Source:
事件的時間線 (Timeline)：
- 香港時間 4 月 10 日：滙豐及渣打在香港獲批（與港幣掛鉤的）穩定幣發行人牌照。滙豐表示，計劃今年下半年推出港元穩定幣。
- 香港時間 4 月 15 日：美國財政部長貝森特 (US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent) 表示 Two Chinese banks received letters from the US Treasury，原因是處理跟伊朗有關的交易。他同時表示 the US has warned a number of banks in various jurisdictions of the potential imposition of secondary sanctions for handling transactions related to Iran.
- 香港時間 4 月 18 日：根據英國《每日電訊報》（Daily Telegraph）報導，HSBC 匯豐 （港股編號: 00005）與渣打（港股編號: 02888）被指控為伊朗洗錢，該兩家英國銀行被指控「在不知情的情況下」處理了一項複雜的規避制裁 (Sanction evasion) 計劃，牽涉數百萬美元。
把三件事放在一起，你就會見到事件背後的邏輯或動機。美國正在向外資銀行發出警告：切勿協助伊朗處理石油貿易及其他交易，否則可能會被實施次級制栽 (Secondary Sanction)，那是專門用來對付外國的個人或企業或金融機構的懲罰性措施，令外資銀行被排除於美國主導的金融系統之外，後果嚴重。英文的說法：Access to US dollar financial system and dollar
clearing revoked. 詳情請參考《延伸閱讀》部份提供的參考資料。
美伊戰爭跟穩定幣的關係
美伊戰爭跟穩定幣有什麼關係？因為穩定幣的其中一個功能是跨國貿易結算，它可以成為伊朗與中國的石油交易的結算貨幣。目前中國跟伊朗的石油交易有幾種結算方法：以物易物（提示：崑崙銀行）、人民幣或與人民幣掛鉤的穩定幣（如果有的話）、加密貨幣（例如：比特幣或以太幣）。
匯豐及渣打是立足香港過百年的老牌英資銀行，剛在香港獲批的穩定幣發行牌照，可以發行與港元掛鉤的穩定幣。港幣跟人民幣關係密切，與港幣掛鉤的穩定幣是否可以用來做中伊貿易的結算貨幣？這個問題要問偉大的中國共產黨，但是從美國的角度看不能抹殺有這個可能，對不對？至於跟人民幣掛鉤的穩定幣，因為牽涉外匯管制這個複雜問題，在香港發行的話要解決很多技術性難題，也牽涉中共政權的穩定性（因為穩定幣可以用來走資或洗黑錢），暫且不表。
為什麼要在香港發展穩定幣？因為中共的政治和經濟體制強調控制，人民幣也並非自由兌換，於是要把香港當作發展金融科技的實驗室。為什麼香港首批穩定幣發行牌照沒有中資金融機構的份兒？因為萬一發展過程中了什麼差錯（例如：被用作中國跟伊朗的石油貿易的結算工具然後被美國找到證據），美國就有藉口對中國以及中資金融機構實施懲罰性措施（次級制栽 Secondary Sanction)，即是令中美關係再添火頭，為國家添亂。從中共的角度來看，把首批穩定幣發行牌照交給英資銀行（而且是香港的發鈔銀行），是比較穩健的做法。
從美國的角度來看，中國是伊朗的支持者。中國跟伊朗買石油，令伊朗可以繼續跟美國打仗。美國總統特朗普（又名：川普，侵侵）幹掉了伊朗的領導人哈梅內伊，但是神權政府沒有倒台，他發覺踩入泥潭，想盡快宣布勝利以及結束戰事。要令伊朗盡快投降，就要想辦法斷伊朗的財路，對不對？打擊那些在香港發行穩定幣的英資銀行，同時對穩定幣的發展設置障礙（提示：針對跟美元掛鉤的穩定幣的 The Genius Act）又或者建立起一套由美國主導的遊戲規則，對美國有利，對不對？金融科技是中美關係的其中一個戰場，對不對？
另一個好處，是對付滙豐及渣打可以殺雞儆猴，令其他國家的銀行不敢做次，說是美國迫外資銀行表態也可以。潛台詞：美國跟中國之間，外資銀行只可以二選一，休想學英資的滙豐及渣打那樣左右逢源，否則美國會實施次級制栽 (Secondary Sanction) ，令外資銀行做不到生意。中國（跟盟友即是俄羅斯和北韓以及伊朗）想建立起另一套（人民幣）結算系統，繞過美國主導的 SWIFT？沒有那麼容易。特朗普的一貫作風，是趕盡殺絕+防範於未然+逆我者亡，對不對？
事情還有另一個角度：《中華人民共和國反外國制裁法》實施之後，在香港經營的外資金融機構如果服從美國的指令，對中國的國民或企業或金融機構實施制裁（例如：關掉賬戶），中國可以動用《反外國制裁法》對該機構採取反制措施，具體做法可以是不發簽証、不准入證、注銷簽証或驅逐出境，也可以是查封、扣押或凍結資產。如果《反外國制裁法》在香港落實執行，會令到在港經營的外資銀行左右為難。不服從美國的指令，會被排除於美國的金融體系之外，做不到生意。服從美國的指令？會招致中國的報復。怎麼辦？撤出香港？詳情請參考《延伸閱讀》部份提供的參考資料。
結論：美國佬玩金融霸權，立足香港過百年的老牌英資銀行（滙豐及渣打）成為磨心。表面上是英資銀行被捲入洗黑錢醜聞，其實是地緣政治升溫加大國角力。大國相爭，買辦死先，是香港的命運。滙豐成為中美關係的磨心，也並非第一次（提示：孟晚舟＋Skycom＋匯豐）。
延伸閱讀／參考資料：
滙豐及碇點金融獲批穩定幣發行人牌照
金管局料最快今年中推出
RTHK
2026-04-10
https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/ch/component/k2/1850662-20260410.htm
節錄：金管局發出首批兩張穩定幣發行人牌照，分別是滙豐，以及由渣打香港、香港電訊及安擬集團合組的碇點金融，預計今年中至下半年陸續推出穩定幣，兩家發行人初步計劃發行港元穩定幣。
滙豐表示，計劃下半年推出港元穩定幣，專注於零售支付及交易需要，會接入 PayMe 及流動理財應用程式，初步計劃可進行個人之間的即時轉帳、個人支付參與商戶，以及代幣化投資。滙豐亦計劃加入非港元計價穩定幣，推出香港與其他司法管轄區之間跨境轉帳，強調發行前必須獲得相關貨幣的央行支持及取得共識。
至於碇點金融預計，今季起，分階段發行港元穩定幣，第一階段發行對象集中於機構用戶，會視乎情況，於今年稍後全面推廣至零售用戶等。公司又提到，跨境支付是很多中小企面對的最大痛點，相信引入穩定幣可以大幅削減跨境交易的成本和時間。
【銘察秋毫】
首批穩定幣牌照爭奪戰：為何仍是滙豐與渣打的「勝利」？
文匯網 2026-04-14
陳湋銘
(特許公司秘書公會會士、榮譽法律學士、
EMBA、證監會負責人員牌照)
https://www.wenweipo.com/a/202604/14/AP69dd51cae4b0b49ad1b6c2b2.html
節錄：為何監管機構仍然選擇傳統發鈔銀行作為首批試點？在市場高呼香港發行的穩定幣應該戰略性掛鈎人民幣或港幣作底層資產之際，為何由英資銀行領銜？滙豐銀行與渣打銀行長期作為香港三家發鈔銀行之二，早已在聯繫匯率制度下承擔貨幣發行及結算的重要角色，具備成熟的資產負債管理（ALM）能力及全球清算網絡。對監管機構而言，這類機構的信用風險、操作風險及流動性風險均處於可控範圍，能有效降低穩定幣脫錨或擠兌風險。特區政府此舉，實際上是將穩定幣納入類似傳統貨幣發行的監管邏輯之中，以銀行體系的信用背書，為整個 Web 3.0 金融基礎設施建立第一層信任錨。
至於為何由英資銀行領銜，而非中資或以人民幣為主導的機構，則需從香港的國際金融中心定位來理解。香港的核心競爭優勢，在於其作為中國與全球資本市場之間的「超級聯繫人」，而非單一貨幣或單一市場的延伸。滙豐銀行與渣打銀行本身具備深厚的國際網絡，其業務覆蓋歐洲、亞洲、中東及非洲市場，能夠在跨境支付、外匯結算及資金流動方面提供即時支援。穩定幣若要發揮其最大價值，關鍵不在於掛鈎何種貨幣，而在於能否在多個司法管轄區之間高效流通。
此外，現階段人民幣穩定幣涉及更複雜的資本帳開放、貨幣政策及跨境監管協調問題。相較之下，以港元或美元資產為儲備的穩定幣，在國際市場的接受程度及流動性顯然更高。由具備國際信譽的銀行牽頭，有助於吸引全球機構投資者及跨國企業參與，從而迅速建立市場規模。與香港過往在離岸人民幣業務上的漸進式開放模式一脈相承。
Hong Kong banks dependent on SWIFT are warned of new
US sanctions
As Trump tries to strangle Iran’s oil trade payments,
Beijing’s bag of counter-moves includes enforcing ban on extraterritorial
jurisdiction
by Jeff Pao
Asia
Times
April 17, 2026
https://asiatimes.com/2026/04/hong-kong-banks-dependent-on-swift-are-warned-of-new-us-sanctions/
Excerpt: The United States has threatened to impose sanctions on Chinese banks if they are found to be involved in handling money from Iran’s oil trade payments, marking a sharp escalation in efforts to tighten financial pressure on Tehran.
The warning came after the US military began blocking ships linked to Iranian trade from docking at the country’s ports on Monday, in an operation that was initially perceived as a broader blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Besides, US President Donald Trump has also stepped up diplomatic pressure on Beijing to ensure China does not supply Iran with weapons. He said on social media that Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed not to send weapons to Iran.
Taken together, Washington’s financial sanctions threats, maritime restrictions and political pressure are expected to significantly curb Iran’s ability to access Chinese financing and supplies. Trump said it’s likely that the US and Iran would make a long-term ceasefire deal next week.
On Wednesday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a media briefing that the US has warned a number of banks in various jurisdictions of the potential imposition of secondary sanctions for handling transactions related to Iran.
“Two Chinese banks received letters from the US Treasury,” he said. “I’m not going to identify the banks, but we told them if we can prove there is Iranian money flowing through your accounts, then we are willing to put on secondary sanctions.”
The Treasury Department urged the jurisdictions’ monetary regulators to work with banks under their supervision to identify and halt any Iran-related financial activity, including transactions routed through front companies or other evasive structures, citing significant illicit finance risks.
New anti-sanctions rules
In June 2021, China passed the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law（中華人民共和國反外國制裁法）to bar individuals and companies from complying with US and other foreign sanctions within its jurisdiction. At the time, Chinese media said the framework could be extended to Hong Kong by adding it to the Basic Law’s Annex III. However, Beijing did not implement it as some Hong Kong banks said the law would place them in a difficult position between Chinese and US regulatory demands.
In practice, major banks in Hong Kong have complied with US sanctions because they need to retain access to the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) network for international settlements. They have closed accounts linked to US-sanctioned individuals, including Lee and Secretary for Security Chris Tang, without disclosing any reasons.
Underground supply chain
Over the past two years, the US has sanctioned a number of Chinese firms for supplying electronic components and technologies to Iran that support its military, drone and missile programs. In 2023 and 2024, it has also sanctioned many Hong Kong- and Shenzhen-based individuals and companies for supplying Russia’s Military Industrial Base with electronic parts.
Media reports pointed to covert payment channels using Hong Kong as a hub to settle China’s underground trade with heavily sanctioned countries such as Russia and Iran. These transactions have reportedly relied on alternative financial mechanisms, including Chinese currency, cryptocurrencies, precious metals and gemstones.
On April 11, the Wall Street Journal reported that Hong Kong has for years served as a key financial hub helping Iran withstand US sanctions, with authorities in Washington struggling to shut down a network that has facilitated billions of dollars in trade.
The report said Hong Kong’s low-cost, rapid company
registration system has enabled dense shell-company networks to process
payments and obscure the origins of funds, with
billions linked to Iran’s shadow banking system flowing through the city,
making it a leading offshore node after the UAE.
實施《中華人民共和國反外國制裁法》的規定
人民網
2025 年 03 月 25 日
http://politics.people.com.cn/BIG5/n1/2025/0325/c1001-40445777.html
第三條 外國國家違反國際法和國際關系基本准則，以各種借口或者依據其本國法律對我國進行遏制、打壓，對我國公民、組織採取歧視性限制措施，干涉我國內政的，或者外國國家、組織、個人實施、協助、支持危害我國主權、安全、發展利益的行為的，國務院有關部門根據反外國制裁法和本規定，有權決定將有關組織、個人及與其相關的組織、個人列入反制清單、採取反制措施。
第四條 國務院有關部門在實施反外國制裁法和本規定過程中，有權開展相應調查和對外磋商。
第五條 國務院有關部門作出採取反制措施的決定，應當明確反制措施的適用對象、具體反制措施、施行日期等。
第六條 反外國制裁法第六條第一項中的不予簽發簽証、不准入境、注銷簽証或者驅逐出境，由國務院外交、國家移民管理等有關部門，依照職責權限實施。
第七條 反外國制裁法第六條第二項中的查封、扣押、凍結，由國務院公安、財政、自然資源、交通運輸、海關、市場監督管理、金融管理、知識產權等有關部門，依照職責權限實施。
反外國制裁法第六條第二項中的其他各類財產，包括現金、票據、銀行存款、有價証券、基金份額、股權、知識產權、應收賬款等財產和財產權利。
How America Is Losing the World | Lunch Money with Paul Krugman and Heather Cox Richardson
A recording from Paul Krugman and Heather Cox
Richardson's live video
Paul Krugman and Heather Cox Richardson
Apr 16, 2026
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/how-america-is-losing-the-world-lunch
Excerpt: So, okay, the dollar is the overwhelmingly dominant currency of international business. If somebody in Brazil wants to do business with somebody in Malaysia, the stuff’s going to be invoiced in dollars. The debts are going to be in dollars. And those private uses of the dollar are more important than the official reserves, although that’s part of it as well.
So if you’re going to exchange reais in Brazil for Malaysian ringgit banks that are going to do the deal. And the interbank markets are all against dollars. There is no market where you can exchange Brazilian currency for Malaysian currency directly. The banks will sell one for dollars and then use dollars to buy the other.
The interbank market is conducted primarily through this thing called SWIFT, which I forgot what the acronym stands for, but anyway, it’s the electronic settlement system based in Belgium, rather oddly, but effectively answering to the United States. There are ways around it, but it’s by far the most convenient way to, to do these transactions. And the role of the dollar gives the U S government a lot of power.
Everything that goes through SWIFT is revealed to the National Security Agency. The United States can effectively veto transactions. Because everybody needs to have an account at a U.S. bank in order to do basically any business anywhere in the world, the U.S. government can blockade transactions. And so this is an extremely powerful lever of power. Actually, I’ll recommend a book by friends of mine, Henry Farrell and Abe Newman, called Underground Empire, which is all about these invisible channels of power, and the currency stuff is a big part of it.
There are ways around it. The United States has tried to embargo Iranian transactions for many years, and the Iranians have costly, kludgy workarounds, but they do have workarounds. The Chinese yuan has done nothing as international currency, but people do make deals that involve using China’s banking system to get around the U.S. blockade. But it’s still a big influence of the United States.
（推介原因：經濟學者 Paul
Krugman 舉例說明 SWIFT 賦予美國的權力。）
每日頭條：
案例：神奇的崑崙銀行 如何繞過美元結算體系
https://kknews.cc/zh-hk/finance/javy89q.html
節錄：漫長的經濟制裁歷史讓伊朗幾乎成為一座海上孤島，對伊朗經濟發展帶來嚴重打擊。石油禁運讓伊朗失去主要的外部資金來源，海外資產凍結讓伊朗損失慘重，經濟萎縮，通脹和失業率高企，在加上國內多股武裝勢力不時發起騷亂，讓整個國家處於一種十分危險的狀態。困境中的伊朗迫切需要對外貿易來帶動經濟增長，除了傳統的石油行業外，伊朗還大力發展本國鋼鐵產業，以增加政府外匯收入來源。由於國內基礎生活物資匱乏，伊朗具有十分強烈的對外貿易需求。
崑崙銀行是一個含着金鑰匙再生的銀行，前身是克拉瑪依市商業銀行。在遇到中石油之前，發展一直不溫不火。直到 2009 年，石化巨頭中石油完成對該行的控股，並於 2014 年 4 月更名為崑崙銀行。中石油的加持讓崑崙銀行插上了隱形的翅膀，排名火速躥升，當然也賦予其一種特殊的使命，為中石油與敏感地區主要是伊朗的石油貿易提供結算服務。後來隨着業務發展，其服務對象擴大至普通涉外企業。只要一提到對伊貿易結算，大家就知道崑崙銀行是唯一選擇。如何結算（超級重點）讓我們來演示一下崑崙銀行是如何實現貨物流和資金流完美匹配的，這還真是應了那句話，複雜的問題往往只需要簡單的解決辦法，四個字「以物易物」，根本就沒有資金流動。具體操作舉例如下：
1. 假設大股東中石油向伊朗採購了 100 萬美元原油。中石油並不實際支付（因為也支付不了），而是通過崑崙銀行向伊朗銀行打個 100 萬美元欠條。伊朗的銀行就有了 100 萬的美元額度。
2. 伊朗的商家向中國採購 100 萬美元商品，只需要將相應的伊朗貨幣里亞爾支付對應給伊朗銀行，並申請美元。
3. 伊朗銀行會通知崑崙銀行將100萬美元欠條結清。
4. 收到通知後，崑崙銀行會通知國內出口商可以進行美元結匯。
5. 收到通知後，國內賣家就可以向伊朗發貨，之後去崑崙銀行結匯獲得人民幣。
綜觀整個交易過程，美元發揮了重要的價值尺度，但全程沒有美元流動，只有相應金額（的）本國貨幣流動。
（推介原因：Two identical transactions which cancel off each other. Hawala system.）
Facctum
What Are Secondary Sanctions And Why Do They Matter?
https://www.facctum.com/terms/secondary-sanctions
Excerpt: Secondary sanctions are penalties imposed by a government not only on its direct citizens or businesses (primary sanctions) but also on third parties that engage with sanctioned entities. They extend the reach of a sanctions regime beyond national borders, forcing global compliance.
For financial institutions, secondary sanctions create significant AML challenges because they must ensure they do not indirectly facilitate transactions with sanctioned parties. Ignoring these restrictions can result in loss of access to critical markets, particularly the U.S. financial system.
Secondary Sanctions
Secondary sanctions occur when a government penalizes foreign firms or individuals for doing business with sanctioned entities, even if those transactions occur outside its jurisdiction.
The United States has been the most active in applying secondary sanctions, often through the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). For example, non-U.S. banks engaging with sanctioned Iranian entities risk losing access to the U.S. financial system.
This extraterritorial reach makes secondary sanctions highly influential, effectively pressuring international businesses to comply with domestic policies of the sanctioning country.
Why Secondary Sanctions Matter In AML Compliance
Secondary sanctions significantly increase compliance complexity. Even if an institution does not operate in the country imposing the sanctions, it may still face severe penalties if it provides financial services to targeted entities.
The U.S. Treasury Department has stressed that foreign banks violating secondary sanctions could face exclusion from U.S. correspondent banking relationships, especially under rules that allow OFAC to impose blocking or correspondent account sanctions on foreign financial institutions even without a U.S. nexus. The European Union has publicly criticized these measures as infringing international norms, but many global banks nevertheless align with U.S. rules to avoid isolation from dollar-based financial systems and loss of access to U.S. markets
Institutions often integrate Payment Screening and Customer Screening solutions to ensure that their systems capture both direct and indirect exposure to sanctioned entities.
Key Risks Of Secondary Sanctions For Banks
Financial institutions face multiple risks if they do not manage secondary sanctions effectively:
Loss Of Market Access: Being cut off from the U.S. financial system can be devastating for global operations.
Reputational Risk: Association with sanctioned entities can damage credibility with regulators and clients.
Operational Risk: Complex compliance requirements increase costs and pressure on AML teams.
Legal Penalties: Fines, asset freezes, and criminal liability may follow violations.
These risks underscore the importance of embedding Watchlist Management and Transaction Monitoring into AML programs.
Regulatory Expectations For Secondary Sanctions
Regulators expect institutions to go beyond primary sanctions compliance and assess indirect exposure.
This means:
- Screening counterparties, subsidiaries, and ownership structures for links to sanctioned entities.
- Ensuring due diligence procedures extend to non-obvious connections.
- Monitoring trade finance, correspondent banking, and cross-border transactions for indirect risks.
OFAC has made clear that secondary sanctions will be aggressively enforced where foreign institutions provide material support to targeted entities. Meanwhile, the FATF emphasizes that effective sanctions compliance frameworks must integrate ownership transparency and real-time monitoring.
Banking giants accused of links to Iranian money
laundering
HSBC and Standard Chartered ordered to turn over
records by US judge investigating sanctions evasion
Camilla Turner
Sunday Political Editor
Daily Telegraph
Apr 18 2026
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/18/banking-giants-accused-links-iran-money-laundering/
HSBC and Standard Chartered have become embroiled in
allegations of a multimillion-pound scheme to launder money for Iran, The
Telegraph can disclose…
HSBC, StanChart inadvertently involved in Iranian
money-laundering: The Daily Telegraph | The Standard
Apr 20 2026
https://www.thestandard.com.hk/finance/article/329760/
Excerpt: HSBC (0005) and Standard Chartered (2888) are facing allegations of links to Iranian money-laundering, according to a report by UK’s The Daily Telegraph.
The report said the two British banks are alleged to have unknowingly processed transactions potentially linked to Iran’s sanctions evasion, involving millions of pounds.
A US court has also ordered JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of New York Mellon, in addition to the two UK lenders to hand over transaction records for investigation, it said.
The report added that the allegations emerged as the White House warned it would penalize any “foreign
financial institutions” supporting Iran, putting major UK banks under scrutiny
over potential links to money-laundering activities involving Tehran.
【伊朗危機】滙豐、渣打據報不知情下捲入伊朗洗錢活動
5 家銀行遭美法官下令交出紀錄
金發局洪丕正：港銀行反洗錢工作全面（第二版）
香港經濟日報
2026-04-20
https://inews.hket.com/article/4116114/
節錄：《每日電訊報》（Daily Telegraph）報道，HSBC滙豐 （00005） 與渣打 （02888） 被捲入一項為伊朗洗錢的數百萬美元計劃的指控，該兩家英國銀行被指控「在不知情的情況下」處理了據稱可能與一項複雜的規避制裁陰謀有關的付款。包括摩通、花旗和紐約梅隆銀行在內的5家銀行已被美國法官下令交出紀錄以供檢查。報道指，滙豐、渣打、摩通、花旗、紐約梅隆銀行均拒絕置評。
身兼香港金融發展局（FSDC）主席及渣打國際業務總裁洪丕正在金發局記者會回應提問時僅指，處理制裁實體及反洗錢（AML）工作自美國 911 恐襲發生持續進行，強調香港銀行體系在這方面的工作全面，且香港在 AML 在國際間屬高水平，即使有不足亦只屬個別個案。針對美國對伊朗的制裁，是全世界均要面對的議題，並不只限於香港，銀行有責任盡量避免受制裁國家或人士。
就在白宮威脅要懲罰任何支持伊朗的「外國金融機構」之際，英國主要銀行被揭露與潛在的為德黑蘭洗錢活動有關。
No records, no role: HSBC, StanChart reject
Iran-linked money laundering claim
HSBC chairman Brendan Nelson says bank is not a party
to alleged Iran-linked case and holds no records, as US court seeks information
Enoch Yiu
South China Morning Post
21 Apr 2026
Intro: HSBC Holdings has rejected allegations linking it to a money laundering case involving Iran, with chairman Brendan Nelson saying the bank was not a party to the matter and had only been asked to provide information.
Responding to a shareholder at an informal meeting in Hong Kong on Tuesday, Nelson said HSBC had no records related to the transactions in question.
“This is a case where HSBC is not a party, but in fact
has only been asked to provide information relating to transactions that
allegedly went through our bank,” he said.
Anti Money-Laundering
Top 14 Biggest AML Fines of All Time (Updated for 2025)
Published date: 21 Apr 2025
Sanction Scanner
https://www.sanctionscanner.com/blog/top-14-biggest-aml-fines-of-all-time-updated-for-2025-1034
Excerpt: What Are AML Fines?
Without a doubt, awareness of AML compliance is on the rise. Anti-Money Laundering (AML) fines are financial penalties imposed by regulatory authorities. We may attribute this remarkable progress to the potential fines, reputation loss or other legal consequences. Anti-Money Laundering (AML) fines are financial penalties imposed by regulatory authorities. However, the severity of these repercussions is still not always enough to stop these acts all together. In this article, we highlight some of the largest fines in history, the sectors and countries most affected, ways to avoid them, and more.
The 14 Biggest AML Fines in History
3. Goldman Sachs: 1MDB scandal
This infamous case revolves around a sovereign wealth fund that was created by the Malaysian government in order to promote economic development. However, billions of dollars were misappropriated from the fund and Goldman Sachs played a key role in this scandal. Goldman Sachs employees allegedly knew about high corruption risks and accepted large personal fees. Regulators held the bank responsible for insufficient AML and due diligence controls. Goldman agreed to settle with the DoJ for $2.9 billion and its Malaysian unit pleaded guilty to a corruption charge.
5. HSBC – $1.9B (2012): Drug cartel funds, Iran sanctions
In 2012, U.S. authorities accused HSBC of not implementing proper controls to prevent money laundering and related crimes. Their evidence showed that HSBC moved billions of dollars in illicit funds through its accounts as well as violating U.S. sanctions against countries like Iran and Sudan. These funds even included drug trafficking and terrorist financing. In 2013, the bank agreed to pay a fine of $1.9 billion to the U.S. Department of Justice.
8. Standard Chartered: Iran/Sudan violations
Standard Chartered was accused of processing transactions worth $438M during the five year period between 2009 and 2014. The problematic part here is that the majority of these transactions involved Iran-linked accounts. In the end, The U.S. and the UK authorities ordered the British bank to pay $1.1B.
9. Deutsche Bank: Mirror trading with Russia
This scandal revealed around the German bank’s Moscow, London and New
York offices from 2011 to 2015, in which it bought Russian blue-chip stocks in
rubles worth $10B on behalf of clients and sold them at the same price through
its London branch. There wasn’t any economic purpose behind these actions, and
the bank missed numerous opportunities to detect, investigate and stop the
scheme. This resulted in the Deutsche Bank receiving $630 million of fines and
requiring an independent monitor to review the bank’s compliance programs.
HSBC: The
World's Most Corrupt Bank? (57:35 minutes)
Java Discover |
Free Global Documentaries & Clips
2026-03-31
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DySE0Exygkk
Intro: From the director of ‘Goldman Sachs: The Bank that Rules the World’ comes a major new investigation into corruption at one of the world’s top financial institutions – HSBC.
If HSBC were a country, it would be the fifth world economic power. Founded during the golden age of the Opium trade to enable the British Empire to access the Chinese market, it has created a unique network to move dirty money around the world. From tax evasion to money laundering for the mafia and manipulation of currency, “this bank had done everything bad that a bank can possibly do.”
In 2012, HSBC nearly lost its license to operate in the US for laundering the money of the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels. Criminal charges were filed and HSBC’s executives hauled before a Senate committee. But George Osborne, UK’s then Chancellor of the Exchequer, wrote to his counterpart in America and to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve to plead for leniency. He claimed that if HSBC received a harsh punishment, it would have serious repercussions on the world’s financial and economic stability. The letter worked and HSBC was fined 2 billion euros. The equivalent of one month’s profits.
As the center of international finance moves to Asia, HSBC is in prime position. It is the most Chinese of Western banks and the most European of Chinese banks. Protected by London, blessed by Beijing, who would dare attack it?
（推介原因：讀者推介的金融紀錄片，講述匯豐的黑歷史，聚焦洗黑錢指控。）
US-Iran war explained by Chinese AI
animation: Legend of the Valley of Gold
(5:22 minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As0rplNJTZI
這是中央電視台製作的 AI 動物武俠片《流金谷恩仇錄》，用中國的角度講解美元霸權和美伊戰爭，風格似上世紀七十年代的邵氏武俠片，老一輩的香港人會覺得非常熟悉。結尾駱駝發表戰爭與和平的偉論，所用的背景音樂是《東海漁歌》（1959），作曲：馬聖龍，顧冠仁。這首音樂是上世紀六十年代港產粵語武俠片的常用配樂，周星馳電影《功夫》（2004）也用過（提示：豬籠城寨的武打場面），用來向前輩致敬。那部電影中所使用的版本，由《香港中樂團》演奏。
相關的文章：
穩定幣 (Stablecoin) Part 4
2025 年 8 月 24 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2025/08/stablecoin-part-4.html
節錄：The Genius Act 的目的是設定穩定幣的遊戲規則，把它納入美國的制度和監管之內。以下文章引述來自美國政界的反對派觀點，認為這條法案的弱點在於沒有監管穩定幣的二手市場交易活動，也難以監管外國發行商在美國境外的活動，以及助長影子銀行系統的出現和便利洗黑錢活動。
穩定幣 (Stablecoin) Part 3
2025 年 8 月 10 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2025/08/stablecoin-part-3.html
節錄：如果我是金管局總裁余偉文，穩定幣讓我很頭痛。國家有任務給我（即是：利用香港推動穩定幣的發展，以免偉大祖國在這個範疇落後或受制於美國），但是跟人民幣掛鈎的穩定幣沒有太大的實用價值（原因大家都懂但是不方便公開講），跟美元掛鈎的穩定幣政治不正確（原因是特朗普回朝之後推出多項針對中國的經濟政策和行政手段）。怎麼辦？做一點門面功夫，配合拖字訣和港式官腔，應酬偉大祖國。對國家有利的事情，對香港是否有利？這個問題很難答，因為會突顯中港矛盾，令本官走入地雷陣，變成另一個林鄭月娥。前車可鑑，避之則吉。
金山黑錢
2020 年 5 月 8 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/05/blog-post.html
節錄：犯罪集團慣用的走私手法：在（未完稅）商品上面舖一層別的東西，用來掩人耳目或轉移視線，令海關職員看不見（收藏於車船的底層或暗格內）的走私貨物，也可以用來干擾緝毒犬的嗅覺。洗黑錢也有類似的做法，表面上是正常的跨國商品貿易，犯罪集團透過誇大或縮小買賣的金額或同一批貨多次出單，把黑錢從一個國家轉移到另一個國家。由於銀行未能完全掌握交易的全貌（英文的說法是 Limited visibility），會在不知不覺間被犯罪集團所利用。這種運用跨國商品貿易掩飾洗黑錢的手法，金融業術語叫 Trade-Based Money Laundering (TBML) 。
Trade Based Money Laundering (TBML)
2025 年 12 月 28 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2025/12/trade-based-money-laundering-tbml.html
節錄：透過國際貿易清洗黑錢 (Trade Based Money Laundering, TBML) 是一種傳統的洗黑錢手法。常用的方法：透過不存在的虛假貿易 (Fictitious or“ghost”trading) 轉移犯罪收入，透過誇大或縮小貨物的價值 (Over Invoicing or Under Invoicing) 轉移資金至另一個國家（動機可以是繞過外匯管制即是走資）。亞洲國家中，最有條件玩 TBML 的，是中國和印度。原因：
FATF 的灰名單和黑名單
2026 年 1 月 6 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2026/01/fatf.html
節錄：粵語水為財，地下水等於原本在地下金融系統流通的黑錢（犯罪收入），而剛過去的 2025 年是大量中國黑錢湧上地面的一年（提示：錢志敏+陳志+蘇炳海）。數量之多，肉眼可見，路人皆知。地下金融系統出事，令地上的合法金融系統受影響，外國勢力有理由說三道四，採取懲罰性措施，影響貿易和投資。過去一年，主流傳媒找到不少證據，證明跨國犯罪集團利用香港（的商業房地產或高級住宅或上市公司或金融機構）洗黑錢。於是有網上的財經評論員預言：香港會被 FATF 列入灰名單 (Grey list)。
英倫黑錢
2022 年 3 月 1 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2022/03/blog-post.html
節錄：英國傳媒的看法：中國人很可能繼俄羅斯人之後，利用英國的金融中心地位洗黑錢。英國的政府部門已經準備收緊移民政策及加強相關的反洗黑錢法規。今日的西方世界視俄羅斯和中國為敵人，有這種想法，不難理解（提示：英國和美國因應俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭，準備在金融層面對俄羅斯實施制裁）。如果屬實，那些來自俄羅斯和中國的黑錢，稍後是否又要轉移到另一個地方（傳統的避稅天堂還是網上的虛擬世界）？即是（洗黑錢的）老鼠繼續逃避御貓（監管機構）的追捕？貓捉老鼠（提示：Tom & Jerry），沒完沒了，就是這樣。
金融中心的黑暗面
2020 年 1 月 15 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/01/blog-post.html
節錄：外國學者用倫敦做例子，說明金融業過度膨脹之後所帶來的問題：來自共產主義國家（中國和俄國）的黑錢氾濫，令樓價飆升至不合理水平，金融業跟其他行業爭奪資源和人才（而非支援實體經濟的發展），令實體經濟失去生存空間或被掏空或變成賭博工具（提示：食神＋爆漿瀨尿牛丸＋開分店上市集資）。金融業發達有助官商勾結（因為利益交換可以透過金融市場進行），危害民主與自由，加劇貧富懸殊（因為權貴可以合法避稅但是打工仔無法避稅），影響社會流動。外國學者說：金融業過度膨脹，令經濟發展失去平衡，導致災難性的後果（提示：Too big to fail）。每次金融泡沫爆破之後，幾代人的努力煙消雲散，年輕人向上流動更加困難，缺乏安全感，不婚不育，人口老化，日本是好例子。
遲早要還
2020 年 6 月 7 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/06/blog-post.html
節錄：大國相爭，買辦死先，是香港的命運。金融中心地位受損，是最低消費 (Minimum charge) 或附帶傷害 (Collateral damage)。中美兩國處於半戰爭狀態，局部開火，平民百姓被誤傷或誤殺，私人財產被破壞或充公，也很常見，無法避免。
Kleptocracy（盜賊統治）
2021 年 8 月 20 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/08/kleptocracy.html
節錄：盜賊統治 (Kleptocracy) 跟洗黑錢活動關係密切，有如連體嬰，或錢幣的兩面。Kleptocrats 是指貪污腐敗的當權者（竊國者），這個詞經常在英語傳媒對於洗黑錢活動的調查報導中出現。金錢無國界，竊國者透過離岸公司及複雜的股權結構，把不義之財轉移至對資產提供較佳保障的西方國家，然後隱藏起來。竊國者要保護自己的權力以及家族利益，必定會全力摧毀本國的法治及設法打壓公民社會，同一時間卻享受著西方國家所提供的法律保障，卑鄙無恥，對不對？
隱身術
2019 年 9 月 27 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2019/09/blog-post_27.html
節錄：以下介紹三種常用的隱身術。第一種做法，叫環迴式控股 (Circular ownership)。圖表中的短髮女子 (Mary) 表面上只持有 Company A 的 2% 股權，但其實她透過持有 Company C 和 Company B 控制 Company A。如果 Company A 是一間上市公司，中間的持股公司又不止 Company B 和 Company C 兩間那麼少，而是十間或以上，在不同的避稅天堂註冊成立的離岸公司，會產生怎樣的效果，自己想。
Pandora Papers
2021 年 10 月 4 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/10/pandora-papers.html
Excerpt: The largest investigation in journalism history exposes a shadow financial system that benefits the world’s most rich and powerful.
諜影
2016 年 4 月 22 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.hk/2016/04/blog-post_22.html
節錄：巴拿馬文件 (Panama
Papers) 讓你明白新聞行業與間諜活動之間的關係。根據 Washington Post 的報導，負責分析文件的國際調查記者聯盟 (The International Consortium of Investigative
Journalists, ICIJ) 背後的美國公共誠信中心 (Center for
Public Integrity)，金主是國際大鱷索羅斯 (George
Soros)。他較早前表示會「沽空亞洲貨幣」，令偉大祖國非常緊張，官媒輪流開炮。索羅斯戰績彪炳，利用在金融市場賺來的錢，資助共產黨的對頭人。中國和俄羅斯的領導人首當其衝，被爆陰毒，理所當然。
文章
沒有留言:
發佈留言