> It's estimated that between $250 billion and 500 billion is laundered through US banks every year, though some portion of that is via correspondent banking and not just individual account money muleing.

The money laundering is not happening through consumer deposit accounts (I've never heard your term money mueling and it's almost definitely not people moving $10,000 at a time if that's what you are suggesting).

It is wanton disingenuity to think that the goal of this rule is prevention of money laundering.

▲

busterarm a day ago | parent [-]

I didn't say that was the goal. I explicitly said that it wouldn't do anything about it. Just that it happens.

And absolutely it happens, particularly with networks of accounts connected to China. Just because you've never heard of it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. FinCEN has been publicly chasing this down for years. Although hawala networks are also a big source of that not mainly personal banking.

Also you're missing the forest for the trees here. Money laundering will most often happen through business bank accounts but a large number of business account holders also have personal accounts at the same bank and link them out of convenience.

Personal ID is also required to open a business bank account. This requirement will likely apply to those as well.

	▲	bonsai_spool a day ago \| parent [-]
		> Also you're missing the forest for the trees here I see what you're saying - I am just trying to convey that the $250 billion dollars being laundered is commercial. It's hard to imagine how anyone can come close to those figures by using consumer accounts, linked or not.