Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)are collaborative initiatives involvinglaw enforcement, FIUs, and financial institutions. Their objective is to improve theefficiency and effectivenessof the fight against money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes bysharing both operational and strategic intelligence.
Option A - Exchange operational information between public authorities and obliged entities:
PPPs often facilitate real-time or near-real-time information sharing that supportsspecific investigations and the detection of suspicious activity, helping financial institutions respond quickly and accurately to ongoing threats.
Option B - Exchange strategic information between FIUs and obliged entities:
Strategic-level intelligence sharing helps financial institutionsunderstand typologies, risk trends, and evolving criminal methods, thereby strengthening their risk assessments and transaction monitoring frameworks.
Option Cis incorrect: Strategic information exchange between private institutions is limited and heavily regulated.
Option Dis incorrect: FATF does not collect or manage databases of suspicious activity reports; it sets standards and reviews national frameworks.
Reference: ACAMS CAMS Study Guide - 6th Edition, Chapter:Public-Private Partnerships and Information Sharing- Section:Purpose and Function of PPPs in AML/CFT

AML compliancemust be balanced with data privacy laws, such asGDPR (EU), CCPA (U.S.), and jurisdictional banking secrecy laws.
Option A (Correct):Data protection laws regulate how customer information can be shared internallyand externally, ensuringconfidentiality and regulatory compliance.
Option B (Incorrect):Enterprise risk assessments do not determine data sharing rules; legal and regulatory policies do.
Option C (Incorrect):Risk rating does not impact legal data-sharing restrictions.
Option D (Incorrect):AML policies must align with data protection laws, not override them.
Key Data Privacy Considerations in AML Compliance:
GDPR (Article 6) requires a legal basis for processing personal data, including AML investigations.
Banking secrecy laws restrict sharing certain customer information without consent or legal obligation.
Internal information-sharing policies must be clear on what AML teams can disclose.
Best Practices for AML & Data Privacy Compliance:
Consult legal teams before sharing AML-related data internally or externally.
Ensure compliance with GDPR, CCPA, and banking secrecy laws.
Minimize data sharing to what is strictly necessary.
Reference:
FATF Recommendation 2 (National Cooperation and Coordination)
EU GDPR Article 6 (Lawful Processing of Personal Data)
Wolfsberg Group AML & Data Privacy Guidelines

The payment received from an account in an offshore jurisdiction and the lack of beneficial ownership details for the originating account are two money laundering red flags.Offshore jurisdictions are often used by money launderers to hide the source and destination of their funds, as they typically have low transparency and weak regulatory oversight. The absence of beneficial ownership information makes it difficult to identify the true owners and controllers of the funds, and to assess the legitimacy and risk of the transaction. These factors increase the possibility that the payment is related to money laundering, tax evasion, or other illicit activities.
ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide, 6th Edition, page 33
ACAMS CAMS Certification Exam Outline, 6th Edition, Domain 1, Task 1.2
ACAMS CAMS Certification Video Training Course, Module 1, Lesson 1.2
Exam CAMS: Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (the 6th edition), Question 315

The CAMS 6th Edition clearly identifies a risk-based approach as the cornerstone of effective AML/CFT programs. Risk assessments should consider various risk factors that directly influence exposure to ML/TF.
* Product risk (A): Certain products or services may present higher ML/TF risks, such as private banking, correspondent banking, or cash-intensive products."Products and services offered, and their inherent risk levels, must be assessed as part of the risk-based approach."(CAMS 6th Edition, AML Compliance Program, Risk Assessment)
* Geographic risk (C): Jurisdictions where the customer operates or where transactions are conducted may present higher or lower risks due to factors such as weak AML regulations or high corruption.
"Geographic risk considers where a customer is located and/or where transactions occur, referencing countries with increased risk, such as those identified by the FATF."(CAMS 6th Edition, Risk Assessment Factors)
* Customer risk (D): The type of customer, such as PEPs, non-residents, or companies with complex structures, may present higher ML/TF risks."Customer risk assessment is based on the customer's profile, activity, and ownership structure, and is a critical component in risk-based monitoring."( CAMS 6th Edition, CDD/EDD) Incorrect Options:
* B (Credit risk): Related to creditworthiness, not ML/TF.
* E (Liquidity risk): Refers to a firm's ability to meet financial obligations; not an AML risk factor.
References:
CAMS Study Guide 6th Edition, AML Compliance Program, "Risk-Based Approach" FATF Guidance: National Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment (2013)

According to the ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), a financial institution (FI) should update its ML/TF risk assessment when there are changes in its business activities, customer base, or operating environment that may affect its exposure to ML/TF risks1 Some examples of such changes are:
When new products, services or customer types are introduced: New products, services or customer types may introduce new or increased ML/TF risks that the FI may not have previously considered or addressed.
For example, offering online banking, prepaid cards, or cross-border remittances may create new opportunities for money launderers or terrorist financiers to exploit the FI's systems and processes. Therefore, the FI should assess the ML/TF risks associated with the new products, services or customer types and implement appropriate controls to mitigate them12 When the institution faces a merger or acquisition: A merger or acquisition may result in the FI inheriting the ML/TF risks of the other entity, as well as the potential liabilities and reputational damage that may arise from any ML/TF issues or violations. Therefore, the FI should conduct a due diligence on the other entity's ML/TF risk assessment, policies, procedures, and controls, and identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. The FI should also integrate and harmonize the ML/TF risk assessment and compliance programs of the merged or acquired entity with its own13
1: ACAMS CAMS Certification Study Guide (6th edition), page 32. 2: Money laundering/terrorism financing risk assessment | AUSTRAC4 3: MONEY LAUNDERING & TERRORIST FINANCING (ML/TF) RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY5, page 4.
Reference: https://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/content/images/National_ML_TF_Risk_Assessment.pdf