Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Acams CAMS Exam - Topic 4 Question 69 Discussion

Which of the following corporate structures present a higher money laundering risk due to reduced transparency? (Select Three.)
C) A company with bearer shares incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction.
A) A company with nominee shareholders and directors in a local jurisdiction.
B) A private company that has no activity in a tax haven jurisdiction.
D) A limited liability company incorporated in a foreign jurisdiction.
E) A private investment company incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction with strict secrecy laws.

Acams CAMS Exam - Topic 4 Question 69 Discussion

Actual exam question for Acams's CAMS exam
Question #: 69
Topic #: 4
[All CAMS Questions]

Which of the following corporate structures present a higher money laundering risk due to reduced transparency? (Select Three.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Peggie at Mar 09, 2024, 07:39 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CAMS Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Elly
8 months ago
Surprised that nominee structures are still a thing!
upvoted 0 times
...
Jolene
8 months ago
Limited liability companies can be shady too, for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alaine
8 months ago
Wait, how does a private company in a tax haven pose a risk if it has no activity?
upvoted 0 times
...
Karol
9 months ago
Totally agree, especially with bearer shares in tax havens!
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
9 months ago
A company with nominee shareholders definitely has higher risks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lang
9 months ago
E seems risky too, especially with those strict secrecy laws in tax havens. It just feels like a setup for money laundering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonio
9 months ago
I remember practicing a question similar to this, and I think C is a clear choice with bearer shares being a big red flag.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maxima
10 months ago
I'm not so sure about option B. A private company with no activity in a tax haven seems low risk, but maybe there's something I'm missing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nettie
10 months ago
I think option A is definitely a high risk because of the nominee shareholders. It makes it hard to trace ownership.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tuyet
10 months ago
This is a tricky question, but I'm going to carefully consider each option and try to identify the ones that would make it easier to conceal the true ownership or activities of the company.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maia
10 months ago
I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. The options with less transparency, like the company with nominee directors and the private investment company in a tax haven, seem like the higher risk choices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuette
10 months ago
Okay, I think I've got a strategy here. I'll focus on identifying the structures with reduced transparency, like nominee shareholders, bearer shares, and tax haven jurisdictions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nieves
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'll need to review the key characteristics of each option to determine which ones present higher money laundering risks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Garry
10 months ago
This looks like a tricky question. I'll need to think carefully about the different corporate structures and how they might impact transparency and money laundering risk.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delisa
10 months ago
Hmm, 93% seems really high. I'm not sure if that's a good sign or not. I'll need to think carefully about the possible reasons for that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dell
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure here. I know we need to make the data accessible on Google Cloud, but I'm not sure if BigQuery or Cloud SQL would be the best fit for unstructured data. Let me think this through a bit more.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jodi
10 months ago
I'm a little confused by the wording of the options. What's the difference between a static and dynamic content group? I'll need to review those concepts before deciding which one is the right approach here. Maybe I'll mark this one and come back to it later.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chi
10 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'll need to review my notes on nested control structures to make sure I understand the concept properly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Quentin
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. I'll have to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tammara
1 year ago
I bet the answer is somewhere in the realm of 'if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edna
1 year ago
Alright, time to put on my forensic accountant hat. These options are like a who's who of financial skulduggery.
upvoted 0 times
Fernanda
1 year ago
Offshore accounts
upvoted 0 times
...
Juan
1 year ago
Trusts
upvoted 0 times
...
Jose
1 year ago
Shell companies
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Evangelina
1 year ago
This is like a game of 'spot the money-laundering loophole'! I'm going to have to really think outside the box on this one.
upvoted 0 times
Broderick
1 year ago
E) A private investment company incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction with strict secrecy laws.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mona
1 year ago
C) A company with bearer shares incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gabriele
1 year ago
A) A company with nominee shareholders and directors in a local jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elly
1 year ago
Hmm, let me see... tax havens, bearer shares, and limited liability companies, oh my! Looks like those options are just begging to be exploited.
upvoted 0 times
Malcolm
1 year ago
E) A private investment company incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction with strict secrecy laws.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buck
1 year ago
C) A company with bearer shares incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamie
1 year ago
A) A company with nominee shareholders and directors in a local jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jani
1 year ago
I'm not sure about option B though. A private company with no activity in a tax haven jurisdiction might still have some risks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vallie
1 year ago
Whoa, this question is like a treasure map for money launderers! I bet the answer involves a lot of shady shell companies and offshore tax havens.
upvoted 0 times
Terina
1 year ago
E) A private investment company incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction with strict secrecy laws.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gregg
1 year ago
C) A company with bearer shares incorporated in a tax haven jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
Derick
1 year ago
A) A company with nominee shareholders and directors in a local jurisdiction.
upvoted 0 times
...
Keneth
1 year ago
Definitely, those structures sound like they would make it easy to hide illegal money.
upvoted 0 times
...
Keneth
1 year ago
A, C, E
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Gaston
1 year ago
I agree with Ricarda. Companies with nominee shareholders, bearer shares, and strict secrecy laws are definitely riskier.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ricarda
1 year ago
I think options A, C, and E present a higher money laundering risk.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel