The bank’s lawyers also noted that it kept its reasoning for the closures confidential at the time: it “never publicized the termination decision nor its confidential internal process giving rise to the closure,” and gave the Trump companies months — plus several extensions — to move their money elsewhere, which they did.
Is that normal procedure for USA banks? If I launder money, I won’t have the cops knocking at my door and the bank will just politely tell me to move my ill-gotten gains somewhere else?
There were no charges, no conviction.
A bank audit determined the accounts had a pattern that might introduce liability for money laundering, so they were asked to bank elsewhere. This is the bank protecting itself from being complicit
If there was a conviction for money laundering, it would have gone very differently
The difference is in how much is in the accounts.
in eu it is normal for banks to turn down customers who are involved in business not outright illegal but statistically involved in shady businesses triggering banking supervision checks and hassle. These kinds of customers cause more cost that the bank gains from proceedings.
Is it…?
Where is Deutsche Bank based? And like a bunch of Swiss ones… And HSBC…? I’m sure there are more
Kinda hilarious given the fact that some of the biggest criminal banks on earth are in Europe, including the ones that laundered the most money for Trump.
