|
Studies Conference; Productivity Commission
1999, Australia’s Gambling Industries, Report
No. 10,
AusInfo, Canberra, Vol. 2:22.1-22.7.
14 When considered purely on the basis of size
of casino gambling turnover, the only Australian
casinos
considered to be viable sites for substantial
money laundering activity are Burswood (Perth),
Crown
(Melbourne), Jupiters (Gold Coast), Star City
(Sydney) and Treasury (Brisbane).
6
undetected in a small casino where the spending
of large amounts of cash would be
obvious to casino staff and government
inspectors. Small casinos also tend not to
attract high-rollers and are reluctant to accept
large bets.
Casino operations in Australia were integrated
into Australia’s anti-money laundering
strategy following the classification of casinos
as ‘cash dealers’ under the FTR Act.
The various jurisdictions’ regulatory regimes
are linked to the anti-money laundering
strategy through the cooperative arrangements
whereby relevant crime and law
enforcement agencies make use of casino
surveillance facilities. Casino regulators are
thus not direct participants in the Australian
anti-money laundering strategy. Casino
regulators are not classified as crime agencies
under the FTR Act and do not receive
details of financial transaction reporting from
AUSTRAC.
Suspected money laundering in casinos is
detected in two main ways:
• through surveillance on-site;
• through financial intelligence gathered by
AUSTRAC.
In the instance of detection of suspected money
laundering activity by on-site
surveillance, the activity is reported to the
appropriate law enforcement, depending on
customary arrangements in each jurisdiction. In
NSW, the Director of Casino
Surveillance (DCS) reports suspected money
laundering to the NSW police and also
to the NSW Casino Control Authority (CCA).
Information reported to police is likely
to be shared with crime agencies through the
task force mechanism.
Back to casino
news
|
