Client intake Current
Requesting source-of-funds information for a higher-risk matter
A practical approach to asking about the origin of funds.
Some matters call for a closer look at where a client's funds came from, particularly when a client, service, or delivery channel is assessed as higher risk. This guide sets out a practical, respectful way to ask. It is general information, not legal or compliance advice.
Action plan
1 Know when a source-of-funds question is needed Source-of-funds questions generally apply when a matter, client, or channel is assessed as higher risk.
Enhanced customer due diligence, including asking about the source of a client's funds, generally applies when a client's money-laundering or terrorism-financing risk is assessed as higher, or in other specific circumstances your firm's AML/CTF program sets out. Whether a specific matter meets that threshold is a determination for your firm to make, not Vertical Flows.
- Check your firm's own risk assessment for whether this matter or client is higher risk
- Confirm against your firm's AML/CTF program whether enhanced due diligence applies
- Document why the source-of-funds question is being asked
Done when: A documented basis exists for why the source-of-funds question applies to this matter
AUSTRAC: overview of customer due diligence2 Ask clearly, and explain why A short, matter-of-fact explanation generally reduces how intrusive the question feels.
Clients generally respond better when the request is framed as a standard part of your firm's process for this type of matter, rather than as a suspicion about them personally. A short explanation that this question is asked for every matter that meets the same risk criteria helps set that context.
- Explain that the question is a standard part of your process for matters like this one, not specific to them
- Ask directly and simply where the funds for the matter came from
- Avoid technical or accusatory language
Done when: The client has been asked clearly and given a plain explanation for the request
AUSTRAC: overview of customer due diligence3 Ask for evidence that supports the client's explanation Where practical, ask for documents that corroborate the stated source of funds.
A client's explanation of where funds came from is generally stronger when supported by documentary evidence, such as a settlement statement, an employment record, or evidence of a prior sale. What evidence is reasonable to request depends on the specific explanation given.
- Ask for documents that support the client's stated source of funds
- Match the evidence requested to the specific explanation given
- Keep the supporting evidence with your other due diligence records
Done when: Supporting evidence for the stated source of funds has been requested and reviewed
See how structured intake and review works4 Escalate if the answer is inconsistent or incomplete An explanation that does not add up is a matter for your firm's own escalation process, not a workaround.
If a client's explanation of the source of funds is inconsistent, incomplete, or cannot be supported by evidence, escalate it through your firm's own AML/CTF program rather than proceeding on the basis of an unresolved answer.
- Escalate an inconsistent or unsupported explanation through your firm's own process
- Do not proceed with the matter on the basis of an unresolved source-of-funds question
- Document the escalation and its outcome
Done when: An inconsistent or unsupported source-of-funds explanation has been escalated through your firm's process
AUSTRAC: overview of customer due diligence