You are looking at 1 - 10 of 31 items

  • Author or Editor: Joras Ferwerda x
Clear All Modify Search
This content is available to you

Brigitte Unger, Joras Ferwerda, Melissa van den Broek and Ioana Deleanu

This content is available to you

Brigitte Unger, Joras Ferwerda, Melissa van den Broek and Ioana Deleanu

This content is available to you

Brigitte Unger, Joras Ferwerda, Melissa van den Broek and Ioana Deleanu

You do not have access to this content

Brigitte Unger, Joras Ferwerda, Melissa van den Broek and Ioana Deleanu

Official government policies against money laundering in the EU have been in place for roughly 25 years, after much concerted effort and a great deal of time and money invested. This volume examines the anti-money laundering policy of the EU Member States in connection to the threat of money laundering they face.
You do not have access to this content

Brigitte Unger and Joras Ferwerda

This chapter presents a Walker gravity model to calculate the amount of money laundering threat for 27 EU Member States. It is found that the threat of money laundering is greatest in the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and other west-European countries, as a result of their relatively sophisticated financial markets, their relatively high GDP per capita levels, their trade, as well as cultural links to a wide range of proceeds of crime-generating countries. The picture changes dramatically, however, when expressed as a percentage of each country's GDP. The threats can be very high - particularly for the smaller countries, such as Estonia, Latvia, Malta and Luxembourg. These countries are bordering or related to much larger countries that generate large amounts of money potentially available for laundering. They therefore face threats equivalent to a significant proportion of their total GDP, even - in those four countries - greater than their entire GDP. The threat assessment presented in this study, based on the Walker gravity model, appears to be quite robust.
You do not have access to this content

Ioana Deleanu and Joras Ferwerda

This chapter explores to what extent the policy response towards money laundering is effective in relation to the money laundering threat the EU Member States face. It is argued that AML policy response can be captured by several indicators: FATF compliance, legal effectiveness, timeliness of implementation, FIU response, international cooperation, information flows and the number of convictions for money laundering. The exploratory analysis is based on a set of figures which have a policy response indicator on the horizontal axis and the threat measure on the vertical axis. The chapter considers the diagonal area in these figures to mark an appropriate policy response - i.e. a policy response that is more or less proportional to the AML threat a country is facing. The chapter shows that most Member States have proportional AML policy responses. Nevertheless, all of them can improve on at least one aspect of their policy response with the positive exception of Denmark, that has, in the analysis of the chapter, relatively low levels of threat and relatively high policy response scores.
This content is available to you

Brigitte Unger and Joras Ferwerda

This content is available to you

Brigitte Unger and Joras Ferwerda

You do not have access to this content

Brigitte Unger and Joras Ferwerda

You do not have access to this content

Brigitte Unger and Joras Ferwerda