Skip to content
Back Home
Dynamic Securities Analytics, Inc.
  • HOME
  • SERVICES
    • LITIGATION SERVICES
    • AML AUDIT & ANALYTICS
    • CRYPTOCURRENCY DISPUTES
  • ABOUT US
    • ABOUT DSA
      • Executive Bio
    • CONTACT US
  • BLOG
  • Search
Back Home
Dynamic Securities Analytics, Inc.
  • Search
  • HOME
  • SERVICES
    • LITIGATION SERVICES
    • AML AUDIT & ANALYTICS
    • CRYPTOCURRENCY DISPUTES
  • ABOUT US
    • ABOUT DSA
      • Executive Bio
    • CONTACT US
  • BLOG
Home » BLOG » Anti-Money Laundering » Who is Filing Suspicious Activity Reports on the Marijuana Industry? New Data May Surprise You.
Anti-Money Laundering Data Analytics FinCEN Marijuana SARs Money Laundering Enforcement Regulatory Analytics SARs

Who is Filing Suspicious Activity Reports on the Marijuana Industry? New Data May Surprise You.

by Alison Jimenez|Published April 13, 2015

By Alison Jimenez, Dynamic Securities Analytics & Steven Kemmerling, Enhanced Compliance Solutions

Pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, on April 6th the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) provided Dynamic Securities Analytics (“DSA”) with new data on Suspicious Activity Report (“SAR”) activity relating to “marijuana industries.” In the disclosure to DSA, FinCEN reported that 3,157 marijuana-related SARS were received between February 14, 2014 and January 26, 2015. Previously, the only available data regarding marijuana-related SARs was mentioned during a speech by FinCEN Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery on August 12, 2014, during which she stated just over 1,000 marijuana-related SARS had been received by FinCEN between February 14, 2014 and August 8, 2014, indicating that approximately 2,157 additional marijuana-related SARS were received between August 9, 2014 and January 26, 2015.

84% of States Reported Marijuana Related SARs

Marijuana law mapThe 3,157 marijuana-related SARs were filed by 374 individual financial institutions (“FIs”) in at least 42 states and the District of Columbia. This compares to the 1,000+ SARs filed by “105 individual financial institutions from states in more than one third of the country” as mentioned in Calvery’s August speech. Although 23 states and DC have legalized medical marijuana, the ArcView Group reports that only 14 states had “active retail markets” in 2014 and 5 of those accounted for 97% of sales. Financial institutions operating only in states where marijuana is illegal should not delude themselves into thinking that the marijuana industry is another state’s problem. However, as previously shown in a prior DSA analysis of SAR geographic data, the accuracy of FinCEN’s state data should be taken with a grain of salt.

Type of Marijuana-Related SARs

FinCEN guidance describes the three classifications of SARs specific to marijuana-related businesses (“MRBs”): Limited, Priority and Termination.

“Marijuana Limited”: A financial institution providing financial services to a marijuana-related business that it reasonably believes, based on its customer due diligence, does not implicate one of the Cole Memo priorities or violate state law should file a “Marijuana Limited” SAR.

“Marijuana Priority”: A financial institution filing a SAR on a marijuana-related business that it reasonably believes, based on its customer due diligence, implicates one of the Cole Memo priorities or violates state law should file a “Marijuana Priority” SAR.

“Marijuana Termination”: If a financial institution deems it necessary to terminate a relationship with a marijuana-related business in order to maintain an effective anti-money laundering compliance program, it should file a SAR and note in the narrative the basis for the termination.

FinCEN reported the following for each of the above marijuana-related SARs classifications:

  • Marijuana Limited SARs – 1,736 filed in 25 states
  • Marijuana Priority SARs – 313 filed in 19 states
  • Marijuana Termination SARs – 1,292 in 42 states

SAR Type Bar Chart

A few nuances regarding this data to consider:

  • From August 2014 to January 2015, the percentage of “Limited” SARs increased to 55% (up from 46%), while “Termination” SARs decreased to 36% (down from 43%). At first glance at the number of “Limited” SARs, one might inaccurately assume that 1,234 new MRBs received banking since August ’14. In fact, FIs who knowingly service an MRB customer are required to submit recurring “Limited” SARs on that customer every 90-120 days. Therefore the increase in “Limited” SARs may largely be due to repetitive SARs on existing MRBs customers, not new MRBs getting accounts.
  • 1,292 “Termination” SARs were filed in 42 states, confirming legal marijuana businesses’ concern about account closure. Some MRBs may have attempted to open out-of-state “funnel accounts” to avoid detection, although this does not seem to be a successful strategy given that financial institutions in 84% of states closed accounts.
  • Careful readers may have noted that the summation of Limited, Priority and Termination SARs totals to 3,341 versus the “Total SARs” of 3,157 as reported in FinCEN’s disclosure to DSA. A possible explanation for this variance is that some banks will include two types of marijuana SAR keywords such as a “Priority” SAR (noting the MRB is believed to be violating one of the Cole Memo priorities) as well as a “Termination” SAR when closing an account.

Marijuana-Related SARs by Industry

FinCEN provided DSA the following count of unique financial institutions filing marijuana-related SARs by industry:

  • 249 banks FI Type
  • 71 credit unions
  • 37 securities brokers
  • 10 money services businesses
  • 1 mortgage companies
  • 4 insurance companies
  • 2 casinos

Since marijuana-related SAR data by FI type has never previously been publicly shared by FinCEN, it is challenging to interpret the numbers. One area to consider is that only two casinos reported marijuana related SARs. There are close to 1,000 casinos in the United States and over 40 in Colorado alone. Similarly, there are 41,727 Money Services Businesses registered with FinCEN while only 10 reported any marijuana SARs.

Banks represented 66% of the total reporting financial institutions while credit unions accounted for 19% and securities dealers 10%.

The Known Unknown

  • Still unknown is the number of financial institutions choosing to provide services to disclosed MRBs. Director Calvery’s August 2014 remarks were widely, and perhaps erroneously, interpreted to mean that 105 institutions were choosing to bank MRBs. However, a portion of the prior 105 and current 374 reporting FIs did so via “Priority” and “Termination” SARs, which suggests that some of the reporting institutions are exiting relationships with MRBs. 45% of the August 2014 through Jan 2015 marijuana-related SARs fell into the “Priority” and “Termination” categories.
  • While FinCEN provided the count of unique banks, securities dealers, etc., still unknown is the number of marijuana-related SARs by industry. For instance, perhaps each of the 249 banks filed one marijuana-related SAR while the two casinos each filed 500. The average number of marijuana-related SARs filed by a reporting institution is 8.

Conclusion

One thing is clear, a wide swath of financial institutions in both Legal and Illegal states are having to deal with the reality of the fast growing legal marijuana industry. While we do not yet have a complete picture, the available data suggests a slight opening of financial services to MRBs.

* FinCEN guidance on marijuana-related SARs states that specific keywords such as MARIJUANA LIMITED should be used in the SAR narrative. DSA requested FinCEN data from SARs using the specified keywords. It is unknown whether FinCEN limited its data query to only the narrative section of SARs or included other text fields. The analysis above assumes that FinCEN used the same query methodology in August 2014 as was used to respond to the FOIA request.

Share this:

  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • AML
  • Anti-Money Laundering
  • FinCEN
  • funnel account
  • marijuana SAR
  • SAR
  • SAR-Limited
  • SAR-Priority
  • SAR-Termination
  • suspicious activity report

You may also like

Published January 16, 2015

Alison Jimenez to Present on Problem Employees & AML Risk

  DSA President, Alison Jimenez, will be a speaker for the upcoming Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (ACAMS) webinar “Spotting and […]

Published June 5, 2014

Is 179,000,000 Bank Secrecy Act records enough?

FinCEN’s record retention policy is detailed in the “Request For Records Disposition Authority” that FinCEN submitted to the National Archives and Records […]

Published March 16, 2022

Alison Jimenez Quoted in CNN on Sanctions

Alison Jimenez was quoted in a CNN story on sanctions against Russian oligarchs.

Published November 6, 2015

Wall Street Journal cites DSA’s Analysis of SARs

Dynamic Securities Analytics’ analysis of marijuana-related SARs was cited by the Wall Street Journal. The WSJ: Risk and Compliance Journal included DSA’s […]

Categories

  • 314(b)
  • Algorithmic Bias
  • AML Audit
  • Anti-Money Laundering
  • Broker-Dealers
  • Calculations
  • Casino
  • Cryptocurrency
  • CSAM
  • Currency Transaction Reports
  • Data Analytics
  • Drug Trafficking
  • DSA in the News
  • Employment Analytics
  • Employment Arbitration
  • Financially Motivated Sextortion
  • FinCEN
  • FINRA
  • Florida
  • Form 8300
  • Fraud Audit
  • Healthcare Fraud
  • Human Smuggling
  • Human Trafficking
  • Interactive Analytics
  • Investment Advisors
  • IRS
  • Marijuana SARs
  • Money Laundering Enforcement
  • MSBs
  • National Security
  • Ponzi Schemes
  • Presentations
  • Real Estate AML
  • Regulatory Analytics
  • SARs
  • SEC
  • Securities Arbitration
  • Securities Enforcement
  • Securities Fraud
  • Securities Litigation
  • Securities Regulation
  • Securities Violations
  • Sextortion
  • Suspicious Activity Reports
  • Tax Evasion
  • Terror Finance
  • Transnational Organized Crime
  • Uncategorized

Archives

  • April 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • April 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • November 2023
  • August 2023
  • June 2023
  • April 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • May 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • September 2020
  • July 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • April 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • August 2018
  • June 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • August 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • April 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • September 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2012
  • October 2010
  • October 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009

Post navigation

  • Previous post Alison Jimenez to Present at ACAMS Conference on Anti-Fraud Firewalls
  • Back to post list
  • Next post DSA cited in Wall Street Journal

Home
Litigation Services
AML Audit & Analytics
Cryptocurrency Disputes
About DSA
Blog
Contact

Mailing Address:
301 W. Platt St. #134
Tampa, FL 33606

Phone: (813) 994-3340

E-mail:
info@securitiesanalytics.com

© 2025 Dynamic Securities Analytics, Inc. – All rights reserved

Powered by WP – Designed with the Customizr theme