Be in possession of the official statistics of the Central Bank on the volume of doubtful operations on withdrawal of money abroad and the informal redistribution of cash via corruption channels through schemes involving a small travel firms, transport companies and organizations procuring overseas software (SW). About the concerns of the Bank of Russia’s increasing activity in the use of these schemes at the recent February meeting of the leadership of the Central Bank with bankers in the suburban boarding house “Bor”, reported the Chairman of the Central Bank Dmitry Skobelkin. The scale of abuse he did not name, but their request agreed to grant the press service of the regulator.
According to the Bank of Russia only on the specified channels in 2016 passed the questionable transactions in the amount of 80 billion to 92 billion rubles, the Largest part of this sum from 48 billion to 60 billion rubles falls on the shadow turnover of cash in the sector of travel agencies. “The volume of the shadow turnover of cash in the sector of travel agencies fluctuate depending on the peaks of the tourist season and in 2016 monthly ranged from 4 billion to 5 billion rubles”, — said the Central Bank. According to the scheme with the participation of transport service providers for the year was deduced 25 billion roubles through fictitious transactions on purchase and sale of software and intellectual property — over 7 billion rubles.
According to the figures given by the Central Bank, the scheme has accumulated almost half of all illegal conclusion of money from Russia. In the same meeting with the bankers in “the forest”, Central Bank head Elvira Nabiullina said that the amount illegally withdrawn from Russia funds in 2016 amounted to RUB 190 billion.
Variety of loopholes
Individual contribution to this amount (about 16 billion rubles) introduces the so-called trial scheme, when the courts settle the artificially created disputes in favor of the interested party, after which the decision is executed by bailiffs.
As told in “the forest” Deputy Director of the Galina Bobrysheva, Rosfinmonitoring gaining popularity and the circuit output and money laundering using Deposit accounts of notaries (for the settlements of their clients using this tool). She is at the beginning of its formation. As reported by Dmitry Skobelkin, the large momentum of the Central Bank there does not see, but will closely monitor the situation.
How to explain employee compliance service of the Bank from the top 10, the transportation scheme is the most famous of these. According to him, when a customer buys from a non-resident company is any good, he usually agrees with him about the delivery, the cost of which is included in the cost of goods and accordingly is issued. It is provided by the international rules in the field of foreign trade “Incoterms”.
“Issues arise when the customer draws for the delivery of third-party logistics company. Such a carrier usually does not have documents confirming the availability of the product, and no feature of the passport of the transaction on this item. Such carrier and the customer maintained in different banks, and for calculations the client uses accounts to which other payments are made irregularly,” explains the source .
Output circuit means with freight according to foreign trade contracts, the Central Bank has described in his recent February recommendations to bankers on how to combat them. The regulator urged banks to request from a dubious customer passports of transactions on the goods transported, the sheet of Bank control, copies of the documents for the purchase of the transported goods and the documents confirming the availability of goods from the shipper or the carrier.
Photo: Mikhail Metzel / TASS
Unlike freight schemes on tourism schemes and the schemes for the purchase of previously details were not reported.
Tours for cash
As explained by the employee of service of internal control of the Bank from the top 10 (by assets), the scheme with the participation of tourist companies as follows. “The travel Agency tries to persuade the client to pay for the ticket in cash, often under the pretext of a broken POS terminal for card acceptance. A receipt from a cash register to the customer this often is not issued or is issued instead of a check credit and cash order, which complicates tracking the movement of funds. By the end of the day the company formed a fairly large amount of unaccounted cash. The money firms sell to third parties who pay for the product in cash. Formally the calculation is in the contract for the provision of services to legal entities, in fact they are natural persons for cash. For some, it’s cashing for others — the ability to quite simply withdraw money abroad, especially as cross-border payments to travel agencies — standard work,” says the source .
Taking into account that the scheme provides for cash from real customers for real tours, there is reason to assume that to engage in dubious operations can “live” travel Agency, says partner of the law office A2 Mikhail Alexandrov.
However, according to him, create a fake travel Agency for these purposes is easy, as this business is not strictly regulated. To open a travel Agency, you need to buy insurance or to obtain a Bank guarantee for financial security in the amount of 500 thousand rubles, but no need to go through some complex legal procedures. “Administrative barriers to entry into this market is not very high,” explains Alexander.
Details of the scheme, with traders software described Aleksandrov and two employees of the financial monitoring service of the major banks. The Russian company enters into an agreement to purchase software licenses with interested in such a shady transaction firm, de jure trading is not known to anyone. This firm may be registered conditionally in Cyprus, or British virgin Islands, or, for example, in the Baltic States, or India — “there are entities who are willing to engage in such transactions”.
The client negotiates the purchase expensive, for example on a thousand computers, brings the contract to the Bank, opens the transaction passport and making him transfer. Then the vendor sends the money to the account of some offshore firms, de facto, associated with the customer. The actual delivery does not occur. It is impossible to verify, since its importation and are not required or supplied software, which in reality is much cheaper. In the end, for the non-resident company is a transit operation with the Commission profits for themselves and for resident — withdrawal of money under the specious guise, explain the interlocutors .
Grey scheme in 2016 in numbers
190 billion rubles were withdrawn from Russia in 2016 is 2.6 times less than in the previous year.
48-60 billion rubles to the shadow turnover of cash in the sector of travel agencies.
25 billion rubles are estimated the extent of withdrawal of money abroad for transactions on the provision of transport services.
More than 16 billion rubles were withdrawn by the schemes involving the courts and bailiffs.
More than 7 billion rubles — through transactions for the alleged purchase of the software or intellectual property rights.
Source: Bank Of Russia
Can’t cover everything
The banks and the Central Bank potentially has the ability to monitor operations in all three schemes, agree most experts.
“So, the Bank can always ask about the contractors firms, being his client and conducting questionable operations. And indeed, the Central Bank can in principle look at any Bank up to the last transaction and if necessary, ask questions to the Bank, so that he in turn asked them to the client”, — says Mikhail Alexandrov. It’s the same with procurement, he continues: “If the Bank sees that some unknown offshore company takes a large amount of money to buy some unknown software, it is a reason to ask questions such buyer from its customers.”
However, as stressed employee compliance service of the Bank of top-100, to block all existing scheme was impossible: “If nothing to do with the economy, the demand for asset Stripping and illegal cashing will still remain and will still be loopholes that allow to do it.”
Partner at Orient Partners Ilya Fedotov insists on the determining role of oversight bodies in the fight against schemes. “To motivate managers to act as needed within the law, sometimes quite difficult. Conflict of interest is a common problem in many areas. My feeling is that its presence in a particular kind of very often present and leads to such consequences. Officially, we want something to fight, but unofficially it to someone it is unprofitable or not necessary” — suggests Fedotov.