Response to consultation on RTS on CCP to strengthen fight against financial crime
Go back
Article 3(1)(b) currently is drafted so that it is unclear whether the Euro 3 Million limit per annum applies to the institution as a whole in a host state, or whether it applies to each individual institution that is established on the territory in forms other than a branch.
For example if a company with a head office in EU state X has 15 such establishments operating in EU state Y, and where each establishment in EU state Y individually transacts Euro 1 Million per annum, then does the company fall within Article 3(1)(b) since its total transactions each year are Euro 15 million, or alternatively does the company fall outside Article 3(1)(b) since each of the 15 establishments in State Y each transacts less then Euro 3 Million ?
Question 1: Do you agree with the criteria for a requirement to appoint a Central Contact Point (CCP)? In particular, • do you agree that it is proportionate to require the appointment of a CCP where - the number of establishments is equal to, or exceeds, ten; or - the amount of electronic money distributed and redeemed, or the value of the payment transactions executed by such establishments is expected to exceed EUR 3 million per financial year or has exceeded EUR 3 million in the previous financial year? If you do not agree, clearly set out your rationale and provide supporting evidence where available. Please also set out at what level these thresholds should be set instead, and why. • do you agree that Member States should be able to - require all institutions, or certain categories of institutions, to appoint a CCP where this is commensurate with the ML/TF risk associated with the operation of these institutions’ establishments on the Member State’s territory; and - empower competent authorities to require an institution to appoint a CCP where they have reasonable grounds to believe that the establishments of that institution present a high money laundering and terrorist financing risk, even if the criteria in Article 3 (1) and (2) of these draft RTS are not met. If you do not agree, clearly set out your rationale and provide supporting evidence where available.
The drafting of Article 3(1)(b) is poor and ambiguous.Article 3(1)(b) currently is drafted so that it is unclear whether the Euro 3 Million limit per annum applies to the institution as a whole in a host state, or whether it applies to each individual institution that is established on the territory in forms other than a branch.
For example if a company with a head office in EU state X has 15 such establishments operating in EU state Y, and where each establishment in EU state Y individually transacts Euro 1 Million per annum, then does the company fall within Article 3(1)(b) since its total transactions each year are Euro 15 million, or alternatively does the company fall outside Article 3(1)(b) since each of the 15 establishments in State Y each transacts less then Euro 3 Million ?