Understanding "Smurfing"

What is "Smurfing" and how is it different from "structuring”?

"Smurfing" and "structuring" are terms often used in the context of financial transactions, especially related to money laundering and avoiding regulatory detection. While Structuring involves breaking down large financial transactions into multiple smaller ones to avoid regulatory scrutiny and detection. "Smurfing" is referred to a type of money launderer who engages in the practice of "structuring."

While they are related concepts, they have distinct meanings and methods.

In Smurfing, multiple people, called "smurfs," are employed to make these smaller deposits or transactions. These Smurfs, keep transaction below the reporting threshold, and aim to conceal the true nature and source of the funds being laundered.

Smurfing is a serious criminal offense with severe legal consequences. Financial institutions and authorities are actively working to detect and prevent smurfing, as it poses a significant threat to the integrity of the financial system.

Key Characteristics:

• Multiple Transactions: A large sum of money is divided into several smaller amounts.
• Multiple Individuals: Often, - Avoidance of Detection: The primary goal is to avoid triggering the reporting requirements that come into play for large transactions (e.g., transactions over $10,000 in the U.S. must be reported to financial authorities). Example: If an individual has $50,000 they wish to deposit without drawing attention, they might break it into ten separate deposits of $5,000 each, potentially using different people to operate in different banks or accounts to further reduce suspicion.

Structuring is a broader term that includes smurfing but also encompasses any other method of breaking up large financial transactions into smaller ones to avoid regulatory scrutiny and reporting requirements. Structuring can involve a variety of methods, including smurfing, to stay below reporting thresholds.

Key Characteristics:

• Intent to Evade: The intent behind structuring is to avoid the detection mechanisms in place for large transactions.
• Regulatory Focus: Structuring is illegal under many financial regulations because it is explicitly done to evade legal reporting requirements.

How can Smurfing be detected?

1. Smurfing can be detected with robust Transaction Monitoring Systems

• Setting up appropriate threshold alerts: Implement automated systems that flag transactions just below regulatory reporting thresholds. For example, if the threshold is $10,000, frequent transactions just under this amount, like $9,950, can trigger alerts.
• Checking Pattern Recognition: Use advanced analytics to identify patterns indicative of smurfing, such as numerous small transactions in a short period, especially if they add up to a large total amount.

2. Customer Profiling and Behavior Analysis

• Customer Activity Baselines: Establish baselines for normal customer behavior and detect deviations from these norms. If a customer who typically deposits $1,000 monthly suddenly starts depositing $9,000 weekly, this could indicate smurfing.
• Account Linkage Analysis: Analyze related accounts for unusual patterns. Smurfing often involves multiple accounts, so identifying and linking accounts controlled by the same entity or person can help.

3. Data Analytics and Machine Learning

• Anomaly Detection: Use machine learning algorithms to detect anomalies in transaction data that could indicate smurfing. These systems can learn from past data and improve over time.
• Cluster Analysis: Group similar transactions to identify clusters that may represent smurfing activities.

4. Cross-Channel Monitoring

• Integrated Systems: Ensure that transaction monitoring systems are integrated across different channels (e.g., ATM, online banking, branch deposits) to detect smurfing activities that might be spread across various platforms.
• Consistent Monitoring: Regularly update and cross-reference data from all transaction channels to identify patterns that could indicate smurfing.

5. KYC (Know Your Customer) and Enhanced Due Diligence

• Enhanced Customer Due Diligence (CDD): For high-risk customers or those with frequent small transactions, conduct enhanced due diligence to understand the source of funds and the purpose of transactions.
• Ongoing KYC Updates: Regularly update KYC information to ensure it reflects the current risk profile of the customer.

6. Regulatory Reporting and Collaboration

• Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs): File SARs with the relevant authorities whenever smurfing is suspected. These reports can help regulatory bodies detect larger money laundering schemes.
• Collaboration with Other Institutions: Share information with other financial institutions to detect smurfing patterns that may span multiple banks.

7. Education and Training

• Staff Training: Regularly train staff on the latest smurfing techniques and detection methods to ensure they are aware of what to look for. Train staff to identify anomalies in customer behaviors and raise the same to competent authorities.
• Awareness Programs: Implement programs to keep all employees informed about the risks and signs of smurfing and other money laundering techniques. ?

Case Studies:

Case Study 1 : Structuring in Drug Trafficking : United States vs. Maria Carolina Haro

• Background: Maria Carolina Haro, a resident of Texas, was involved in a drug trafficking operation. She was tasked with depositing drug proceeds into various bank accounts to avoid detection.
• Smurfing Technique: Haro made multiple cash deposits under $10,000 into several bank accounts over a short period to avoid triggering Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs) required by U.S. law for transactions over $10,000.
• Outcome: Her pattern of frequent, structured deposits was identified by the bank's automated monitoring system, which flagged the activity for further review. Law enforcement was alerted, leading to an investigation and her subsequent arrest. Haro was convicted of structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements.

Case Study 2: International Money Laundering Ring: Liberty Reserve?

• Background: Liberty Reserve was a digital currency service used extensively for money laundering. The platform facilitated anonymous transactions that were difficult to trace.
• Smurfing Technique: Users would deposit funds into Liberty Reserve accounts in small amounts to avoid detection. These funds were then moved through a series of smaller transactions across different accounts and jurisdictions, effectively “smurfing” the money to obscure its origin.
• Outcome: The complexity and volume of transactions eventually drew attention from international financial regulators. An investigation revealed the extent of the smurfing operations, leading to the platform's shutdown and the arrest of its operators. It was estimated that Liberty Reserve laundered more than $6 billion before being closed.

Case Study 3 : Corporate Account Manipulation: HSBC and the Mexican Drug Cartels

• ?Background: HSBC's U.S. operations were found to be used by Mexican drug cartels to launder money.
• Smurfing Technique: Cartel members structured their transactions by making numerous small deposits into various HSBC accounts. They used individuals known as "smurfs" to make deposits just below the reporting threshold across multiple branches.
• Outcome: An internal audit and external pressure led to an investigation that uncovered the smurfing scheme. HSBC was fined $1.9 billion for its lack of controls and failure to report suspicious activities. The case highlighted the importance of robust transaction monitoring and compliance programs.

Case Study 4: Local Business Structuring: The New York Check Cashing Operation

• ?Background: A check-cashing business in New York was involved in laundering money for various criminal enterprises.
• Smurfing Technique: The business accepted large sums of cash from clients and then used "smurfs" to make small, structured deposits into various bank accounts. These deposits were often made at different branches to avoid detection.
• Outcome: Bank tellers noticed the pattern of frequent small deposits from the check-cashing business and reported it to their compliance department. An investigation revealed the extent of the structuring operation, leading to the arrest of the business owners and several associates.

Case Study 5: Real Estate Money Laundering: Vancouver Real Estate Market

• Background: The Vancouver real estate market has been scrutinized for being used to launder money.
• Smurfing Technique: Criminal organizations would purchase high-value properties using funds structured into small, incremental amounts. These funds were often deposited into bank accounts over time and then used to make property purchases, avoiding large transactions that might trigger scrutiny.
• Outcome: Regulatory bodies and financial institutions enhanced their transaction monitoring systems and increased collaboration with law enforcement. Several high-profile investigations led to arrests and significant regulatory changes aimed at combating real estate money laundering.

?Case Study 6: : Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) Scandal

• Background: Between 2012 and 2015, CBA was involved in a significant money laundering case where over 53,000 transactions went undetected due to inadequate compliance mechanisms.
• Smurfing Technique: Criminals used CBA's Intelligent Deposit Machines (IDMs) to deposit large amounts of cash in small increments below the $10,000 reporting threshold, a classic example of smurfing.
• Outcome: CBA was fined AUD 700 million (approximately USD 534 million) for failing to report the suspicious transactions and for not meeting anti-money laundering (AML) obligations.

?