Bank of America BSA Deficiencies: OCC Findings and Compliance

The recent headlines about Bank of America BSA deficiencies OCC have drawn significant attention across the compliance and financial services industry. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which oversees national banks in the United States, identified weaknesses in Bank of America’s compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). These findings highlight the ongoing regulatory pressure on major institutions to maintain robust anti-money laundering compliance frameworks.

This development is not an isolated case. Regulators have consistently emphasized the importance of effective monitoring, reporting, and governance when it comes to preventing financial crime. The OCC’s findings serve as a timely reminder that even the largest banks, with vast compliance budgets, are not immune from deficiencies. For compliance professionals, understanding the implications of this case is essential for strengthening their own programs.

In this article, we’ll analyze the OCC’s findings, explain the significance of Bank Secrecy Act requirements, and provide insights into how compliance teams can learn from Bank of America’s experience to improve financial crime prevention practices.

Background: What Are BSA Deficiencies?

The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), also known as the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, is the cornerstone of U.S. anti-money laundering regulations. It requires financial institutions to implement measures such as customer due diligence, suspicious activity reporting, and transaction monitoring.

When regulators refer to “BSA deficiencies,” they are identifying gaps in how an institution applies these requirements. This may include failures in transaction monitoring systems, delays in filing Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), or weaknesses in governance and internal controls. Deficiencies do not always mean deliberate misconduct, but they do signal vulnerabilities that criminals can exploit.

For large banks like Bank of America, the stakes are high. Deficiencies can result in consent orders, civil monetary penalties, and reputational damage. The OCC’s role in identifying and addressing these issues demonstrates the regulatory commitment to ensuring that banks remain at the forefront of financial crime prevention.

The OCC’s Findings on Bank of America

According to the OCC, Bank of America was cited for multiple deficiencies in its BSA and AML compliance program. While the regulator did not initially impose a monetary penalty, it issued a consent order requiring the bank to take corrective action. This underscores the seriousness of the identified weaknesses, even if they did not yet result in enforcement fines.

The OCC found that Bank of America’s transaction monitoring systems did not adequately capture or escalate certain suspicious activities. In addition, internal processes for escalating alerts and ensuring timely SAR filings were inconsistent. These findings mirror challenges seen across the industry, where outdated technology and siloed governance structures hinder effective compliance.

For compliance professionals, the OCC’s consent order signals the importance of continuous improvement. It demonstrates that regulators expect institutions not only to meet minimum standards but also to anticipate emerging risks and adopt proactive solutions for anti-money laundering compliance.

Why BSA Compliance Remains a Challenge

One of the main challenges in BSA compliance is balancing the volume of financial activity with the need for accurate monitoring. Large institutions like Bank of America process millions of transactions daily, making it difficult to distinguish between legitimate activity and potential money laundering.

Technology plays a critical role in this process. However, many monitoring systems are rule-based and prone to generating high levels of false positives. This strains compliance resources, leaving analysts overwhelmed and reducing efficiency. The OCC’s findings suggest that Bank of America’s systems were not fully optimized to detect and escalate genuine risks in a timely manner.

Another challenge is maintaining consistency across business units. For multinational banks, ensuring that all branches and affiliates apply the same compliance standards is complex. Weaknesses in communication or governance can create vulnerabilities that regulators classify as deficiencies. This highlights the need for robust internal controls and enterprise-wide accountability.

The Regulatory Significance of OCC’s Consent Order

A consent order is one of the strongest supervisory tools regulators can use short of imposing fines. It requires the institution to take corrective actions under strict oversight, often including deadlines, reporting requirements, and independent monitoring.

For Bank of America, this means implementing system upgrades, enhancing governance structures, and strengthening escalation protocols. The order also likely requires the bank to report progress to the OCC, ensuring transparency and accountability.

The consent order sends a broader message to the industry: regulators expect continuous investment in BSA compliance. Even without monetary penalties, the reputational and operational impacts of such orders can be significant, influencing investor confidence and customer trust.

Lessons for Compliance Teams

Compliance professionals can learn several important lessons from the Bank of America BSA deficiencies OCC findings. The first is the importance of technology modernization. Outdated monitoring systems are a liability in an era where financial crime is increasingly sophisticated. Leveraging AI-driven monitoring tools can reduce false positives and improve detection accuracy.

Second, compliance programs must emphasize governance and accountability. Institutions should adopt frameworks such as the Three Lines of Defense, which clearly define roles across operations, compliance, and internal audit. This ensures deficiencies are identified early and addressed systematically.

Finally, compliance teams should prioritize timely reporting. Delays in filing SARs are a common deficiency cited by regulators, and institutions must ensure they have adequate resources to meet reporting deadlines. Embedding efficiency into compliance processes is critical to avoiding similar regulatory findings.

{{snippet-case}}

How AML Analysts Are Affected

AML analysts are on the front lines of BSA compliance, and the OCC’s findings have direct implications for their daily work. Analysts may face increased pressure to resolve alerts more quickly and escalate cases more efficiently. They may also be required to undergo additional training on emerging risks and updated monitoring protocols.

The case also highlights the importance of proper workload distribution. With high volumes of alerts, AML analysts need access to advanced tools and automation to manage their responsibilities effectively. Banks that underinvest in supporting their analysts risk falling short of regulatory expectations. (See The Ultimate Guide to AML Software for Banks for advice on the topic).

In the long run, this case may lead to greater recognition of the critical role analysts play in financial crime prevention. It emphasizes the need for institutions to empower their compliance teams with both resources and authority.

The Broader Implications for the Banking Sector

While the OCC’s findings focused on Bank of America, they carry broader implications for the entire banking industry. Regulators are signaling that even the largest, most established institutions will be held accountable for deficiencies, regardless of size or influence.

Smaller institutions should not assume that their risk is lower. In fact, community banks and fintech firms may face even greater scrutiny if they lack the resources of large banks. The message is clear: all financial institutions must prioritize Bank Secrecy Act compliance and invest in robust systems.

The case also highlights the importance of global harmonization. With regulators worldwide tightening AML standards, deficiencies in one jurisdiction can quickly attract attention from international bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). For multinational banks, aligning compliance programs globally is no longer optional—it is essential.

Technology and the Future of BSA Compliance

The Bank of America case illustrates why modernization is critical for compliance. Traditional rule-based monitoring systems are not sufficient to meet today’s regulatory expectations. AI, machine learning, and advanced analytics can help institutions detect unusual patterns, adapt to emerging risks, and improve efficiency.

Blockchain analytics is another area of growing importance, as criminals increasingly exploit cryptocurrencies to launder funds. Regulators expect banks to stay ahead of these trends, which requires continuous innovation in compliance technology.

However, technology alone is not enough. Successful compliance programs must integrate people, processes, and technology seamlessly. This includes training staff, updating policies, and maintaining clear audit trails to demonstrate compliance to regulators.

{{snippets-guide}}

Conclusion

The case of Bank of America BSA deficiencies OCC is a reminder that no institution is immune from regulatory scrutiny. The OCC’s findings emphasize the need for continuous improvement in monitoring, reporting, and governance, even for the largest banks.

For compliance professionals, the key takeaway is clear: effective anti-money laundering compliance and financial crime prevention require proactive investment, strong governance, and advanced technology. By learning from Bank of America’s deficiencies, institutions of all sizes can strengthen their BSA programs and reduce regulatory risk.

In today’s environment, regulators expect nothing less than full commitment to compliance excellence. Institutions that rise to this challenge will be better positioned to maintain trust, avoid penalties, and contribute to the integrity of the global financial system.

sanctions.io is a highly reliable and cost-effective solution for real-time screening. AI-powered and with an enterprise-grade API with 99.99% uptime are reasons why customers globally trust us with their compliance efforts and sanctions screening needs.

To learn more about how our sanctions, PEP, and criminal watchlist screening service can support your organisation's compliance program: Book a free Discovery Call.

We also encourage you to take advantage of our free 7-day trial to get started with your sanctions and AML screening (no credit card is required).

‍