This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 12 THE HAGUE 003328 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR INL, EUR/ERA, EUR/UBI 
STATE ALSO FOR EB A/S WAYNE 
TREASURY FOR U/S LEVEY AND A/S ZARATE 
TREASURY PLEASE PASS FINCEN 
STATE PLEASE PASS FEDERAL RESERVE 
DEA HQS PASS OFE AND OKF 
JUSTICE FOR OIA, AFMLS AND NDDS 
PARIS ALSO FOR OECD 
 
E.O. 12958:    N/A 
TAGS: KTFN KCRM PTER SNAR ECON EFIN ETTC EFIN PREL PGOV NL
SUBJECT:  200434 INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL STRATEGY 
REPORT (INCSR) FOR THE NETHERLANDS - PART II: MONEY 
LAUNDERING AND FINANCIAL CRIMES 
 
REF:  STATE 254401 
 
328024, B) THE HAGUE 00004 
¶1. ATTACHED IS THE HAGUE'S SUBMISSION OF PART II OF THE 
200434 INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL STRATEGY REPORT: 
MONEY LAUNDERING AND FINANCIAL CRIMES.  POST'S RESPONSE IS 
ORGANIZED ACCORDING TO CHAPTERS PROVIDED IN THE INCSR 
QUESTIONNAIRE (REFTEL. A). THE DOLLAR/EURO EXCHANGE RATE ON 
DECEMBER 15JANUARY 5 WAS 0.77530880 EUROS TO THE DOLLAR. 
THE AVERAGE DOLLAR/EURO EXCHANGE RATES FOR2000, 2001, AND 
2002 AND 2003 WERE0.9400, 0.900, AND 0.9200 AND 0.9257 EUROS 
TO THE DOLLAR RESPECTIVELY. 
 
¶2. MONEY LAUNDERING: GENERAL 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS IS A MAJOR FINANCIAL CENTER AND AS SUCH 
AN ATTRACTIVE TARGET FOR THE LAUNDERING OF FUNDS GENERATED 
FROM A VARIETY OF ILLICIT ACTIVITIES.  ACTIVITIES INVOLVING 
MONEY LAUNDERING ARE OFTEN RELATED TO THE SALE OF HEROIN, 
COCAINE, SYNTHETIC DRUGS, OR CANNABIS.  SOME OF THE MONEY 
LAUNDERED IS PROBABLY LOCALLY OWNED AND DERIVED FROM THE 
ILLEGAL PRODUCTION AND SALE OF CANNABIS PRODUCTS OR DESIGNER 
DRUGS SUCH AS ECSTASY.  A CONSIDERABLE PORTION OF THE 
LOCALLY OWNED ILLICIT MONEY LAUNDERED IS BELIEVED TO BE 
GENERATED THROUGH ACTIVITIES INVOLVING FINANCIAL FRAUD. 
MONEY LAUNDERING IS UNDERSTOOD TO TAKE PLACE THROUGH THE 
BANKING SYSTEM, MONEY EXCHANGE HOUSES (BUREAUX DE 
CHANGECAMBIOS), CASINOS, CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, INSURANCE 
AND SECURITIES FIRMS, STOCK BROKERS, MONEY TRANSFER OFFICES, 
NOTARIES, LAW FIRMS, REAL ESTATE AGENTS, AND TRADERS IN HIGH- 
VALUE GOODS (CARS, ANTIQUES, BOATS, JEWELERY AND PRECIOUS 
STONES AND METALS). 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS IS IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE FORTY 
MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING RECOMMENDATIONS OF 
THE FINANCIAL ACTION TASK FORCE (FATF), WITH RESPECT TO BOTH 
LEGISLATION AND ENFORCEMENT.  THE NETHERLANDS ALSO COMPLIES 
WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION'S SECOND MONEY LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE. 
IN SOME AREAS, MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION IN THE 
NETHERLANDS IS AHEAD OF EU-LEGISLATION (E.G. FULL MONEY 
LAUNDERING CONTROLS ON MONEY REMITTERS, INCLUDING LICENSING 
AND IDENTIFICATION OF CUSTOMERS).  IN DECEMBER 2004, THE 
DUTCH EU PRESIDENCY SUCCEEDED IN REACHING POLITICAL 
AGREEMENT WITHIN THE EU ON THE THIRD MONEY LAUNDERING 
DIRECTIVE. THE DUTCH HAVE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED SOME OF THE 
OBLIGATIONS RESULTING FROM THIS DIRECTIVE, SUCH AS EFFECTIVE 
SUPERVISION. OTHER OBLIGATIONS, SUCH AS THE EXPANSION OF 
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS TO INCLUDE ALL NATURAL AND LEGAL 
ENTITIES RECEIVING CASH PAYMENTS OF 15,000 EUROS (ROUGHLY 
$20,000) OR MORE DURING THE COURSE OF THEIR PROFESSION, WILL 
BE INCORPORATED INTO NATIONAL LEGISLATION AT A LATER STAGE. 
IN NOVEMBER 2004, THE DUTCH EU PRESIDENCY ALSO SUCCEEDED IN 
REACHING POLITICAL AGREEMENT WITHIN THE EU ON A REGULATION 
CONTROLLING CROSS-BORDER CASH MOVEMENTS. 
 
-- AS IN MOST OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES, SOME MONEY 
LAUNDERING ACTIVITIES ARE DRUG RELATED, ALTHOUGH EXACT 
PERCENTAGES ARE NOT AVAILABLE.  MUCH OF THE MONEY LAUNDERED 
IN THE NETHERLANDS IS LIKELY OWNED BY MAJOR DRUG CARTELS AND 
OTHER INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONSMAJOR DRUG CARTELS 
AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKELY OWN 
MUCH OF THE MONEY LAUNDERED IN THE NETHERLANDS.  THERE ARE 
NO INDICATIONS OF SYNDICATE-TYPE STRUCTURES IN ORGANIZED 
CRIME OR MONEY LAUNDERING. THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO BLACK 
MARKET FOR SMUGGLED GOODS IN THE NETHERLANDS. ALTHOUGH, 
UNDER THE SCHENGEN ACCORD, THERE ARE NO FORMAL CONTROLS ON 
THE BORDERS WITH GERMANY AND BELGIUM, DUTCH AUTHORITIES 
REMAIN VIGILANT, RUNNING SPECIAL OPERATIONS IN THE BORDER 
AREAS AND THE COMMON EU BORDER DESIGNED TO KEEP SMUGGLING TO 
A MINIMUM. 
 
 
 
-- THE DUTCH EXPERIENCE WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND UNUSUAL 
TRANSACTION REPORTING PROVIDES NO EVIDENCE THAT MONEY 
LAUNDERING IS FOCUSED ON ANY PARTICULAR PART OF THE 
FINANCIAL SECTOR. THE DUTCH SYSTEM FOR COMPULSORY REPORTING 
OF UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS TARGETS THE FINANCIAL SECTOR AND NON- 
BANKING INSTITUTIONS INCLUDING THE BANKING SYSTEM, MONEY 
EXCHANGE HOUSESCAMBIOS, CASINOS, CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, 
INSURANCE AND SECURITIES FIRMS, STOCK BROKERS, MONEY 
TRANSFER OFFICES, TRADERS IN HIGH-VALUE ITEMS, CIVIL LAW 
NOTARIES, ATTORNEYS, INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVISORS, 
ACCOUNTANTS, FINANCIAL ADVISORS, TAX ADVISORS, COMPANY 
SERVICE PROVIDERS (INCLUDING TRUST COMPANIES) AND REAL 
ESTATE AGENTS.  WHILE DATA ABOUT INFORMAL HALWALLA BANKING 
AS A A POTENTIALPOTENTIAL MONEY LAUNDERING SOURCE IS STILL 
SCARCE, THE ROLE OF FORMAL MONEY TRANSFER OFFICES (WESTERN 
UNION AND MONEY GRAM) IN LAUNDERING ILLICIT MONEY IS RAPIDLY 
GROWING. 
 
-- MONEY LAUNDERING IS NOT A GOVERNMENT POLICY OR PRACTICE, 
NOR DOES THE DUTCH GOVERNMENT ENCOURAGE, FACILITATE OR 
ENGAGE IN DRUG MONEY LAUNDERING ACTIVITIES. AS GLOBAL 
PLAYERS, SEVERAL DUTCH FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ENGAGE IN 
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING LARGE AMOUNTS 
OF UNITED STATES CURRENCY. THERE ARE, HOWEVER, NO 
INDICATIONS THAT SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF DOLLAR TRANSACTIONS BY 
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE NETHERLANDS STEM FROM ILLICIT 
ACTIVITIES. 
 
¶3. MONEY LAUNDERING: LAWS AND REGULATIONS 
 
-- AS OF DECEMBER 2001 (GOVERNMENT GAZETTE STB. 2001, 606), 
THE DUTCH PENAL CODE (ARTICLES 420BIS, 420TER AND 
420QUARTER) TREATS ENCOURAGING, FACILITATING, OR ENGAGING IN 
MONEY LAUNDERING, REGARDLESS OF THE ORIGIN OF THE FUNDS 
INVOLVED, AS A SEPARATE CRIMINAL OFFENSE. THE PENALTY FOR 
DELIBERATE ACTS OF MONEY LAUNDERING IS CAN BE PENALIZED WITH 
A MAXIUMUM FOUR YEARS IMPRISONMENT AND A MAXIMUM FINE OF 
45,000 EURO (ROUGHLY $60,00057,000 DOLLARS), WHILE THOSE 
FOUND GUILTY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE REASONABLE 
SUSPICION STANDARD OF ARTICLE 420QUARTER ARE SUBJECT TO A 
PENALTY NOT EXCEEDING LIABLE ACTS OF MONEY LAUNDERING ARE 
SUBJECT TO A PENALTY OFONE YEAR IMPRISONMENTAT THE MOST AND 
A MAXIMUM FINE OF 45,000 EURO. REPEATED CONVICTIONS FOR 
MONEY LAUNDERING OFFENSES MAY BE PUNISHED WITH A MAXIMUM OF 
SIX YEARS IMPRISONMENT AND A MAXIMUM FINE OF 45,000 EURO. 
CORPORATIONS MAY FACE FINES OF UP TO 450,000 EUROS, AND 
THOSE CONVICTED MAY ALSO HAVE THEIR PROFESSIONAL LICENSES 
REVOKED UNDER ARTICLE 420QUINQUIES.  SELF-LAUNDERING IS 
PENALIZED, AS THE POSSESSION OF MONEY THAT STEMS FROM 
CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS ALREADY CONSIDERED TO BE MONEY 
LAUNDERING. 
 
 
 
-- DUTCH MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION COMPLIES WITH THE EU 
MONEY LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE AND ALSO RESPONDS TO 
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE FATF ON MONEY LAUNDERING, TO 
WHICH THE NETHERLANDS BELONGS. THE SECOND EU MONEY 
LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE AND THE FATF GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN 
IMPLEMENTED IN THE MONEY LAUNDERING DISCLOSURE OF UNUSUAL 
TRANSACTIONS ACT (DISCLOSURE ACT) AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF 
FINANCIAL SERVICES ACT (THE IDENTIFICATION ACT) 
RESPECTIVELY. AMENDMENTS OF BOTH THE DISCLOSURE ACT AND 
IDENTIFICATION ACT ARE EXPECTED SOON. THE AMENDMENTS OF THE 
DISCLOSURE ACT WILL INCLUDE THE EXPLICIT INCLUSION OF THE 
FIGHT AGAINST TERRORIST FINANCING IN THE SCOPE OF THE ACT 
(CURRENTLY INCLUDED IMPLICITLY IN THE ACT UNDER THE SERIOUS 
CRIMES CLAUSE) AND THE POSSIBILITY FOR SOME SUPERVISORY 
AUTHORITIES TO IMPOSE ADMINISTRATIVE FINES. 
 
-- IN ADDITION TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR MONEY LAUNDERING 
OFFENSES, MONEY LAUNDERING SUSPECTS CAN ALSO BE CHARGED WITH 
PARTICIPATION IN A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION (ART. 140 OF THE 
PENAL CODE WITH A MAXIMUM PENALTY OF NINE YEARS 
IMPRISONMENT), VIOLATION OF FINANCIAL REGULATORY ACTS 
(SUPERVISION OF CREDIT INSTITUTIONS ACT (WTK), MONEY 
SERVICES ACT (WGT)), OR FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE 
OBLIGATION TO DECLARE UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS ACCORDING TO THE 
ECONOMIC OFFENSES ACT (WED). FINALLY, SOME ACTS CONSTITUTE A 
VIOLATION OF THE SANCTIONS ACT (PUNISHABLE WITH A MAXIMUM OF 
SIX YEARS IMPRISONMENT). 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS HAS COMPREHENSIVE MONEY LAUNDERING 
LEGISLATION. THE SERVICES IDENTIFICATION ACT (WID) AND THE 
DISCLOSURE ACT SET FORTH IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING 
REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING 
BANKS, MONEY EXCHANGE BUREAUS, CASINOS, CREDIT CARD 
COMPANIES, INSURANCE FIRMS, SECURITIES FIRMS, STOCK BROKERS 
AND MONEY TRANSFER OFFICES. SINCE 2001, COMPULSORY MONEY 
LAUNDERING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN EXPANDED TO 
INCLUDE TRUST COMPANIES, FINANCING COMPANIES (OF LARGE 
INTERNATIONAL CONGLOMERATES) AND TRADERS COMMERCIALLY 
DEALING IN HIGH VALUE GOODS. 
 
-- SINCE JUNE OF 2003, NOTARIES, LAWYERS AND LAW FIRMS, 
INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVISORS, ACCOUNTANTS, FINANCIAL AND TAX 
ADVISORS, COMPANY SERVICE PROVIDERS AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS 
HAVE ALSO BEEN BROUGHT WITHIN THE AMBIT OF THE 
IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING SYSTEM. ATTORNEY- CLIENT 
PRIVILEGES WILL EXEMPT LAWYERS FROM REPORTING INVOLVING 
CASES UNDER LITIGATION. THE THIRD MONEY LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE 
WILL BRING ALL NATURAL AND LEGAL ENTITIES ACCEPTING, DURING 
THE COURSE OF THEIR PROFESSIONS, CASH PAYMENTS OF 15,000 
EUROS AND MORE UNDER THE SCOPE OF THE DIRECTIVE. 
 
 
 
-- THE DISCLOSURE ACTWET MOT AND THE SANCTIONS ACT MAKE 
REPORTING OF UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS COMPULSORY. ALL FINANCIAL 
INSTITUTIONS, AS WELL AS OTHER ENTITIES/INDIVIDUALS COVERED 
BY THE LAW (AND LOWER LEGISLATION), MUST PAY SPECIAL 
ATTENTION TO ALL UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS AND PATTERNS OF 
TRANSACTIONS, WHICH HAVE NO APPARENT ECONOMIC OR VISIBLE 
LAWFUL PURPOSE. THE DUTCH APPROACH IS THUS FOCUSED ON 
UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS, INSTEAD OF THE MORE RESTRICTED CONCEPT 
OF SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS.  FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, AND 
OTHER ENTITIES, MUST REPORT TRANSACTIONS AS UNUSUAL, EVEN IN 
THE ABSENCE OF DIRECT MONEY LAUNDERING SUSPICION. ATTEMPTED 
TRANSACTIONS WITH/BY/ON BEHALF OF DESIGNATED TERRORIST 
ENTITIES HAVE TO BE REPORTED AS WELL. 
 
-- THE MONEY LAUNDERING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR UNUSUAL 
TRANSACTIONS ARE BASED ON LISTS OF OBJECTIVE INDICATORS 
(CASES OF COMPULSORY REPORTING, MOSTLY DEFINED BY 
QUANTITATIVE THRESHOLDS), AS WELL AS SUBJECTIVE INDICATORS 
(REPORTING ON THE BASIS OF SUBJECTIVE OBSERVATIONS BY THE 
INSTITUTIONS). THESE INDICATORS ARE CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW. 
TO ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 
AND TO REDUCE THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON REPORTING 
INSTITUTIONS, MORE SUBJECTIVE INDICATORS WILL BE DEVELOPED. 
THE DUTCH FIU, THE MELDPUNT ONGEBRUIKELIJKE TRANSACTIES 
(MOT), RECEIVES, RECORDS, PROCESSES AND ANALYZES ALL 
INCOMING REPORTS OF UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS. UNUSUAL 
TRANSACTIONS IDENTIFIED AS SUSPICIOUS ARE PASSED ON TO THE 
POLICE INVESTIGATION SERVICE FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION. 
SINCE THE MONEY LAUNDERING DETECTION SYSTEM ALSO COVERS 
AREAS OUTSIDE THE FINANCIAL SECTOR, THE SYSTEM IS USED ALSO 
FOR THE TRACING OF TERRORIST FINANCING. 
 
-- THE DISCLOSURE ACT (WET MOT) PROTECTS REPORTING 
INSTITUTIONS (AND THEIR EMPLOYEES) FROM CRIMINAL OR CIVIL 
LIABILITY FOR BREACHING ANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS ON 
DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION IMPOSED BY CONTRACT OR BY ANY 
LEGISLATIVE, REGULATORY OR ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.  ALL 
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, AND OTHER ENTITIES, THAT ARE SUBJECT 
TO THE DISCLOSURE ACT ARE SUPERVISED FOR THEIR COMPLIANCE 
WITH THE DISCLOSUREMOT ACT. VIOLATION OF THE DISCLOSURE MOT 
ACT, DEALT WITH IN THE ECONOMIC OFFENSES ACT, MAY LEAD TO 
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. 
 
-- DUTCH BANKS AND OTHER FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ARE REQUIRED 
BY LAW TO MAINTAIN, FOR A PERIOD OF SEVENFIVE YEARS, RECORDS 
NECESSARY TO RECONSTRUCT SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS, 
AND TO RESPOND QUICKLY TO REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION FROM 
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES IN CRIMINAL CASES. 
 
-- THE MOT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1994. IT RECEIVES OVER 8590 
PERCENT OF UNUSUAL TRANSACTION REPORTS ELECTRONICALLY 
THROUGHU ITS SECURE WEBSITE. SUBSEQUENT DATA ANALYSIS 
INCLUDES FULLY AUTOMATIC MATCHES WITH POLICE DATABASES, AS 
WELL AS OTHER MORE SPECIFIC RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS BASED ON A 
VARIETY OF SOURCES AND KNOW-HOW. WHEN UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS 
ARE CLASSIFIED AS 'SUSPICIOUS', THEY ARE REPORTED TO LAW 
ENFORCEMENT BRANCHES AND PUT ON THE INTRANET SUSPICIOUS 
TRANSACTIONS SITE (INTRANET VERDACHTE TRANSACTIES - (IVT). 
INFORMATION ON THE IVT INTRANET IS AVAILABLE TO ALL POLICE 
SERVICES FOR USE OF VARIOUS PURPOSES INCLUDING CRIMINAL 
PROSECUTIONS. COPIES OF ALL SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS ARE 
PASSED TO THE BUREAU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT OF THE 
NATIONAL PROSECUTOR (BLOM). ESTABLISHED IN 1999, THE BLOM 
ASSISTS THE NATIONAL ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 
BY ANALYZING SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS PASSED ON BY THE MOT, 
BY PROVIDING POLICE SERVICES WITH INFORMATION AND 
INTELLIGENCE IN THE FIELD OF ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING (BOTH 
VOLUNTARY AND ON DEMAND), AND BY PREPARING ANTI-MONEY 
LAUNDERING INVESTIGATIONS FOR OTHER POLICE SERVICES. 
 
-- THE MOT (WITH A STAFF OF MORE THAN 25, NOT INCLUDING 
STAFF ASSIGNED TO THE FIU.NET) AND THE BLOM (WITH A STAFF IN 
EXCESS OF 25) RELY ON A HIGHLY TRAINED AND SCREENED 
WORKFORCE THAT IS SLATED FOR RAPID EXPANSION. BOTH THE MOT 
AND BLOM ARE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED INSTITUTIONS THAT 
PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN THE EGMONT GROUP OF FIUS. IN RECENT 
YEARS, THE MOT HAS ALSO SUPERVISED THE PHARE-PROJECT ON 
MONEY LAUNDERING FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION THAT IS NOW AWAITING 
THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL REPORT. THE COUNTRIES THAT TOOK 
PART IN THE PHARE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PROJECT WERE 
BULGARIA, ESTONIA, HUNGARY, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, POLAND, 
ROMANIA, SLOVENIA, THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC AND THE CZECH 
REPUBLIC.  THE MOT HAS ALSO ESTABLISHED, AND MONITORS, THE 
FIU.NET PROJECT (AN ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION 
CURRENTLY BETWEEN EUROPEAN FIUS BY MEANS OF A SECURE WEB). 
 
-- THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNUSUAL FINANCIAL TRANSACTION REPORTS 
RECEIVED BY THE MOT IN 20032002 ROSE SHARPLYALMOST DOUBLED 
(UP 2981 PERCENT) FROM 20022001 TO OVER 177,137000.  DURING 
THE SAME PERIOD, THE MOT CLASSIFIED WELL OVERA TOTAL OF 
CLOSE TO 3824 37,000 UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS AS SUSPICIOUS FOR 
FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY THE BLOM. THE SHARP INCREASE IN 
UNUSUAL TRANSACTION REPORTSI IS THE RESULT CHIEFLY OF A 
STEADY RISE IN REPORTED FILING OF THESE REPORTS BY MONEY 
TRANSFERS OFFICES, NOTABLY TRANSFERS MADE THROUGH PROVIDERS 
LIKE WESTERN UNION AND MONEY GRAM AND TO A LESSER EXTENT TO 
THE INCREASE IN TRANSACTIONS REPORTS ORIGINATING FROM 
DEALERS IN HIGH-VALUE GOODS. 
 
-- IN 2003, BLOM INITIATED 559 INVESTIGATIONS, INCLUDING 75 
HIT-AND-RUN MONEY LAUNDERING (HARM) ACTIONS, RESULTING IN 
THE ARREST OF 78 SUSPECTS. OF THE 75 HARM ACTIONS, 12 
INVOLVED EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS, 54 INVOLVED THE PHYSICAL 
PRESENCE OF LARGE AMOUNTS OF CASH MONEY (CROSS BORDER) AND 
NINE CASES INVOLVED WITHDRAWALS, DEPOSITS, WIRE TRANSFERS OR 
OFFERS OF BANK CHECKS.  WITH REGARD TO THE CROSS-BORDER 
MOVEMENT OF CASH, THE ROYAL CONSTABULARY APPREHENDED 70 
OUTGOING CASH COURIERS AT AMSTERDAM SCHIPHOL AIRPORT AND 
CONFISCATED OVER 9 MILLION EUROS IN CASH. BETWEEN DECEMBER 
2001 AND THE END OF 2003, THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC 
PROSECUTION ISSUED SUMMONS FOR MONEY In 20032002, BLOM 
PREPARED A TOTAL OF 120 HIT-AND-RUN-ANTI MONEY-LAUNDERING 
(HARM) ACTIONS, RESULTING IN THE CONFISCATION OF CLOSE TO 
CLOSE TO 30 MILLION EURO (ROUGHLY $32 MILLION DOLLARS), AND 
THE ARREST OF 192 SUSPECTS. IN ADDITION TO PREPARING THE 
HARM FILES, BLOM INITIATED 322 OTHER MONEY LAUNDERING 
INVESTIGATIONS. BLOM ALSO TREATED 518 DEMANDS FOR 
INFORMATION BY POLICE REGIONAL/LOCAL POLICE SERVICES, 
RELATING TO MORE THAN THREE THOUSAND TRANSACTIONS.  THE BLOM 
ALSO ASSISTED IN 614 REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL LEGAL 
ASSISTANCE. 
--ESTABLISHED IN 1999, THE BLOM IS THE SUCCESSOR OF THE 
FINANCIAL POLICE FINPOL. THE BLOM ASSISTS THE NATIONAL AML 
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BY ANALYSING SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS 
PASSED ON BY THE MOT, PROVIDING POLICE SERVICES WITH 
INFORMATION AND INTELLIGENCE IN THE FIELD OF AML (BOTH 
VOLUNTARY AND ON DEMAND), AND PREPARING AML INVESTIGATIONS 
FOR OTHER POLICE SERVICES. 
 
--THE MOT (STAFF OF MORE THAN 25, NOT INCLUDING STAFF 
ASSIGNED TO EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S PHARE-AML PROJECT), AND 
THE BLOM (STAFF IN EXCESS OF 25) RELY ON A HIGHLY TRAINED 
AND SCREENED WORKFORCE THAT IS SLATED FOR RAPID EXPANSION. 
BOTH MOT AND BLOM ARE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED 
INSTITUTIONS THAT PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN THE EGMONT GROUP OF 
FIU'S. THE MOT SUPERVISES THE PHARE-PROJECT ON MONEY 
LAUNDERING FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION. THE MOT HAS ALSO 
ESTABLISHED, AND MONITORS, THE FIU.NET PROJECT (AN 
ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION CURRENTLY BETWEEN 
EUROPEAN FIU'S BY MEANS OF A SECURE WEB). THE BLOM'S 
ANALYSIS TOOL "WINSTON" (INCLUDING ITS DATABASE) IS 
CURRENTLY ALSO BEING USED BY THE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING 
OFFENSES IN 247 CASES. 
 
-- FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS CANNOT BE PROSECUTED ON THE BASIS 
OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED AS A RESULT OF THEIR REPORTING 
OBLIGATIONS. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ARE PROTECTED AGAINST 
CIVIL LAW SUITS RESULTING FROM DISCLOSURE BY CRIMINAL AND 
CIVIL SAFEGUARDS. THERE ARE NO SECRECY LAWS OR FISCAL 
REGULATIONS THAT KEEP DUTCH BANKS FROM DISCLOSING CLIENT 
OWNERSHIP INFORMATION TO BANK SUPERVISORS AND LAW 
ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES. FURTHERMORE, ON THE BASIS OF 
ARTICLE 126Y OF THE CRIMINAL CODE, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CAN 
ORDER FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO CONTINUE CARRYING OUT THE 
PROVISION OF SERVICES TO A THIRD PARTY UNDER INVESTIGATION 
IN ORDER TO FURTHER THE INVESTIGATION INTO MONEY LAUNDERING 
OFFENSES. 
 
-- THE PROBLEM OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT OF ILLICIT 
CURRENCY AND MONETARY INSTRUMENTS IS DEALT WITH IN THE MONEY 
LAUNDERING GUIDELINES FOR BANKING AND SECURITIES 
TRANSACTIONS. FURTHERMORE, CURRENT LEGISLATION ALSO REQUIRES 
CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES TO REPORT UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS TO THE 
MOTMONEY LAUNDERING DISCLOSURE OFFICE (MOT). HOWEVER, THE 
DUTCH DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A CURRENCY DECLARATION 
REQUIREMENT FOR INCOMING TRAVELERS. AS A CENTRAL PRIORITY OF 
THE DUTCH EU PRESIDENCY IN THE AREA OF ANTI-MONEY 
LAUNDERING, POLITICIAL AGREEMENT WAS REACHED WITHIN THE EU 
IN NOVEMBER 2004 ON THE REGULATION OF CROSS-BORDER CASH 
MOVEMENTS. REGULATIONS ARE DIRECTLY APPLICABLE IN ALL EU 
MEMBER STATES.  WITH REGARD TO THE NETHERLANDS, THIS WILL 
ENTAIL A CURRENCY DECLARATION SYSTEM FOR LARGE QUANTITIES OF 
CASH CARRIED ACROSS THE EU BORDER. 
 
 
 
-- ACCORDING TO NETHERLANDS CENTRAL BANK BALANCE OF PAYMENTS 
REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS OF 2003, A GROUP OF SELECTED 
COMPANIES ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS 
(IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AMOUNT AND INCLUDING CROSS-BORDER 
TRANSACTIONS) DIRECTLY TO THE CENTRAL BANK (DIRECT 
REPORTING). THE BALANCE OF PAYMENTS REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS 
OF 2003 HAVE REPLACED THE GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS FOR 
EXTERNAL PAYMENTS IN PLACE SINCE 2000.  THE LATTER REQUIRED 
DUTCH CITIZENS TO REPORT CROSS-BORDER TRANSACTIONS IN EXCESS 
OF 2,500 EURO (ROUGHLY $3,324172DOLLARS). BANKS SUBSEQUENTLY 
REPORT THESE TRANSACTIONS TO THE NETHERLANDS CENTRAL BANK 
(INDIRECT REPORTING).  IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DISCLOSURE OF 
UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS ACT, THE NETHERLANDS CENTRAL BANK WILL 
REPORT SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS TO THE MOT. 
 
 
 
-- THE MONEY LAUNDERING DISCLOSURE ACT, THE SANCTIONS ACT, 
AND THE SERVICES IDENTIFICATION ACT (WID) INCLUDE THE 
OBLIGATION TO REPORT AND IDENTIFY CLIENTS, AND TO KEEP 
RECORDS OF TRANSACTIONS AND OF IDENTIFIED CLIENTS. THE 
ECONOMIC OFFENSES ACT (WED) STIPULATES THAT ANYONE REFUSING 
TO COMPLY WITH THE OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE UNUSUAL 
TRANSACTIONS AND PROVIDE IDENTIFICATION IS COMMITTING AN 
OFFENSE AND LIABLE TO A FINE OR IMPRISONMENT.  THEREFORE, 
"DUE DILIGENCE" OR "BANKER NEGLIGENCE" LEGISLATION TO 
ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM, THEREFORE, IS NOT NEEDED. 
 
 
 
-- DUTCH CRIMINAL LAW ADDRESSES INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATE 
LIABILITY, WHICH CAN BE APPLIED TO ACTING MANAGERS 
INDIVIDUALLY (ARTICLE 51 OF THE PENAL CODE). MORE 
IMPORTANTLY, THERE IS SUPERVISION FOR COMPLIANCE OF ALL LAWS 
MENTIONED. REGULAR PRUDENTIAL SUPERVISION OF ALL FINANCIAL 
INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 
AND SOME DESIGNATED NON-BANKING BUSINESSESS AND PROFESSIONS, 
ALSO CONTAINS AN INTEGRITY COMPONENT. 
 
-- MONEY LAUNDERING CONTROLS APPLY TO ALL NON-BANKING 
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING MONEY EXCHANGE 
HOUSESCAMBIOS, CASINOS, CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, INSURANCE AND 
SECURITIES COMPANIES, STOCKBROKERS AND MONEY TRANSFER 
OFFICES.  THESE CONTROLS INCLUDE SCREENING COMPANY OFFICERS 
FOR INTEGBRITY.  IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EU'S SECOND MONEY 
LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE, LEGISLATION ON CONTROLS ON MONEY 
LAUNDERING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING IDENTIFICATION AND 
REPORTING OBLIGATIONS AND SUPERVISION), WHICH IS ALSO 
APPLICABLE TO NOTARIES, LAWYERS AND LAW FIRMS, INDEPENDENT 
LEGAL ADVISORS, ACCOUNTANTS, FINANCIAL ADVISORS, TAX 
ADVISORS, REAL ESTATE AGENTS AND TRADERS IN HIGH-VALUE 
GOODS, HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED SINCE JUNE OF 2003. COMPANY 
SERVICE PROVIDERS - ALTHOUGH NOT MENTIONED EXPLICITLY IN THE 
EU ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING DIRECTIVE - ARE ALSO COVERED BY 
DUTCH MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION. 
 
-- THE BANKING COMMUNITY IS LARGELY SUPPORTIVE OF ANTI- 
MONEY LAUNDERING EFFORTS.  ALTHOUGH THE BANKING COMMUNITY 
REMAINS CRITICAL OF THE EXTRA BURDEN THAT REPORTING 
OBLIGATIONS IMPOSE ON THE FINANCIAL SECTOR, BANKS NOW FULLY 
COMPLY WITH THE MONEY LAUNDERING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. 
THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS THAT MONEY LAUNDERING REPORTING 
REQUIREMENTS HAVE ADVERSELY AFFECTED DUTCH FINANCIAL 
INSTITUTIONS. NEITHER IS THERE ANY INDICATION OF A DECLINE 
IN BANKING DEPOSITS AS A RESULT OF MONEY LAUNDERING 
LEGISLATION. 
 
¶4. TERRORIST FINANCING 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS HAS AN 'ALL OFFENSES' REGIME FOR 
PREDICATE OFFENSES OF MONEY LAUNDERING, MEANING THAT ANY 
TERRORIST CRIME WILL AUTOMATICALLY QUALIFY AS A PREDICATE 
OFFENSE. 
 
-- ARTICLES 46 AND 140A OF THE CRIMINAL CODE CRIMINALIZE THE 
FINANCING OF TERRORISM. ARTICLE 46 IMPOSES A PRISON TERM OF 
AT LEAST EIGHT YEARS FOR THE PLANNING OF ANY CRIME IF THE 
(SOLE) PERPETRATOR INTENTIONALLY "ACQUIRES, MANUFACTURES, 
IMPORTS, RE-EXPORTS, EXPORTS OR HAS IN HIS POSSESSION GOODS 
(INCLUDING MONIES OR OTHER PROPERTY) THAT ARE APPARENTLY 
DESIGNATED FOR THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME." THE FINANCING OF 
A CRIMINAL OFFENSE FALLS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF MAKING 
PREPARATIONS FOR A CRIME UNDER ARTICLE 46 OF THE CRIMINAL 
CODE. PARTICIPATION IS PUNISHABLE BY ADDING ONE HALF THE 
PENALTY FOR THE OFFENSE BEING PLANNED AND, IN THE CASE OF A 
LIFE SENTENCE, BY TEN YEARS. 
 
-- ARTICLE 140A CRIMINALIZES EXPLICITLY PARTICIPATION IN AN 
ORGANIZATION WHEN THE INTENT IS TO COMMIT ACTS OF TERRORISM 
AND DEFINES PARTICIPATION AS INCLUDING THE PROVISION OF 
MONETARY OR OTHER MATERIAL SUPPORT AND THE PROVISION OF 
MONEY TO PERSONS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION. 
PARTICIPATION IN SUCH AN ORGANIZATION IS PUNISHABLE BY 15 
YEARS IMPRISONMENT.  LEADERSHIP OF A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION 
IS PUNISHABLE WITH A LIFE SENTENCE. 
 
-- UNDER ARTICLES 2 AND 4(AL 13)-(AL 14) OF THE CRIMINAL 
CODE, TERRORISM FINANCING OFFENSES OCCUR IF THE PROVISION OR 
COLLECTION OF ASSETS TAKES PLACE IN THE NETHERLANDS EVEN IF 
THE TERRORISTS OR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE 
OF THE NETHERLANDS OR THE TERRORIST ACT TAKES PLACE OR IS TO 
TAKE PLACE ELSEWHERE. UNDER ARTICLE 140A, PARTICIPATION IN A 
CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION OFFENSE EVEN INCLUDES PARTICIPATION IN 
A FOREIGN ORGANIZATION. 
 
FINANCING OF TERRORIST ACTIVITIES IS SUBJECT TO ARTICLE 46 
OF THE DUTCH PENAL CODE AS AMENDED DECEMBER 17, 2001 
(GOVERNMENT GAZETTE STB. 2001, 675). THE AMENDMEND IS 
RELATED TO SPECIFIC REFERENCE MADE TO "MATERIAL SUPPORT" 
(INCLUDING MONEY) FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMMITTING A SERIOUS 
OFFENCE. FURTHERMORE, THE TEXT OF ARTICLE 46 WAS AMENDED TO 
ALSO APPLY TO SINGLE PERPETRATORS, WHERE BEFOREHAND 
PREPARATION WAS AN ACT COMMITTED BY TWO OR MORE PERSONS. THE 
MAXIMUM PENALTY UNDER ARTICLE 46 IS TEN YEARS OF 
IMPRISONMENT. 
 
THE ACT ON TERRORIST OFFENCES (GOVERNMENT GAZETTE STB 
2004,290) TOOK EFFECT ON AUGUST 10, 2004. THE NEW ACT 
INTRODUCES ARTICLE 140A ON THE PARTICIPATION IN A TERRORIST 
ORGANIZATION. THE ACT INCLUDES A SEPARATE SUB ARTICLE (140A 
AL 3) DEALING WITH "PROVIDING FINANCIAL OR OTHER MATERIAL 
SUPPORT TO TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS" (REFERRING TO THE ALSO 
NEW ARTICLE 140 AL 4).  THE PROVISION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT 
CONSTITUTES PARTICIPATION IN THE ORGANIZATION AS SUCH.  THE 
MAXIMUM PENALTY UNDER ARTICLE 140A IS FIFTEEN YEARS OF 
EMPRISONMENT FOR PARTICIPATION AND LIFE EMPRISONMENT FOR 
LEADERS OF AN ORGANIZATION.   LEGISLATION INCREASING THE 
PENALTIES FOR TERRORIST FINANCING WAS PASSED BY THE SECOND 
CHAMBER OF PARLIAMENT AND IS NOW PENDING BEFORE THE UPPER 
CHAMBER; IT IS EXPECTED.TO PASS AND GO INTO EFFECT BY MID 
¶2004. 
 
WITH ARTICLES 46 AND 140A ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UN 
CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION OF THE FINANCING OF TERRORIST 
FINANCING ARE MET. THE ARTICLES CONSTITUTES AN EFFICIENT 
INSTRUMENT IN PROSECUTING AND CONVICTING THOSE THAT FINANCE 
TERRORIST ACTIVITIES. -- FOLLOWING THE 9/11 EVENTS, THE 
NETHERLANDS AMENDED ITS NATIONAL SANCTIONS ACT TO IMPLEMENT 
UNSCR 1373 AND EU REGULATION 2580/2001. THERE IS AN 
INDEPENDENT BASIS FOR INSTITUTING CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS FOR 
VIOLATIONS OF PROVISIONS OF THE SANCTIONS ACT OF 1977 THAT 
RELATE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UN AND EU FREEZE LISTS. 
IN THE NETHERLANDS, ENGAGING IN ANY FINANCIAL OR ECONOMIC 
TRANSACTION WITH A PERSON OR ORGANIZATION WHOSE NAME APPEARS 
ON ONE OF THE LISTS IS A VIOLATION OF THE SANCTIONS ACT. 
THIS VIOLATION, IN TURN, IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE PUNISHABLE BY 
UP TO SIX YEARS IMPRISONMENT UNDER THE ECONOMIC OFFENSES 
ACT.  IF THE NETHERLANDS INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY SERVICE 
(AIVD) HAS AN INDICATION THAT AN INDIVIDUAL/ORGANIZATION 
SUPPORTS AN ENTITY ON THE LIST, IT CAN PASS THE INFORMATION 
TO THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR DEALING WITH TERRORIST CASES. 
 
-- THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CAN ACT (ON THE BASIS OF CRIMINAL 
LAW) ACCORDING TO ITS DISCRETIONARY POWERS. IF THE POLICE 
HAVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION THAT THE SANCTIONS ACT HAS BEEN 
VIOLATED, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CAN START A CRIMINAL 
INVESTIGATION INDEPENDENTLY. TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY UNDER 
THE SANCTIONS ACT, IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SHOW THAT AN 
OFFENDER WAS AWARE OF THE PURPOSE OF THE FINANCIAL 
TRANSACTION. IT IS SUFFICIENT FOR A CONVICTION THAT A 
PROVISION OF THE SANCTIONS ACT ADOPTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
INTERNATIONAL DECISIONS HAS BEEN VIOLATED WILLFULLY OR 
THROUGH SIGNIFICANT NEGLIGENCE.  MOREOVER, WITH THE 
CRIMINALIZATION OF THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM, INTENDED 
VIOLATION OF THE SANCTIONS ACT COULD ALSO CONSTITUTE AN 
OFFENSE UNDER THE PENAL CODE AND WOULD BE PUNISHABLE UNDER 
THESE TERMS (UP TO A LIFE SENTENCE). 
 
--FOLLOWING THE 9/11 EVENTS, THE NETHERLANDS AMENDED ITS 
NATIONAL SANCTIONS ACT TO IMPLEMENT UNSC 1373 AND EU 
REGULATION 2580/2001.  THIS PROVIDED THE LEGAL BASIS TO 
FREEZE THE ASSETS OF LISTED TERRORISTS, TERRORIST 
ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR SUPPORTERS. PARLIAMENTARY 
RATIFICATION OF AMENDED SANCTIONS LEGISLATION TOOK PLACE 
JUNE 7, 2002. INVOLVEMENT IN FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH 
INDIVIDUALS AND/OR ORGANIZATIONS DESIGNATED NATIONALLY, BY 
THE EU, OR UN LISTS HAS BEEN MADE A CRIMINAL OFFENSE. 
VIOLATION OF THE SANCTIONS ACT IS PUNISHABLE AS A (ECONOMIC) 
CRIMINAL OFFENSE. IF THE NETHERLANDS INTELLIGENCE AND 
SECURITY SERVICE (AIVD) HAS AN INDICATION THAT AN 
INDIVIDUAL/ORGANIZATION SUPPORTS AN ENTITY ON THE LIST, IT 
CAN PASS THE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR DEALING 
WITH TERRORIST CASES.  THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CAN ACT (ON THE 
BASIS OF CRIMINAL LAW) ACCORDING TO ITS DISCRETIONARY 
POWERS. IF THE POLICE HAVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION THAT THE 
SANCTIONS ACT HAS BEEN VIOLATED, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CAN 
START A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INDEPENDENTLY. 
-- THE NETHERLANDS HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IDENTIFY, FREEZE AND 
SEIZE TERRORIST FINANCE ASSETS, BASED ON THE SANCTIONS ACT, 
ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 1977, AND AMENDED ON JUNE 7, 2002 TO 
INCLUDE IMPLEMENTATION OF UNSCR 1373 AND EU REGULATION 
2580/2001.  THE SANCTIONS ACT ALLOWS MEASURES TO BE TAKEN 
AGAINST INDIVIDUALS OR ORGANIZATIPONS ON THE BASIS OF 
TERRORIST SUSPICION.  ARETERRORIST ASSETS HAVE BEEN FROZEN 
BASED ON THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED BY THE SANCTIONS ACT, 
UNSCRS, AND EU DIRECTIVES. THE NETHERLANDS HAS AUTONOMOUSLY 
DESIGNATED TERRORIST AND FROZEN ASSETS.  FREEZING OF ASSETS 
IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE. 
 
 
 
-- DUTCH AUTHORITIES AND U.S. OFFICIALS ARE WORKING TOGETHER 
CLOSELY TO FIGHT TERRORIST FINANCING. TO FACILITATE 
COORDINATION AND COMMUNICATION OF TERRORIST FINANCING 
MEASURES WITH THE FINANCIAL SECTOR, A WORKING GROUP HAS BEEN 
ESTABLISHED CONSISTING OF GOVERNMENT ENTITIES INVOLVED IN 
DRAWING UP LISTS OF TERRORISTS (MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 
MINISTRY OF JUSTICE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, MINISTRY OF 
INTERIOR, POLICE, THE NETHERLANDS INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY 
SERVICES, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, FINANCIAL SECTOR SUPERVISORS). 
 
-- THE DUTCH FINANCE MINISTRY, IN CLOSE COORDINATION WITH 
THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTRY, DISTRIBUTES LISTS OF ENTITIES 
WHOSEWHOSE ASSETS MUST BE FROZEN) TO FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 
AND RELEVANT GOVERNMENT BODIES (INCLUDING LOCAL TAX 
AUTHORITIES).  FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS SCREEN LISTS OF 
CUSTOMERS ON A TIMELY BASIS. EXACT HITS AUTOMATICALLY LEAD 
TO FREEZING OF ALL ACCOUNTS OF THE CUSTOMER. PERSONAL 
INFORMATION AND TRANSACTION RECORDS ARE SUBSEQUENTLY 
FORWARDED TO THE NETHERLANDS INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY 
SERVICES THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND THE FINANCIAL 
MARKETS SUPERVISORS. 
 
THE NETHERLANDS HAS FROZEN MORE TERRORIST RELATED ASSETS 
THAN ANY OTHER EU MEMBER STATE. 
 
-- THE MONEY SERVICES ACT, WHICH REGULATES AND FACILITATES 
(INTEGRITY) SUPERVISION FOR BOTH MONEY REMITTANCE SYSTEMS 
AND MONEY EXCHANGERS, TOOK EFFECT ON JUNE 2001. THE LAW 
EXPLICITLY FORBIDS UNLICENSED MONEY SERVICES. ALL ENTITIES 
AND/OR INDIVIDUALS ENGAGED IN MONEY TRANSFERS HAVE TO 
REGISTER FOR SUPERVISION BY THE NETHERLANDS CENTRAL BANK. 
TO THIS END, THE MANAGERS OF THE ENTITY OR THE INDIVIDUALS 
ARE SCREENED BY THE CENTRAL BANK. THE DETECTION OF ILLICIT 
MONEY SERVICE ENTITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY CHIEFLY OF THE 
DUTCH POLICE AND THE ECONOMIC AND FISCAL INVESTIGATION 
SERVICE. 
 
-- POSSIBLE UNDERGROUND BANKING HAS COME UNDER INCREASED 
SCRUTINY; FOR EXAMPLE, THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE HAS ORDERED A 
STUDY IN THIS FIELD, WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED SHORTLY. 
FURTHERMORE, THE MINISTERS OF JUSTICE AND FINANCE HAVE 
JOINTLY TASKED THE FINANCIAL EXPERT CENTRE (FINANCIEEL 
EXPERTISE CENTRUM, FEC) TO REVIEW CURRENT PROCEDURES IN THE 
FIGHT AGAINST UNDERGROUND BANKING TO DETECT POSSIBLE BOTTLE 
NECKS. 
 
 
 
-- SINCE JANUARY 2002, DEALERS IN HIGH VALUE GOODS ARE 
REQUIRED BY LAW TO REPORT UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS TO THE DUTCH 
MOT. THE REQUIREMENT ENTAILS AN OBLIGATION TO REPORT ANY 
TRANSACTION INVOLVING A CASH PAYMENT OF 15,000 EURO (ROUGHLY 
$20,00019 DOLLARS) OR MORE. TRANSACTIONS THAT, UNDER THE 
CIRCUMSTANCES, ARE CONSIDERED UNUSUAL OR SUSPICIOUS MUST 
ALSO BE REPORTED. REPORTS MUST INCLUDE A DETAILED 
DESCRIPTION OF THE TRANSACTION AS WELL AS A FULL 
IDENTIFICATION OF THE CUSTOMER/CLIENT. 
 
-- UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS REPORTED BY THE FINANCIAL SECTOR ARE 
THE FIRST FILTER AGAINST THE ABUSE OF RELIGIOUS 
ORGANIZATIONS, FOUNDATIONS AND CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS FOR 
TERRORIST FINANCING.  NO INDIVIDUAL OR LEGAL ENTITY 
(CHURCHES OR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS INCLUDED) IS EXEMPT FROM 
THE OBLIGATION OF IDENTIFICATION WHEN USING THE FINANCIAL 
SYSTEM. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MUST ALSO INQUIRE ABOUT THE 
IDENTITY OF THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIAL OWNERS. A PAPER TRAIL IS 
THUS MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE PAYMENT CHAIN. 
 
-- A SECOND FILTER IS PROVIDED BY DUTCH CIVIL LAW 
(HANDELSREGISTERWET) THAT REQUIRES REGISTRATION OF ALL 
ACTIVE FOUNDATIONS - THE MOST APPROPRIATE FORM OF LEGAL 
ENTITY TO BE USED FOR CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS - IN THE 
REGISTERS OF THE CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE. EACH FOUNDATION'S 
FORMAL STATUTES (CREATION OF THE FOUNDATION MUST BE 
CERTIFIED BY A NOTARY OF LAW) MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE 
CHAMBERS. 
 
-- THE OBLIGATION THAT CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS REGISTER 
WITH, AND REPORT TO, THE TAX AUTHORITIES IN ORDER TO QUALIFY 
FOR FAVOURABLE TAX TREATMENT (REDUCED GIFT TAXES, DEDUCTION 
OF DONATIONS) ACTS AS A THIRD FILTER. APPROXIMATELY 15,000 
ORGANIZATIONS (AND THEIR MANAGEMENT) THAT SERVE A PUBLIC 
PURPOSE ARE REGISTERED IN THIS WAY. THE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE 
TO FILE THEIR STATUTES, SHOWING THEIR PURPOSE AND MODE OF 
OPERATIONS, AND SUBMIT ANNUAL REPORTS. SAMPLES ARE TAKEN FOR 
AUDITING. 
 
-- FINALLY, MANY DUTCH CHARITIES ARE REGISTERED WITH OR 
MONITORED BY PRIVATE WATCHDOG ORGANIZATIONS OR SELF- 
REGULATORY BODIES, THE MOST IMPORTANT OF WHICH IS THE 
CENTRAL BUREAU FOR FUND RAISING. 
 
-- TO FURTHER ENHANCE SCRUTINY OF THE NON-PROFIT SECTOR, 
VARIOUS STEPS FOR NEAR FUTURE ACTIONS ARE CURRENTLY UNDER 
CONSIDERATION.  THESE ACTIONS MAY INCLUDE COMPULSORY 
PUBLICATION OF ANNUAL STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNTS, MORE 
REPRESSIVE SUPERVISION, AND/OR INJUNCTIONS AGAINST BEING 
MEMBERS OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS. 
 
¶5.   OFFSHORE FINANCIAL CENTERS 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS IS NOT AN OFFSHORE FINANCIAL CENTER IN 
THE SENSE OF AN INTERNATIONAL CENTER PROVIDING ATTRACTIVE 
FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES TO NON-RESIDENTS, NOR ARE 
THERE ANY FREE-TRADE ZONES IN THE NETHERLANDS. 
 
¶6.   INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION 
 
-- THE UNITED STATES ENJOYS GOOD COOPERATION WITH THE 
NETHERLANDS IN FIGHTING INTERNATIONAL CRIME, INCLUDING MONEY 
LAUNDERING.  IN SEPTEMBER 2004, THE UNITED STATES AND THE 
NETHERLANDS SIGNED TWO AGREEMENTS IN THE AREA OF MUTUAL 
LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND EXTRADITION, STEMMING FROM THE 
AGREEMENTS THAT WERE CONCLUDED IN 2003 BETWEEN THE EU AND 
THE UNITED STATES. ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE EXISTING 
BILATERAL AGREEMENT IS THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON BANK 
ACCOUNTS. 
 
-- THE MOTOFFICE FOR THE DISCLOSURE OF UNUSUAL TRANSACTIONS 
(MOT) HAS ESTABLISHED CLOSE LINKS WITH THE U.S. FINCEN AND 
IS ALSO INVOLVED IN EFFORTS TO EXPAND INTERNATIONAL 
COOPERATION BETWEEN DISCLOSURE OFFICES. 
 
 
 
-- ADEQUATE RECORDS ARE MADE AVAILABLE OFFICIALLY TO 
APPROPRIATE USG PERSONNEL THROUGH OUR MUTUAL LEGAL 
ASSISTANCE TREATY (MLAT) WITH THE NETHERLANDS.  U.S. 
AUTHORITIES COOPERATE CLOSELY WITH THE DIENST NATIONALE 
RECHERCHE INFORMATIE (DIN) AND WITH THE DUTCH INTERNAL 
REVENUE SERVICE INVESTIGATION OFFICE. 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS HAS RATIFIED THE 1988 UN DRUG CONVENTION 
AND THE 1990 COUNCIL OF EUROPE CONVENTIONOF STRASBOURG 
ONMONEY LAUNDERING, SEARCH, SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION OF THE 
PROCEEDS OF CRIME.  THE NETHERLANDS IS ACTIVE IN THE FATF, 
WHICH IT CHAIRED IN 1994/95; THE AND THE CARIBBEAN FINANCIAL 
ACTION TASK FORCE (CFATF).; AND THE UN COMMISSION ON 
NARCOTIC DRUGS, WHICH IT CHAIRED IN 1991.  A REPRESENTATIVE 
OF THE DUTCH MOT IS ASSISTING THE SURINAMESE GOVERNMENT IN 
ESTABLISHING A FIU.  THE NETHERLANDS IS A MEMBER OF THE UN 
COMMISSION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, WHICH IT CHAIRED IN 1991, THE 
MAJOR DONORS GROUP OF THE UNODC AND AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTOR 
TO EU COUNTER-NARCOTICS EFFORTS. 
 
-- THE DUTCH ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF THE EGMONT GROUP OF FIUS 
FOR THE EXCHANGE OF KNOW-HOW AND EXPERIENCE IN THE FIGHT 
AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING.  THE DUTCH HOSTED AND CHAIRED THE 
EGMONT PLENARY IN 2001 AND PROVIDE PERMANENT ADMINISTRATIVE 
SUPPORT TO THE GROUP. THE DUTCH MOT IS THE MAIN CONTRACTOR 
FOR THE SECOND ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PROJECT UNDER AUSPICES 
OF THE PHARE "MULTI-COUNTRY" PROGRAM OF THE EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION. THE NETHERLANDS RATIFIED THE 1999 UN CONVENTION 
FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF FINANCING OF TERRORISM AND THE 1997 
UN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF THE 
FINANCING OF TERRORISM. THE NETHERLANDS IS A PARTY TO THE 
2000 PALERMO CONVENTION ON TRANS BOUNDARY ORGANIZED CRIME. 
THE DUTCH COOPERATE WITH THE U.S. AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS IN 
INVESTIGATING FINANCIAL CRIMES. 
 
 
 
-- THE CENTRAL BANK OF THE NETHERLANDS (DE NEDERLANDSCHE 
BANK N.V.), WHICH MERGED WITH THE PENSION AND INSURANCE 
CHAMBER (PVK) IN APRIL OF 2004, AND THE FINANCIAL MARKETS 
AUTHORITY (AUTORITEIT FINANCIELE MARKTEN AFM)AND THE PENSION 
AND INSURANCE CHAMBER (PENSIOEN EN VERZEKERINGS KAMER PVK), 
AS THE SUPERVISORS OF THE DUTCH FINANCIAL SECTOR (BANKS, 
STOCKMARKET, COLLECTIVE PENSION SYSTEMS, INSURANCE AND 
SECURITY SECTOR, MONEY EXCHANGE BUSINESS, MONEY TRANSFER 
INSTITUTIONS AND CREDIT CARD COMPANIES) REGULARLY EXCHANGE 
INFORMATION NATIONALLY AND INTERNATIONALLY. SHARING OF 
INFORMATION BY DUTCH SUPERVISORS DOES NOT REQUIRE FORMAL 
AGREEMENTS OR MOUS. WHERE REQUIRED, HOWEVER, MOUS HAVE BEEN 
AGREED. DUTCH FINANCIAL SECTOR SUPERVISORS ARE IN COMPLIANCE 
WITH FATF, BASEL, IAIS AND IOSCO REQUIREMENTS.  PLANS TO 
MERGE THE SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES OF THE PENSION AND 
INSURANCE CHAMBER (PVK) WITH THAT OF THE NETHERLANDS CENTRAL 
BANK ARE WELL ADVANCED. 
 
-- DUTCH AUTHORITIES COOPERATE WITH U.S. AGENCIES ON MAJOR 
MONEY LAUNDERING CASES.  THIS COOPERATION HAS RESULTED IN 
SIGNIFICANT SEIZURES OF ASSETS IN BOTH COUNTRIES. DESPITE 
DIFFERENT CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SYSTEMS, MUTUAL LEGAL 
ASSISTANCE BETWEEN THE US AND THE NETHERLANDS IS STRONG.  WE 
KNOW OF NO INSTANCES WHERE THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NETHERLANDS 
HAS REFUSED TO COOPERATE WITH USG OR FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS IN 
EXCHANGING INFORMATION, NOR ARE WE AWARE OF ANY ACTION BY 
THE USG OR INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AGAINST SUCH A 
REFUSAL. THE NETHERLANDS ALSO EXTRADITES ITS NATIONALS, 
INCLUDING TO THE U.S. 
 
-- THE MOT EXCHANGES INFORMATION FREELY WITH RECOGNISED 
FIUS, ON AN AD-HOC BASIS. THIS MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO DEVELOP 
AND PROMOTE THE FIU.NET. THE MOT HAS ALSO CONCLUDED FORMAL 
MOUS WITH BELGIUM, ARUBA AND THE NETHERLANDS ANTILLES, 
ALTHOUGH THESE ARE NOT NECESSARY TO EXCHANGE MOT INFORMATION 
UNDER DUTCH LAW. THE BLOM CAN EXCHANGE INFORMATION ON THE 
BASIS OF MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE REQUESTS. 
 
-- THE U.S. AND THE NETHERLANDS HAVE AN AGREEMENT ON ASSET 
SHARING DATING BACK TO 1994. RECORDS RELATED TO EXTRADITION 
AND LEGAL ASSISTANCE ARE MADE AVAILABLE OFFICIALLY TO 
APPROPRIATE USG PERSONNEL THROUGH THE MLAT WITH THE 
NETHERLANDS. 
 
¶7.  ASSET FORFEITURE AND SEIZURE LEGISLATION 
 
-- THE NETHERLANDS HAS ENACTED LEGISLATION GOVERNING ASSET 
FORFEITURES. DUTCH AUTHORITIES ARE ABLE TO IDENTIFY, TRACE, 
FREEZE, AND SEIZE FORFEITED NARCOTICS-RELATED ASSETS. 
IMPLEMENTING THE STRASBOURG CONVENTION, THE ASSET SEIZURE 
AND CONFISCATION ACT OF DECEMBER 10, 1992 WENT INTO EFFECT 
IN MARCH OF 1993. FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF A 1998 
EVALUATION STUDY, LEGISLATION HAS BEEN IMPROVED AND 
EXTENDED. AMENDMENTS TOOK EFFECT IN NOVEMBER OF 2003.  DUTCH 
LEGISLATIONTHE 1992 ASSET SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION ACT 
ENABLES THE AUTHORITIES TO CONFISCATE ASSETS THAT ARE 
ILLICITLY OBTAINED OR OTHERWISE CONNECTED TO CRIMINAL ACTS. 
A 1998 EVALUATION OF CURRENT SEIZURES AND FORFEITURE 
LEGISLATION CONCLUDED THAT, ALTHOUGH NO MAJOR CHANGES IN 
ASSET SEIZURE LEGISLATION ARE REQUIRED, MINOR ADJUSTMENTS 
HAVE BEEN ADVISED TO IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ACT. 
UNDER DUTCH LEGISLATION, THERE IS NO NEED TO CREATE A 
SPECIFIC LEGAL BASIS FOR SHARING OF SEIZED ASSETS. HOWEVER, 
SOME COUNTRIES PREFER A FORMAL TREATY AS A LEGAL BASIS. THE 
NETHERLANDS HAS A TREATY ON ASSET SHARING WITH THE US AND 
WITH THE UK, AS WELL AS AN AGREEMENT WITH LUXEMBOURG. 
 
  ASSET SHARING NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE PENDING. 
 
-- THE 1992 ASSET SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION ACT APPLIES TO 
THE SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION OF PROCEEDS OF ALL CRIMES. THE 
SYSTEM IS PRINCIPALLY VALUE-BASED, THOUGH PROPERTY-BASED 
ORDERS CAN ALSO BE MADE. ANY TANGIBLE ASSETS, SUCH AS REAL 
ESTATE OR OTHER CONVEYANCES THAT WERE PURCHASED DIRECTLY 
WITH THE PROCEEDS OF A CRIME TRACKED TO ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES, 
MAY BE SEIZED.  PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CONFISCATION AS AN 
INSTRUMENTALITY MAY CONSIST OF BOTH MOVEABLE PROPERTY AND 
CLAIMS.  ASSETS CAN BE SEIZED AS A VALUE-BASED CONFISCATION. 
 
-- ASSET SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION LEGISLATION ALSO PROVIDES 
FOR THE SEIZURE OF ADDITIONAL ASSETS CONTROLLED BY 
TRAFFICKERS. LEGISLATION DEFINES PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF 
CONFISCATION AS "ANY OBJECT AND ANY PROPERTY RIGHT." 
PROCEEDS FROM NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURES AND FORFEITURES ARE 
DEPOSITED IN THE GENERAL FUND OF THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE. 
NEITHER THE DUTCH NOR U.S. AUTHORITIES HAVE IDENTIFIED ANY 
SIGNIFICANT LEGAL LOOPHOLES THAT ALLOW TRAFFICKERS TO SHIELD 
ASSETS. DUTCH LEGISLATION ALLOWS THE GOVERNMENT TO FORFEIT 
SEIZED ASSETS. DUTCH LAW ALLOWS FOR CRIMINAL FORFEITURE.  TO 
REMOVE ANY EXISTING OBSTACLES, AND TO IMPROVE AND STRENGTHEN 
THE OPTIONS FOR IDENTIFYING, FREEZING AND SEIZING CRIMINAL 
ASSETS IN GENERAL, LEGISLATION WAS AMENDED IN 2003. 
 
¶8. ASSET SEIZURE ENFORCEMENT 
 
-- THE GON ENFORCES DRUG-RELATED ASSET SEIZURE AND 
FORFEITURE LEGISLATION THAT CAME INTO EFFECT IN MARCH OF 
¶1993. DUTCH GOVERNMENT ENTITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCEMENT 
IN THIS AREA INCLUDE THE POLICE AND SEVERAL SPECIAL 
INVESTIGATION SERVICES. THESE ENTITIES HAVE ADEQUATE POWERS 
AND RESOURCES TO TRACE AND SEIZE ASSETS. 
 
SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT UNITS ARE CURRENTLY BEING 
ESTABLISHED IN THE AREA OF FINANCIAL INVESTIGATION METHODS 
TO BETTER EQUIP THE POLICE FORCE, THE SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 
SERVICES AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORS WITH REGARD TO 
IDENTIFYING, TRACING, FREEZING AND SEIZING CRIMINAL ASSETS. 
 
-- DUTCH CRIMINAL LAW PROVIDES AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO SEIZE 
AND CONFISCATE CRIMINAL ASSETS (ART. 36E PENAL CODE). IN 
ORDER TO PROMOTE THE CONFISCATION OF CRIMINAL ASSETS, 
SPECIAL COURT PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN CREATED, ENABLING LAW 
ENFORCEMENT TO CONTINUE FINANCIAL INVESTIGATIONS IN ORDER TO 
PREPARE CONFISCATION AFTER THE UNDERLYING CRIMES HAVE BEEN 
SUCCESSFULLY ADJUDICATED. 
 
-- ASSET SEIZURE HAS BEEN, AS A MATTER OF POLICY, FULLY 
INTEGRATED IN ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO 
SERIOUS CRIME. ALL POLICE SERVICES INVESTIGATING IN THE 
FIELD OF ORGANIZED CRIME CAN RELY ON THE REAL TIME 
ASSISTANCE OF FINANCIAL DETECTIVES AND ACCOUNTANTS, AS WELL 
AS ON THE ASSISTANCE OF BOOM, THE SPECIAL BUREAU ADVISING 
THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR IN COMPLEX (I.E. 
INTERNATIONAL) SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION CASES. TO FURTHER 
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THIS AREA, THE CAMDEN ASSET 
RECOVERY NETWORK (CARIN) WAS SET UP IN THE HAGUE IN 
SEPTEMBER 2004. BOOM PLAYED A LEADING ROLE IN THE 
ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS INFORMAL INTERNATIONAL NETWORK OF 
ASSET RECOVERY SPECIALISTS, WHOSE AIM IS THE EXCHANGE OF 
INFORMATION AND EXPERTISE IN THE AREA OF ASSET RECOVERY. 
 
-- FORFEITURE STATISTICS PROVIDED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT OF ASSETS FORFEITED 
AND/OR SEIZED IN 20032002 AMOUNTED TO 10.1 MILLION EUROS 
($11 MILLION), COMPARED TO 7.9 MILLION EUROS ($8.4 MILLION 
DOLLARS)) IN 2002, AND, COMPARED TOTO 9.1 MILLION EUROS 
($10.1 MILLION DOLLARS) IN 2001.    AND FROM 10 MILLION 
EUROS ($10.9 MILLION DOLLARS) IN 2000. THESE STATISTICS DO 
NOT INCLUDE FORFEITURE BASED ON TAXATION LEGISLATION). 
 
REPRESENT EXCLUSIVELY TERRORIST FINANCING ASSETS. INADEQUATE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSET SEIZURE LEGISLATION AND BOTTLENECKS 
IN THE LAW ITSELF HAVE KEPT THE AMOUNTS SEIZED SO FAR BELOW 
OFFICIAL PUBLIC PRESCUTOR PROJECTIONS. 
 
--IN ADDITION TO REGULAR ASSET SEIZURE, THE OFFICE OF THE 
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S HIT-AND-RUN-MONEY-LAUNDERING-TEAMS (HARM- 
TEAMS) IN 2002 CONFISCATED A TOTAL AMOUNT OF 29.5 MILLION 
EUROS ($31.4 MILLION DOLLARS). 
 
-- AS MENTIONED IN PARAGRAPH 6, THE NETHERLANDS HAS AN ASSET 
SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES AND WITH THE UNITED 
KINGDOM WHICH WENT INTO EFFECT IN JUNE 1994. DUTCH AGENCIES 
DO REACT TO TIPS FROM USG OFFICIALS AND FROM OFFICIALS OF 
OTHER COUNTRIES. THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE ADVERSE REACTION TO 
ASSET SEIZURES OR FORFEITURES. THE BANKING COMMUNITY 
GENERALLY COOPERATES WITH GON ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS TO TRACE, 
MONITOR OR SEIZE BANK ACCOUNTS. BANKING SECRECY HAS NOT BEEN 
TIGHTENED. WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY CRIMINAL RETALIATORY 
MEASURES IN THIS AREA TAKEN BY TRAFFICKERS. 
 
¶9. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND PLANS FOR THE FUTURE 
 
-- IN 2004, AN EVALUATION OF THE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING 
REPORTING SYSTEM, COMMISSIONED BY THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, 
WAS PUBLISHED. IN ITS OFFICIAL REACTION TO THE REPORT, THE 
GOVERNMENT OF THE NETHERLANDS ANNOUNCED A NUMBER OF MEASURES 
TO ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING 
SYSTEM. THESE MEASURES INCLUDE: AN INSTRUCTION ON MONEY 
LAUNDERING FOR THE PUBLIC PROSECUTION SERVICE, THE MERGER OF 
THE MOT WITH THE POLICE-UNIT BLOM, NEW INDICATORS FOR 
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AMENDMENTS TO ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING 
LEGISLATION (I.E. DISCLOSURE ACT AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF 
SERVICES ACT) AND AN AGREEMENT OF COOPERATION BETWEEN THE 
NATIONAL POLICE AND THE DUTCH INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 
INVESTIGATION OFFICE. THESE MEASURES ARE CURRENTLY BEING 
IMPLEMENTED OR WILL TAKE EFFECT DURING THE COURSE OF 2005. 
 
-- IN JUNE 2004, THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE ALSO SENT AN 
EVALUATION STUDY TO THE PARLIAMENT ON SPECIFIC PROBLEMS 
ENCOUNTERED WITH ASSET FORFEITURE IN LARGE, COMPLEX CASES. 
IN ITS OFFICIAL REACTION TO THIS REPORT, THE GOVERNMENT OF 
THE NETHERLANDS ANNOUNCED SEVERAL MEASURES TO IMPROVE THE 
EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSET SEIZURE ENFORCEMENT, INCLUDING STEPS 
TO INCREASE EXPERTISE IN THE FINANCIAL-ECONOMIC FIELD, 
STRENGTHEN AND PROFESSIONALIZE THE BOOM; ASSIGN EXTRA PUBLIC 
PROSECUTORS TO THE BOOM TO IMPROVE THE COORDINATION AND 
HANDLING OF LARGE, COMPLEX CASES AND ESTABLISH A SPECIFIC 
"ASSET FORFEITURE FUND."  THE MINISTRIES OF JUSTICE AND 
FINANCE ARE ALSO CURRENTLY STUDYING THE POSSIBILITIES FOR 
SUCH A FUND, WHICH WOULD STIMULATE SPECIFIC PROJECTS AIMED 
AT IMPROVING THE ENFORCEMENT OF ASSET FORFEITURE. 
 
-- DURING THE DUTCH EU PRESIDENCY, POLITICAL AGREEMENT WAS 
REACHED WITHIN THE EU ON THE THIRD MONEY LAUNDERING 
DIRECTIVE AND ON THE REGULATION ON CONTROLS OF CASH ENTERING 
OR LEAVING THE EU CUSTOMS TERRITORY. BOTH INSTRUMENTS ARE OF 
PARTICULAR SIGNIFICANCE TO THE FIGHT AGAINST MONEY 
LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING AND WILL, AFTER ADOPTION 
AT EU LEVEL, BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE NETHERLANDS IN DUE 
COURSE. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE THIRD MONEY LAUNDERING 
DIRECTIVE ENVISIONS AN EXTENSION OF THE SCOPE OF OBLIGATIONS 
TO INCLUDE THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORIST FINANCING AND BRINGS 
ALL NATURAL AND LEGAL PERSONS ACCEPTING CASH PAYMENTS OF 
15,000 EUROS OR MORE, IN THE COURSE OF THEIR PROFESSION, 
UNDER THE SCOPE OF THE DIRECTIVE. FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO 
PREVIOUS DIRECTIVES INCLUDE THE OBLIGATION TO TAKE MEASURES 
TO IDENTIFY THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF CERTAIN 
ACTIVITIES OR TRANSACTIONS. THE REGULATION ON CONTROLS OF 
CASH WILL ENTAIL A CURRENCY DECLARATION SYSTEM FOR LARGE 
QUANTITIES OF CASH BEING CARRIED ACROSS EU BORDERS. 
 
-- IN CONCLUSION, SPECIAL ATTENTION SHOULD BE DRAWN TO THE 
ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF) OF 
THE NETHERLANDS' ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING/COUNTER-TERRORIST 
FINANCING SYSTEM IN DECEMBER 2003 (AS PART OF A FINANCIAL 
SERVICES ACTION PLAN ASSESSMENT), WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE 
NETHERLANDS HAS A SOUND ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING/COUNTER- 
TERRORIST FINANCING FRAMEWORK. ON THE REQUEST OF THE 
NETHERLANDS, THE IMF PUBLISHED IN SEPTEMBER 2004 THE REPORT 
ON THE OBSERVANCE OF STANDARDS AND CODES (ROSC) AND THE 
DETAILED ASSESSMENT REPORT, IN WHICH THE NETHERLANDS' SYSTEM 
IS DESCRIBED IN GREAT DETAIL.  BOTH REPORTS ARE AVAILABLE ON 
THE IMF WEBSITE (WWW.IMF.ORG).