Has anyone successfully exempted a casino? I know I used to get away with it when they were tribal casinos. But what about a Publicly Traded Casino?

It just seems counterintuitive to file CTRs on a Casino that is publicly traded, regulated and filing their own CTRs.

We don't file on banks that are regulated - not sure why regulated Casinos are viewed so differently.

You say publicly traded. Do they meet the requirements of 31 CFR 1020.315(b)(4) or (5) as listed companies or subs of listed companies? If they do, why would you not exempt them?

Yes they do meet those requirements. But examiners have "frowned" upon it & I just don't get why. They like to hang their hat on the "can't have more than 50% of ineligible activities" - but I think that caveat is only for Phase II - not Phase I correct?

The concept of "ineligible" customers only applies to Phase II exempt persons. If Caesars banks with you, you may choose to recognize them as an exempt person.

Whoever wrote FIN-2012-G003 must have known your examiners were non readers. The matrix pretty clearly indicates that the concept of ineligible activities does not apply to "entities listed on the major national stock exchanges."

A colleague of mine tried that once. He's no longer with us.

Is he no longer with you because he exempted them? Can you elaborate?

I agree with you Ken, wholeheartedly. But it's been very difficult - I'm going to try it again. If I get the disapproving eyebrow - where can I escalate it further? Has someone written a letter to FinCEN regarding this that I could bounce off of?

I found this for tribal (which is what I used to use) & it does clearly state:

https://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/tribalcasinoguidance.html

"(The provision prohibiting banks from treating businesses deriving more than 50% of gross revenues from gaming activity found in 31 C.F.R. §103.22(d)(6)(viii) only applies in the context of granting exemptions to non-listed businesses pursuant to 31 C.F.R. §103.22(d)(2)(vi), and thus does not prohibit banks from exempting a tribal casino that is determined to be a department or agency of a tribe.). "

So I would assume the same holds true for publicly traded on the stock exchange casinos.

Honestly, given the published guidance, it's not a subject on which reasonable people could disagree.

If you want something more, send an e-mail to the Helpdesk citing the guidance, but asking for verification that your specific customer is eligible for exemption. Give them the symbol and a link to the listing so they can verify it.

Filing CTRs on a publicly traded casino is up there with filing CTRs on Chase.

The "tribal" exemption is in no way related; it's about being a government entity.

The only justifiable objection to exempting a listed entity would be if, by exempting it, you would somehow be less able to monitor the entity's activities at and through your bank for suspect activity. If an examiner's eyebrow goes into an uncontrollable tic, shove a copy of that FinCEN guidance in front of the offending eye.

The "gotcha" for some "tribal" casinos has been that they were actually operated by private (non-tribal) companies under license from the tribe. In those cases, the government entity exemption is out the window.

Regulator is already giving me "the eye" - but then I found this too!

Why should it be so hard for us to convince a regulator about their own laws?


https://www.fincen.gov/news_room/rp/advisory/pdf/advis10.pdf

9. Are certain businesses ineligible for treatment as non-listed businesses?

Yes. A business engaged primarily in one or more of the activities listed in 31 CFR 103.22(d)(6)(viii) may not be treated as a non-listed business for purposes of the reformed exemption procedures (although it may be treated as an exempt person if it otherwise meets the definition of another class of exempt person — e.g., a casino whose stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange may be treated as an exempt person).

Yes, but that's only been the official position since 1998...

Hahahahahahaha - right? *sigh*

Looking forward to BOL Conference next week!

You had more than enough proof with the 2012 Guidance. This just gilds the lily.

Since they think they have something to write about, they won't look too much any more unless you play your hand now. FYI, I've actually known bankers who waited until the exit conference when their boss was in the room to rebut ridiculous, unfounded criticisms with a documented, irrefutable response...not me of course.

And to really nail it in - got an official response back from FinCEN.

*she shoots - she scores!*