I'd like to hear another viewpoint on this issue. We've always understood that any individual who brings over $10,000 cash into the bank automatically qualifies for CTR filing, regardless of what he does with the money.

An example: an individual owns 2 businesses, each separate legal entites with their own EIN. He brings cash deposits for both businesses, over $10,000, then divides them between the 2 accounts, sometimes depositing less than $10,000 in one or both accounts.

So we have filed CTRs for these transactions, due to the fact this one individual presented over $10k. Now our FDIC examiner is telling me that because the businesses are separate legal entities, we should only file if the divided deposits exceed $10k on their own.

The reg plainly says "by or on behalf of the same person", so I take that to mean "by" in this situation.

He is adamant that we should not be filing and so we have stopped. But I'm really uneasy and have asked for something in writing to cover us.

Any thoughts?

Not that my opinion will "cover you" in an exam, but for what it's worth, you are correct. I believe your FDIC examiner has been misinformed, and if I were you I'd go back and file all of the CTR's you've missed. FinCEN should be able to clarify this issue for you in writing.

You are absoultely correct- the transactions you described are reportable, and you will definitely want to resume filing.

It looks like you'll also need to backfile these CTRs from the time you stopped until now.

I agree, backfile any missing CTRs and then speak with FinCEN for something in writing. Document everything, including your conversations with your FDIC examiner and save it all for your next exam.

My feelings exactly. Another note, in our conversation last month, 3 months after the exam, he actually sent my argument "up the line" and said that what was "coming back down" substantiated his opinion.

So what's up with the FDIC?

From FinCEN guidance letter: "A financial institution must treat multiple transactions in currency as a single transaction if the financial institution "has knowledge that [the multiple transactions] are by or on behalf of any person and result in either cash in or cash out totaling more than $10,000 during any one business day." See 31 CFR § 103.22(c)(2)."

I wonder what part of "by or on behalf of..." has caused the confusion? Person walked through the door with more then $10k, you were correct in filing CTRs. Can you imagine the chaos if that was suddenly deemed to be wrong?

The examiner and his "up the line folks" are completely wrong.

The only possible way for a CTR to not be required in this situation is if the business entities are on your exemption list.

What the examiner says is true only if you have two different people making deposits to the two different accounts. Since the same person made the deposits, the "by part of the by or on behalf of" rule applies.

Have you checked the examiner's ID? You know there are a lot of fake IDs around.

I would say file also. If you know the deposits/withdrawals are for the benefit of one person that is consistent across the given account relationships, file. We had this come up, we were asked by our examiner why we filed some of these types of CTRs and they liked our response. We were OTS regulated.

We had a clear connection that the person in question was the only consistent signor across multiple accounts.

It's okay if the "signor" is consistent across multiple accounts, but for CTR purposes, it makes no real difference. If the owner of the businesses sent a part-time teenage worker to make both of the deposits, a CTR would be required because the same person made both of the deposits. It makes no difference whether the accounts are related or not.

Thanks everyone for the support. I love it when I'm right! :-)

PS, we will be filing from now on until I get something firm in writing from the powers that be, though I somehow doubt that will ever happen.....