Chapter 11 Quiz

Suspicious Activity Reporting and Case Management

18 questions. Answers follow.


1. Under the US Bank Secrecy Act, a bank must file a SAR when it knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect that a transaction of at least what minimum amount is involved in suspicious activity?

A) $1,000 B) $2,000 C) $5,000 D) $10,000


2. The "tipping off" prohibition in SAR regulations means:

A) Financial institutions must notify law enforcement before filing a SAR B) Financial institutions that file a SAR are prohibited from disclosing the SAR's existence to the subject of the SAR C) Law enforcement must notify financial institutions when a subject of a SAR is arrested D) Financial institutions must disclose to their regulators when they choose not to file a SAR


3. The US SAR filing deadline from the date of initial detection of suspicious activity is:

A) 10 business days B) 30 calendar days (60 days if subject is unknown) C) 90 calendar days D) 12 months (with quarterly status updates)


4. A UK institution has "knowledge or suspicion" that a customer's account contains proceeds of drug trafficking. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, what is the primary legal obligation of the institution?

A) File a SAR with FinCEN within 30 days B) Immediately close the customer's account and return the funds C) Submit a SAR to the National Crime Agency's Financial Intelligence Unit D) Notify the customer that their account is under investigation


5. The UK "Defence SAR" mechanism (also called an "appropriate consent" SAR) is designed to:

A) Protect the institution from prosecution when it was unaware of money laundering B) Allow the institution to request permission from the NCA to proceed with a transaction that would otherwise constitute money laundering — protecting the institution from POCA liability C) Automatically close the customer account pending NCA investigation D) Provide the institution with immunity from regulatory examination of the suspicious transaction


6. FinCEN has noted concerns about "defensive filing" of SARs. What is defensive filing?

A) Filing a SAR specifically to report suspected terrorist financing as opposed to money laundering B) Filing SARs of little or no intelligence value primarily to protect the institution from regulatory criticism if suspicious activity is later identified — diluting law enforcement's ability to prioritize actionable intelligence C) Filing a SAR and simultaneously notifying the customer to give them an opportunity to provide an explanation D) Filing a SAR with incomplete information and amending it later when more facts are available


7. In the five elements of an effective SAR narrative, "the suspicious pattern" refers to:

A) The full transaction history of the account over the prior 12 months B) The analyst's explanation of why the activity is suspicious — what specific indicators crossed the threshold from "unusual" to "suspected money laundering" C) A comparison of the subject's activity to peer group benchmarks D) A description of the regulatory provisions potentially violated by the subject's activity


8. Network visualization in a case management system is particularly useful for identifying:

A) Which regulatory reporting deadlines are approaching for a given case B) Structural patterns in financial crime — hub accounts, rapid transit nodes, and structuring networks that are difficult to detect from transaction tables alone C) The specific regulations that the suspicious activity may violate D) Discrepancies in the subject's KYC documentation


9. In a transaction network graph, an account with HIGH betweenness centrality would typically indicate:

A) The account holds a large balance relative to other accounts in the network B) The account conducts an unusually high volume of transactions C) The account is positioned on many of the shortest paths through the network — suggesting it may be acting as an intermediary or hub in a money laundering scheme D) The account has a high number of incoming transactions from different sources


10. The "rapid transit node" AML risk indicator in network analysis is identified by:

A) An account that processes transactions faster than the institution's standard settlement time B) An account with a high in/out ratio — receiving significant funds and paying out most of those funds — suggesting a pass-through role rather than a genuine account holder C) An account that moves funds between different currencies within a single day D) An account that accesses online banking from multiple geographic locations


11. AI-assisted SAR drafting is most appropriately used for:

A) Making the final judgment about whether suspicious activity exists B) Characterizing the legal nature of the potentially criminal conduct C) Synthesizing transaction data into structured narrative format, identifying matched typologies, and filling in standard SAR fields — with human review and finalization D) Automatically filing SARs for transactions above defined risk thresholds without analyst involvement


12. A financial institution files a SAR on January 15 for suspicious activity identified on December 20. Suspicious activity continues in February and March. What is the institution's obligation?

A) No further SAR filing required — the January SAR covers all past and future suspicious activity B) File a new SAR for each month of continuing activity C) Monitor the activity at 90-day intervals; file continuing activity SARs if warranted by ongoing suspicious patterns D) Immediately exit the relationship — continuing the relationship after filing a SAR is always prohibited


13. The SAR narrative quality element "context" refers to:

A) The institutional context — which branch, which product, which relationship manager B) How the suspicious activity differs from the customer's declared purpose and historical transaction pattern — providing law enforcement with the baseline needed to assess the significance of the deviation C) The broader macroeconomic context that may explain the transaction patterns D) The historical context of the money laundering typology matched by the suspicious activity


14. A compliance officer discovers that a SAR filed 15 months ago describes activity that is directly related to an ongoing federal investigation into organized crime. The subject's account is still active. What considerations should guide the compliance officer's decision about the account?

A) The account should be closed immediately — maintaining a relationship with a subject of law enforcement investigation is always prohibited B) The compliance officer should contact the investigating federal agency to offer cooperation C) The account should continue normally — SAR filing creates no relationship exit obligation D) Consult legal counsel; consider whether law enforcement contact is appropriate and legal; continue monitoring for additional suspicious activity; file continuing activity SARs if warranted; assess timing of any account exit carefully to avoid tipping off implications


15. The SAR registry maintained in a case management system typically tracks:

A) All customer accounts at the institution, not just those subject to SAR investigation B) The personal information of all individuals whose transactions generated monitoring alerts C) All filed SARs including subject identifiers, filing date, activity period, and subsequent relationship status — enabling ongoing monitoring and continuing SAR assessment D) Information shared by law enforcement about subjects of previous SAR filings


16. Under AMLD5, EU financial institutions must submit Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) to:

A) FATF's global suspicious transaction database B) OFAC, as the primary international AML authority C) The national financial intelligence unit (FIU) of the member state where the institution is licensed D) The European Banking Authority (EBA) within 72 hours of detection


17. An effective SAR narrative includes "complete subject identification." Which of the following identifiers should be included where known?

A) Name and account number only — additional identifiers are prohibited under data privacy regulations B) All known identifiers: name, address, date of birth, account numbers, tax identification number, phone numbers, email addresses, associated entities C) Only verified identifiers — unverified information (such as an address the customer provided verbally) should be excluded D) Government-issued ID numbers only — other identifiers create SAR subject privacy liability


18. The chapter's opening case study featured an analyst who identified suspicious activity across multiple closed alerts. This illustrates which fundamental limitation of automated alert management?

A) Transaction monitoring systems cannot detect structuring patterns B) Individual alert review, even when conducted correctly, can miss the suspicious significance of a pattern that only becomes apparent across multiple alerts reviewed in aggregate C) Automated alert closure systems always produce higher false positive rates than manual review D) Law enforcement cannot act on SARs that were generated from monitoring alert closures


Answer Key

Q A Explanation
1 C US bank SAR threshold: $5,000. MSBs: $2,000. Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) have a different $10,000 threshold.
2 B Tipping off: the institution cannot disclose to the SAR subject that a SAR was filed. Federal crime in the US; criminal offence in UK.
3 B 30 calendar days from initial detection; 60 days if no subject can be identified.
4 C UK SAR obligation: submit to NCA's Financial Intelligence Unit. FinCEN is US; closing the account is not the primary obligation; notifying the customer is prohibited (tipping off).
5 B Defence SAR: institution requests consent from NCA to proceed with a transaction that would otherwise be money laundering — protecting from POCA criminal liability for proceeding.
6 B Defensive filing: SARs of little intelligence value filed primarily to protect the institution rather than because genuine suspicion exists. FinCEN has warned this diverts law enforcement resources.
7 B "The suspicious pattern" element: analyst's explanation of why the activity is suspicious — specific typology indicators that cross the suspicion threshold.
8 B Network visualization reveals structural patterns (hub accounts, rapid transit nodes, fan-out structuring networks) that are difficult to detect from tables of individual transactions.
9 C High betweenness centrality: the account sits on many shortest paths through the network — indicating it acts as an intermediary through which funds flow.
10 B Rapid transit node: high in/out ratio — receives significant funds and pays out most of them — pass-through account characteristic. Not about speed of settlement or geography.
11 C AI-assisted SAR drafting: appropriate for data synthesis, typology matching, template completion. Not appropriate for the suspicion judgment itself or legal characterization.
12 C Continuing activity: monitor at 90-day intervals; file continuing activity SARs if suspicious patterns continue. No requirement for one-per-month filing; no automatic relationship exit requirement.
13 B Context: how the suspicious activity differs from the customer's declared purpose and historical pattern — provides law enforcement with the baseline needed to assess significance.
14 D Complex situation requiring legal counsel: law enforcement contact considerations, continuing SAR obligations, timing of account exit (tipping off risk). No automatic relationship exit obligation; no automatic cooperation obligation.
15 C SAR registry: tracks all filed SARs — enabling continuing activity monitoring and examination support. Not all customers; not alert-level information; not LE feedback.
16 C EU STRs: filed with the national FIU of the member state where the institution is licensed. Not FATF, not OFAC, not EBA.
17 B Complete subject identification: all known identifiers. Privacy regulations don't prohibit SAR subject identifiers — SAR confidentiality protections apply. Unverified information (such as provided addresses) is valuable to law enforcement and should be included with an indication of the source.
18 B The opening case: individual alert closures (each technically appropriate) missed the significance of the pattern across all closures. Pattern recognition across multiple alerts requires holistic case review, not just alert-by-alert disposition.