Chris Wakem Comments on The Guardian's ABB Money Laundering Feud
-
Upload
christopher-wakem -
Category
Economy & Finance
-
view
16 -
download
0
Transcript of Chris Wakem Comments on The Guardian's ABB Money Laundering Feud
ABB’s Guardian Rebuttal Dirties up the Facts on FOBT Money Laundering By Christopher Wakem December 10, 2013
While Dirk Vennix of the Association of British Bookmakers recently took issue with the accuracy and fairness of Randeep Ramish’s Guardian article on the link between gambling machines and money laundering, the truth is Mr. Vennix himself makes a major jump in logic. The gist of Mr. Ramish’s piece: drug dealers throughout Britain are using fixed-‐odds betting terminals in bookmaker shops to launder money by feeding their profits into the machines, losing a minuscule amount, cashing out, and collecting a printed ticket that they can show police should any questions be raised. The concern is that the machines are very lightly regulated, and though bookmakers are aware the machines are being used for this sinister purpose, they are hesitant to do anything about it as FOBTs are so profitable–the machines contributed $1.4 billion to the betting industry last year alone. In his rebuttal, Mr. Vennix argues that though money laundering is a serious and widespread crime that must be eradicated, bookmakers can not possibly be seen as the root of the problem. According to his organization’s research, less than 0.3% of suspicious incidents reported to the Serious Organised Crime Agency involved bookmaker shops. And of all the betting transactions in the UK, just 250 cases (or 0.00001667%) were suspected of wrongdoing, only 10% of which ended up being investigated further or prosecuted. He argues this is due to stringent anti-‐money-‐laundering regulations the shops abide by, including the Proceeds of Crime Act, the Gambling Act, and the Terrorism Act. Mr. Vennix’s argument, though persuasive, overlooks a key fact highlighted by Ramish–that bookmakers essentially regulate themselves. They decide whether or not to ban problem gamblers, call the police over suspicious behavior, or report witnessed crimes. A low number of suspicious incidents reported or investigated doesn’t necessarily prove Vennix’s assertion that the regulations are working, in fact it could play right into Mr. Ramish’s contention that the cases of wrong doing are simply being ignored.