I can not seem to find any information that states a SAR filing is optional. Not that I think it is, I am just looking for some documentation that says if we think something is suspicious, then we have to report it by law.

I have been on FinCEN website and have had no luck.

§ 1020.320 Reports by banks of suspicious transactions.
(a) General. (1) Every bank shall file with the Treasury Department, to the extent and in the manner required by this section, a report of any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible violation of law or regulation. A bank may also file with the Treasury Department by using the Suspicious Activity Report specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section or otherwise, a report of any suspicious transaction that it believes is relevant to the possible violation of any law or regulation but whose reporting is not required by this section.

This is the relevant portion fo the BSA (FinCEN) regulation. Your federal functional regulatory agency also has a parallel, but somewhat broader regulation that also uses the word "shall." You also "may" file a voluntary SAR.

If one of the filing triggers is pulled, filing could not be described as optional.

You can also get reporting information in the SAR Instructions: http://www.fincen.gov/forms/files/f9022-47_sar-di.pdf

I would like to tag onto this discussion.

We currently have examiners in the office for our BSA Exam. They want me to go back and file on a cash transaction that occurred in July because the occupation does not fit the amount of cash deposited. This is a long time customer that indicates they are a housewife but the cash deposited was 30,000.00. A CTR was filed and the customer withdrew it a few days later to purchase a cashiers check to a title company. For some banks I am sure this would set off alarms but I work for bank with a large Asian, Hispanic and Indian population. I am fairly sure the cash came from unreported income but since they did not structure the cash in, we did not file.

Would you argue the point with the examiners or just file the SAR?

Opinions?

If you're fairly sure that the cash came from unreported income, wouldn't you then have suspicion of tax evasion? And wouldn't you file a SAR?

I would certainly argue the point with the examiner and point them to the bottom of page 75 of the FFIEC examination manual. As long as you identified the transaction and concluded that no SAR was warranted based upon your knowledge of the customer, the fact that there was no attempt to structure, etc thet have no right to force you to file a SAR.

I agree with Doug's point. Structuring is not the only reason to file a SAR.

The fact that you are dealing with a customer base that deals in cash doesn't remove the need to understand how the cash was obtained. Unfortunately.

As stated by devsfan on page 75: "The decision to file a SAR is an inherently subjective judgment. Examiners should focus on whether the bank has an effective SAR decision-making process, not individual SAR decisions."

I also like to use the following when contemplating filing, which is on page 67:
"Has no business or apparent lawful purpose or is not the type of transaction that the particular customer would normally be expected to engage in, and the bank knows of no reasonable explanation for the transaction after examining the available facts, including the background and possible purpose of the transaction."

To a fault, I like the contest... However, in this case it would depend on how it was put to me.

If it's going to be criticized in the written report, I would fight until the CEO ordered me out of the room. (Happened once.)

If it's a suggestion they feel strongly about, but do not intend to criticize I would file and go on to what's next. However, I would teasingly ask for some help with the narrative. What in the devil are you supposed to say? If we're going to say it's untaxed income that would make sense if it came as $1,000 a week, not in a single pop of $30,000. What could a housewife do to earn a single payment in that amount?

I have to agree with Ken. How do you defend a $30,000 cash deposit with no explained source. It is not worth the battle and actually I wouldn't consider not filing unless someone gave me a really good explanation.

I deal with several banks that are primarily cash intensive communities. Every type of transaction is conducted with cash in the community, including businesses buying supplies from wholesalers with cash, which is basically unheard of in other venues. If this bank filed a SAR on every $30,000 cash deposit that they could not positively identify the source, they would be filing 100s a day. She might have sold her car or it was a gift for all you know to by a house. If banks have to file on every one time occurrence of a cash deposit or withdrawal, we are going down a slippery slope.

Not every one, but those that are unusual for the customer in question, with no explanation.

Sorry - but I have seen banks end up under orders for this.

I'm assuming there's a reason for this conclusion. If so, how does that information inform your decisioning on whether or not to file?