EstatePass
ComplianceAML Actlevel4MEDIUM

Which scenario would most likely require a suspicious activity report under the AML/CFT Act 2009?

Correct Answer

A) A client paying a $20,000 deposit in cash and giving no reasonable explanation

A reporting entity must file a suspicious activity report when it has reasonable grounds to suspect that a transaction or activity is relevant to money laundering or other crime (AML/CFT Act 2009, s 40). A large cash payment with no sensible explanation is a classic red flag. Trusts, overseas buyers and ordinary settlement changes may need more due diligence but are not suspicious in themselves.

Answer Options
A
A client paying a $20,000 deposit in cash and giving no reasonable explanation
B
A client asking to move the settlement date because finance approval is delayed
C
A client buying the property through a family trust with documented beneficiaries
D
A client who lives overseas and is buying the property as a rental investment

Why This Is the Correct Answer

Under s 40 of the AML/CFT Act a reporting entity must report when it has reasonable grounds to suspect a transaction is relevant to money laundering. A large cash payment with no sensible explanation is a classic red flag, so this is the scenario most likely to require a report.

Why the Other Options Are Wrong

Option B: A client asking to move the settlement date because finance approval is delayed

A settlement delay tied to finance is ordinary and explained, so on its own it gives no grounds to suspect money laundering.

Option C: A client buying the property through a family trust with documented beneficiaries

Trusts are common and lawful; they call for enhanced due diligence, but a trust alone is not grounds for suspicion.

Option D: A client who lives overseas and is buying the property as a rental investment

An overseas buyer may raise extra due diligence and Overseas Investment Act questions, but residence alone is not grounds for suspicion.

Memory Technique

Remember 'CASH WITHOUT CAUSE' - large Cash payments without reasonable explanation are Always Suspicious and require Heightened scrutiny under AML/CFT.

Exam Tip for Compliance

Focus on combinations of unusual factors: large cash + no explanation = suspicious. Single factors like trusts or non-residents alone aren't automatically suspicious.

Common Mistakes to Avoid on Compliance Questions

  • β€’Thinking all large transactions are automatically suspicious regardless of explanation
  • β€’Confusing legitimate business structures like trusts with suspicious activity indicators
Was this explanation helpful?

More Compliance Questions

People Also Study

Practice More NZ Questions

Access 600+ New Zealand real estate practice questions and prepare for your qualification assessments.

Browse All NZ Questions