Skip to content
WHATSAPP (24 HRS)
REPORTING ENTITIES · ECONOMIC CRIME · FEDERAL / ECONOMIC CRIMINAL COURTS

Reporting Entities (FIU) and Money Laundering (Art. 303 APC): Criminal Defence and Preventive Technical Response

If you are a reporting entity (professional or SME) and have received an information request, an AML audit or disciplinary notice, or there is a risk of asset freezes, device seizures or criminal proceedings, the priority is to establish traceability and organise evidence without unnecessary exposure. We appear in CABA and Province of Buenos Aires before the Federal Courts and/or the Economic Criminal Court (according to jurisdiction).

Reporting entities 48–72 hours Evidence FAQs
URGENT CALL (24 HRS) CONFIDENTIAL WHATSAPP

If there has been a property search or device seizure, see also: Search & Seizure Defence Guide.

If you are a reporting entity: what creates the most exposure — and what protects you

In practice, many cases do not begin with a criminal charge: they begin with an information request, an AML audit or a disciplinary notice. That is where the tone of the case is set. A response that is late, disorganised or internally contradictory can significantly escalate risk.

Response checklist (professionals and SMEs)

  • Inventory and preservation: collate documentation, backups and a chronology — without rushed “reconstructions” that can be detected in forensic analysis.
  • Traceability and audit trail: lawful source of funds, funds flow, contracts, invoices, bank statements, supporting documentation and counterparties.
  • Consistency: a single, coherent technical account — what is said today must be consistent with the accounting records and digital evidence.
  • Scope: respond to what has been requested, with judgment, and document in writing anything that does not exist or is not within your control.
  • Criminal law position: avoid unnecessary statements and define the message before speaking to any third parties.

STRs and confidentiality (critical point)

Under the AML/CFT framework, Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) and related actions are subject to strict confidentiality obligations. This matters because tipping-off — disclosing, directly or indirectly, that a report has been filed or that an investigation is underway — can seriously worsen the situation. If you are facing a specific scenario, we define together what can be communicated and what should be avoided.

Money laundering: what is actually in dispute

In practice, “money laundering” is not defined by a label but by a map of transactions: how funds entered, how they moved, what documentation supports them and which hypothesis the prosecution advances.

The technical defence works to separate what is presumed from what is proved: origin, traceability, knowledge or purpose and the link to a predicate offence.

Technical note (Art. 303 APC)

Art. 303 APC (current text) provides for a custodial sentence and a fine for the basic offence, and sets a monetary threshold (measured in statutory minimum wages) “at the time of the conduct”. If that threshold is not met, the article itself provides for a fine-only regime — a technical and evidentiary discussion about the amount, the transaction and the traceability of funds.

Forensic accounting analysis and digital evidence

The contest is usually fought over technical evidence. We work on: accounting evidence (balance sheets, invoices, funds flows, corporate structure, ultimate beneficial ownership) and digital evidence (messages, emails, metadata, virtual assets, chain of custody) — to identify inconsistencies, hypothesis bias and attribution gaps.

What we look for (accounting)

  • Chronology of transactions and counterparties.
  • Consistent supporting documents (contracts / invoices / bank statements).
  • Coherence between actual activity and funds flow.
  • Economically plausible explanations — not isolated “narratives”.

What we protect (digital)

  • Evidence integrity — preventing contamination.
  • Messages and emails read in full context, not as selective excerpts.
  • Metadata and digital traces — without fabricating anything.
  • Chain of custody and lawfulness of seizure.

Warning signs (for reporting entities)

How cases typically begin

Alerts from the AML/CFT system, information requests from the FIU (UIF), ARCA or other supervisory bodies, third-party complaints or a connection to another case. The first “signal” is often administrative rather than criminal.

Intrusive measures

Property searches (PFA/GNA/PSA), seizure of devices and documentation, account freezes, attachment orders and injunctions.

Jurisdiction

A determination is made as to whether the case falls within the Federal Courts or the Economic Criminal Court, based on the conduct, the predicate offence, the subject matter and the territorial scope of the investigation.

Immediate objective: technical oversight of the case, lawfulness of the measures and preservation of evidence.

First 48–72 hours: what to do and what to avoid

DO NOT IMPROVISE
  • Do not sign “explanatory statements” or supplementary records without a strategy in place.
  • Do not “reconstruct” documentation under pressure — it is detectable in forensic analysis.
  • Do not send partial or contradictory information by email or messaging apps to third parties.
  • Do not discuss the case with employees or suppliers unless a unified message has been agreed.
ACT QUICKLY
  • Preserve evidence of lawful source of funds and build a simple chronology.
  • Organise supporting documents (contracts, invoices, bank statements, counterparties, KYC documentation where applicable).
  • Review the procedural records and lawfulness of any search or seizure that has taken place.
  • Establish a single response channel (scope, content and deadlines).
Practical tip: for reporting entities, presentation matters: a properly indexed response with numbered annexes, documentary consistency and a clear audit trail significantly reduces the room for adverse interpretation.

Related areas

Electronic evidence

Digital evidence is often decisive in money laundering cases. A guide to the preservation and technical reading of messages, emails and files.

VIEW GUIDE
Corporate & Compliance

For reporting entities and SMEs, the approach combines AML/CFT compliance and criminal law protection: documentation, traceability and a consistent message.

VIEW CORPORATE
Federal offences

Information on federal jurisdiction and related complex economic offences.

VIEW FEDERAL COURTS

Frequently asked questions

It does not automatically make you a suspect, but it can escalate risk if the response is late, disorganised or internally contradictory. The strategy is typically twofold: (i) collate documentation and establish traceability so as to respond technically and within the deadline; and (ii) protect the criminal law position — avoiding unnecessary statements, preserving evidence and controlling the scope of what is disclosed.

In general, no: the AML/CFT framework imposes a duty of confidentiality. Tipping-off — disclosing that a report has been filed — can significantly worsen the situation. If you are in a specific situation, the appropriate message and its scope should be defined with legal advice before anything is communicated.

In broad terms, money laundering involves transactions designed to give an appearance of lawful origin to assets or funds of illicit provenance. In practice, the real dispute is almost always evidentiary: origin, traceability, knowledge or purpose, and the link to a predicate offence.

Because they frequently come with intrusive measures: property searches, seizure of devices and documentation, account freezes, attachment orders and banking information requests. What happens in the first few days shapes the entire case file.

Precautionary measures affecting assets are common in these cases. Proportionality, evidentiary basis and lawfulness are assessed; excessive measures are challenged and an application to lift or substitute them is made, as the case requires.

It depends on the strategy and on having reviewed the case file first. Sometimes a statement is beneficial — to frame the facts and offer evidence; other times, silence prevents consolidating the prosecution’s hypothesis. The decision is made once the file has been examined.

Contracts, invoices, bank statements, evidence of lawful source of funds, corporate structure and ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO), payment traceability and relevant correspondence. In complex cases, building the chronology and organising the evidence is itself a core part of the defence.

Confidential consultation — reporting entities / money laundering

Information request, AML audit, disciplinary proceedings, asset freeze or court summons: take technical control of the case from the outset.

CONFIDENTIAL WHATSAPP CALL THE FIRM
Personalised Assistance
Hello! If you are a reporting entity facing an FIU request or AML audit, or if you face criminal risk under Art. 303 APC, we can assess your case in complete confidence.
Lawyer
REQUEST A REVIEW