Correspondent banking

Spec sheet // Glossary // CORRESPONDENT BANKING
Glossary / C / Correspondent banking
Glossary · AML

Correspondent banking

Also called correspondent relationship, correspondent account

Definition

Correspondent banking is the provision of accounts and payment services by one bank, the correspondent, to another bank, the respondent. It lets the respondent make cross-border payments, clear cheques and trade currencies in markets where it has no branches. The correspondent processes payments for customers it has never met.

01 PAYER02 RESPONDENT BANK03 CORRESPONDENT04 BENEFICIARY BANK
Fig. 1 · Correspondent banking
Money Laundering Regulations 2017 · AMLR · USA PATRIOT Act sections 312 and 313
Key rulesMoney Laundering Regulations 2017 · AMLR · USA PATRIOT Act sections 312 and 313
Applies toUK credit and financial institutions with correspondent relationships
RegionsGlobal · UK · EU · US
01

How it works

Before opening a relationship, the correspondent gathers information on the respondent's ownership, business, reputation and supervision. It assesses the respondent's AML controls, often through a standard questionnaire, and gets senior management approval. Once live, it monitors the payment flows passing through the account and asks the respondent about unusual activity.

Correspondent banking matters because the correspondent relies on the respondent's checks on its own customers. Weak controls at the respondent can bring illicit funds into the global system. Rules ban relationships with shell banks. Since the mid-2010s many large banks have cut correspondent relationships in higher-risk regions.

Step 1Gather informationUnderstand the respondent's ownership, business, reputation and supervision.
Step 2Assess controlsReview the respondent's AML and sanctions controls.
Step 3Get approvalObtain senior management sign-off before opening the relationship.
Step 4Document dutiesRecord each bank's AML responsibilities in writing.
Step 5Monitor flowsReview payment activity and refresh due diligence periodically.
02

The rules

UK · 26 June 2017Money Laundering Regulations 2017The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/692), regulation 34

Requires enhanced due diligence for correspondent relationships with third-country respondents and prohibits relationships with shell banks.

UK credit and financial institutions with correspondent relationships
EU · Applies from 10 July 2027AMLRRegulation (EU) 2024/1624 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for money laundering or terrorist financing

Articles 36 to 39 set enhanced due diligence for cross-border correspondent relationships with third-country respondents and ban relationships with shell institutions.

Credit and financial institutions and other obliged entities in the EU
US · 26 October 2001USA PATRIOT Act sections 312 and 313Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, sections 312 and 313

Require due diligence on correspondent accounts for foreign financial institutions and prohibit correspondent accounts for foreign shell banks.

US banks and other covered financial institutions with foreign correspondent accounts
03

Common questions

What is a nested correspondent relationship?

Nesting happens when a respondent bank lets other banks use its correspondent account to reach the correspondent. The correspondent then processes payments for banks it has not assessed. Rules and guidance expect correspondents to identify and manage nested activity.

What is a payable-through account?

A payable-through account lets the respondent's own customers transact directly through the correspondent's account. UK and EU rules require the correspondent to be satisfied that the respondent has verified those customers and can provide their due diligence data on request.

What is de-risking in correspondent banking?

De-risking means closing or refusing relationships with whole categories of respondents, often in higher-risk regions, rather than managing risk case by case. It reduces payment access for some countries. Supervisors expect firms to assess respondents case by case.