooseInTime said:

how will banks ensure they comply with the regulations if they start accepting XRP

XRP is used under the hood. Entrypoint is FIAT coming in via bank accounts. This is what all the upcoming regulation is and will be about. We have to know where money is coming from and which value enters the network. As soon as value is in the network it is considered valid and "clean". Thus the entrypoints are subject of the regulations. This is also why exchanges have more and more KYC and AML efforts to be sorted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to be the voice speaking up for a more "systems oriented" approach to thinking about terrorist moneys. And maybe the attempt to segregate that and limit their access is not an optimal response?

EDIT:

Also the concept of "trading with the enemy" of course has a long history. For instance I've heard that Schnitzer in Portland Oregon was selling scrap iron to Japan right up to the deadline during WWII. My father was especially outraged because he had given money as a boy in an effort to save the Battleship Oregon, which Schnitzer was responsible for scrapping. (Well they saved the mast).

And also it is now common and cheaply used in US politics, with Obama, H. Clinton, and D. Trump all on the receiving end of accusations.

The effort to establish a "clean blockchain" will probably also involve a good deal of controversy and contradictions. Just another tool we can use against each other in the endless battle for legal/political power. Which of course is the goal of terrorism, ultimately, to make that aspect of our lives very complicated, limiting the usefulness of diplomacy, furthering the descent towards warfare generally speaking.

 

Edited by Vader-DeWelt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...