Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 49 items for :

  • "identified jurisdiction" x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund

Front Matter Page INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND Integrating Stability Assessments Under the Financial Sector Assessment Program into Article IV Surveillance: Background Material Prepared by the Monetary and Capital Markets Department Approved by José Viñals August 27, 2010 Contents Glossary I. Introduction II. The Methodology for Identifying Jurisdictions with Systemically Important Financial Sectors A. Definition of Systemic Importance B. Data C. Methodology D. Results E. Interpretations and Caveats III. Frequency of

International Monetary Fund. External Relations Dept.

further action on the part of affected institutions; and •developing a process to identify jurisdictions that facilitate terrorist financing and making recommendations for actions to achieve cooperation from such countries. Enhanced sharing of information among financial intelligence units is also critical to cut off the flow of resources to terrorist organizations and their associates. We call on all countries to establish functional financial intelligence units as soon as possible. Financial supervisors and regulators around the world will need to redouble their

International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department

the list of jurisdictions with SIFS bringing the total number to 29 (the S29). 74. Staff’s in-depth analytical work suggests that the 2013 methodology remains appropriate to identify jurisdictions with SIFS (see IMF, 2019 ). The methodology incorporates the main lessons learned from past crises and captures cross-country interconnectedness through which shocks could lead to significant spillovers. More recent approaches to measuring systemic risk provide useful insights but have their drawbacks when it comes to measuring the systemic importance of financial

International Monetary Fund
This paper presents the staff analysis underpinning two central elements of the proposal to make financial stability assessments under the FSAP mandatory for members with systemically important financial sectors: the definition of systemic importance used in the paper and the methodology for identifying members with systemically important financial sectors (Section II); and the review of the literature and industry practices that form the basis for the staff proposal to conduct these mandatory financial stability assessments at a frequency of about three years (Section III).
Ms. Michaela Erbenova, Ms. Yan Liu, Mr. Nadim Kyriakos-Saad, Aledjandro Lopez Mejia, Jose Giancarlo Gasha, Mr. Emmanuel Mathias, Mr. Mohamed Norat, and Ms. Yasmin Almeida

designated non-financial businesses and professions. 10 According to the FATF standard, enhanced due diligence measures include (i) obtaining additional information on the customer, intended nature of the business relationship, source of funds, and reasons for intended or performed transaction, (ii) obtaining approval of senior management to commence or continue the business relationship, and (iii) conducting enhanced monitoring ( FATF 2012 ). 11 The FATF issues two public documents three times a year identifying jurisdictions with weak AML/CFT measures

International Monetary Fund. Monetary and Capital Markets Department
The Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) Provides In-Depth Assessments Of Financial Sectors. FSAPs Are Usually Conducted Jointly With The World Bank In Emerging Market And Developing Economies And By The Fund Alone In Advanced Economies. Fsaps Provide Valuable Analysis And Policy Recommendations For Surveillance And Capacity Development. Since The Program’s Inception, 157 Fund Members Have Undergone Individual Or Regional Fsaps. In Recent Years, The Fund Has Been Conducting 12–14 Fsaps Per Year At A Cost Of About 3 Percent Of The Fund’s Direct Spending.
Ms. Michaela Erbenova, Ms. Yan Liu, Mr. Nadim Kyriakos-Saad, Aledjandro Lopez Mejia, Jose Giancarlo Gasha, Mr. Emmanuel Mathias, Mr. Mohamed Norat, and Ms. Yasmin Almeida
This paper focuses on the withdrawal of correspondent banking relationships (CBRs) in some jurisdictions post-global financial crisis. It describes existing evidence and consequences of the withdrawal of CBRs and explores drivers of this phenomenon drawing on recent surveys and select country information. While the withdrawal of CBRs has reached a critical level in some affected countries, which can have a systemic impact if unaddressed, macroeconomic consequences have not been identified so far at a global level. The paper presents responses from the international community to address this phenomenon, and explains the role that the IMF has been playing in this global effort, especially with regards to supporting member countries in the context of surveillance and technical assistance, facilitating dialogue among stakeholders, and encouraging data gathering efforts. The paper concludes by suggesting policy responses by public and private sector stakeholders needed to further mitigate potential negative impacts that could undermine financial stability, inclusion, growth and development goals.