Why identifying the ultimate beneficial owner matters

In the past, detecting funds from unlawful activities as they entered the financial system was relatively straightforward. However, with the dishonest among us increasingly making use of juristic or corporate entities to hide their true identities and introduce illicit proceeds into the system, it’s becoming more and more difficult for the relevant authorities to identify these funds. And it’s not only South African officials who find themselves in this position – the challenge cuts across international borders.

The ins and outs of subject to bond approval clauses

Several strategies have been developed and implemented over time to curb this growing problem and prevent the misuse of these entities. One of these strategies has been identifying the ultimate beneficial owner – the natural person who ultimately owns, controls, and/or benefits from a juristic entity and the income it generates. 

South Africa aimed to establish legislation to help combat money laundering activities, organised crime and terrorism through the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001 9 (FIC Act),

In the context of juristic entities, ownership and control must be distinguished from the notion of ultimate actual ownership and control. Section 21(B) of the FIC Act requires that the ownership and control structure be established for juristic entities. Reasonable steps also need to be taken to identify the beneficial owner/s:

  • The identity of each natural person who either independently or together has a controlling interest in the juristic entity must be determined.
  • Complex control structures must be examined until a ‘warm body’ is identified.
  • The accountable institution needs to take reasonable steps to satisfy itself that it has established the beneficial owner.
  • Accountable institutions should not rely on a customer’s ‘self-certification’ without also taking reasonable steps and measures to verify the identity of all parties involved in the juristic entities control structure.  
  • Accountable institutions must be in a position to identify the real customer they are dealing with and apply risk adjusted strategies accordingly.

While the above does complicate things when it comes to entering into transactions where a juristic entity is the seller or purchaser, one must be mindful of why certain documents are requested time and time again and remember that this process is a necessary step towards addressing issues around the misuse of juristic entities.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.

Recommended for you

Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Contractual Matters

Buying and selling property – the implications for married foreign nationals[post_view before=""]

In a recent article, we looked at the question of whether foreign nationals are permitted to own property in South Africa. A related question is what happens when a foreign national, who has entered into a marriage outside of South Africa, wishes to buy or sell property. Let’s take a look.

Read More
Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Contractual Matters

Foreign property ownership in South Africa[post_view before=""]

Can foreign nationals own property in South Africa? The short answer is yes. But before we explore this topic in any detail, let’s first define what we mean by foreign national – someone who is a non-resident, meaning that they are neither ordinarily resident nor meet the requirements of the physical presence test.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Contractual Matters

Power of Attorney: Can it lapse?[post_view before=""]

A power of attorney is a useful tool that can be used in many situations. For example, an elderly parent who, due to their age, finds it difficult to attend to their affairs may decide to grant power of attorney to their adult child.

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Contractual Matters

How does divorce affect transfers in the case of joint ownership?[post_view before=""]

The end of a marriage can result in several administrative challenges, not least of which is tackling the joint ownership of immovable property. And while divorce can be a traumatic and emotional experience, with the proper legal advice, the transfer of ownership doesn’t need to be.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Contractual Matters

Cheques are a thing of the past[post_view before=""]

In a statement issued late last year, the South African Reserve Bank informed the public that, “the issuing and the acceptance/collection of cheques will cease, effective from 31 December 2020.” At the time, most banks had already begun phasing out this form of payment, with clients making use of cheaper, more convenient electronic payment methods.

Read More

Need more Snymans content?

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Why identifying the ultimate beneficial owner matters

In the past, detecting funds from unlawful activities as they entered the financial system was relatively straightforward. However, with the dishonest among us increasingly making use of juristic or corporate entities to hide their true identities and introduce illicit proceeds into the system, it’s becoming more and more difficult for the relevant authorities to identify these funds. And it’s not only South African officials who find themselves in this position – the challenge cuts across international borders.

The ins and outs of subject to bond approval clauses

Several strategies have been developed and implemented over time to curb this growing problem and prevent the misuse of these entities. One of these strategies has been identifying the ultimate beneficial owner – the natural person who ultimately owns, controls, and/or benefits from a juristic entity and the income it generates. 

South Africa aimed to establish legislation to help combat money laundering activities, organised crime and terrorism through the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001 9 (FIC Act),

In the context of juristic entities, ownership and control must be distinguished from the notion of ultimate actual ownership and control. Section 21(B) of the FIC Act requires that the ownership and control structure be established for juristic entities. Reasonable steps also need to be taken to identify the beneficial owner/s:

  • The identity of each natural person who either independently or together has a controlling interest in the juristic entity must be determined.
  • Complex control structures must be examined until a ‘warm body’ is identified.
  • The accountable institution needs to take reasonable steps to satisfy itself that it has established the beneficial owner.
  • Accountable institutions should not rely on a customer’s ‘self-certification’ without also taking reasonable steps and measures to verify the identity of all parties involved in the juristic entities control structure.  
  • Accountable institutions must be in a position to identify the real customer they are dealing with and apply risk adjusted strategies accordingly.

While the above does complicate things when it comes to entering into transactions where a juristic entity is the seller or purchaser, one must be mindful of why certain documents are requested time and time again and remember that this process is a necessary step towards addressing issues around the misuse of juristic entities.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.