During a review, an analyst notices discrepancies between a customer's nature of business listed on the business registry and what was stated on the customers application. The analyst should:

When discrepancies exist between official business registry information and customer-provided data, the analyst must clarify these inconsistencies as they directly impact the accuracy of the customer risk assessment. The nature of business is a fundamental element in determining transaction patterns, risk exposure, and appropriate monitoring scenarios. Unresolved discrepancies could lead to incorrect risk ratings, inadequate monitoring, and potential regulatory violations. This aligns with enhanced due diligence requirements under FATF Recommendations 10 and 22, which mandate understanding the customer's business and ensuring information accuracy.

B. Closing without resolution violates due diligence requirements; absence of adverse news doesn't address factual inconsistencies.

C. Document certification doesn't resolve substantive discrepancies between different information sources.

D. Accepting discrepancies undermines ongoing monitoring obligations regardless of initial onboarding decisions.

1. FATF Recommendations (2012, Updated 2023), Recommendation 10, Customer Due Diligence, Paragraphs 6-7

2. Wolfsberg Group AML Principles for Correspondent Banking (2014), Section 2.1, Customer Due Diligence Standards

3. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, "Sound Management of Risks Related to Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism" (2020), Paragraphs 34-36

4. ACAMS Study Guide, 6th Edition, Chapter 3, Customer Due Diligence, pp. 89-91