Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment (Making Gambling Businesses Accountable) Bill 2024

High-Level Summary

The bill amends relevant legislation to put a positive obligation on gambling companies to report to AUSTRAC if they have reason to suspect a person is paying for a gambling service with money they have obtained illegally.


Summary
The bill affects the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 by introducing several key amendments.
  • It inserts the definition of 'stolen property' from the Criminal Code Act 1995 into the Act.
  • Extends suspicious matter reporting obligations to include gambling companies who suspect funds used for betting are illegally obtained, requiring reporting to AUSTRAC within three business days.
  • Introduces a new Part 8A, which includes provisions prohibiting gambling services to persons suspected of using illegally obtained funds, with civil penalties for breaches.
  • Allows the Federal Court to issue compensation orders to individuals who have suffered loss due to gambling services paid with illegally obtained funds.
  • The court can act on applications made by affected individuals or the AUSTRAC CEO on behalf of these individuals, with their consent.
From the explanatory memo:
This bill ensures gambling entities are more accountable by preventing them from profiting from illegal behavior and requires them to report suspicious transactions.

Argument For
Normative Bases
  1. Non-Discrimination
  2. Utilitarian Ground Truth
  3. Anti-Corruption

The bill should be supported because it enhances accountability among gambling businesses, ensuring they do not profit from illegal activities. By mandating the reporting of suspicious transactions, it upholds ethical business practices and reduces the risk of money laundering within the gambling sector. This contributes to the overall integrity of the financial system and serves the public interest by protecting individuals from financial harm [Judgment]. Furthermore, ensuring that compensation is available to those harmed by illegally obtained funds aligns with principles of justice and fairness [Judgment].


Argument Against
Normative Bases
  1. Propertarianism
  2. Value-Neutral / Epistemic Objection

The bill should be opposed because it imposes additional regulatory burdens on gambling businesses, potentially increasing operational costs and complicating compliance processes without a direct financial benefit. These requirements might deter some businesses from entering the market or result in reduced services offered to consumers [Judgment]. Additionally, there is a concern that the bill may lead to over-reporting to AUSTRAC, bogging down the system with false positives and diverting resources from more significant threats [Judgment].


Date:

2024-11-18

Status:

Not Proceeding

Sponsor:

WILKIE, Andrew, MP

Portfolio:

Unspecified

Categories:

Consumer Protection, Anti-Corruption, Criminal Law Reform, Discrimination / Human Rights

Timeline:
18/11/2024
28/03/2025

Comments (0)