Key details for this exam, checked against the published exam outline
Each question shows the correct answer and an explanation of why it is right
"Al-Falah Company", registered in Dubai, wants to open an account at a financial institution. Through due diligence, the compliance team finds out that "El-Fallah Investments", based in Iraq, is under UN sanctions for facilitating terrorism financing. The listed Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the sanctioned entity is not the same as the CEO of the potential client. How should the compliance team proceed?
Sanctions and Compliance Domains state that when entities share similar names, regions, or other characteristics with a sanctioned party --- even when executive leadership differs --- the institution must perform enhanced due diligence to rule out affiliation, ownership, or control links.
The similarity in names ('Al-Falah' vs. 'El-Fallah'), geographic proximity, and the involvement of UN-sanctioned terrorism-related activity require deeper investigation. Compliance teams must confirm corporate records, ownership structure, purpose, and possible indirect connections before making a determination.
Automatic rejection is premature without evidence. Onboarding without further investigation is inappropriate.
Name similarity and geographic proximity as sanctions escalation triggers.
Requirements for enhanced due diligence when possible indirect links exist.
In which situation should a financial institution sanctions team perform a historical review or lookback?
A historical review or lookback is warranted when previously unidentified data elements, missing reference data, or newly discovered customer attributes are detected that may have impacted earlier screening results. Sanctions and Compliance Domains explain that such scenarios indicate that past alerts may not have been correctly generated or evaluated, necessitating a retrospective review.
Routine list updates or daily refreshes do not automatically trigger lookbacks. New sanctions programs may require enhanced forward-looking monitoring, but only missing or newly uncovered data affecting past screening results justify a historical lookback.
Requirements for lookbacks when gaps in screening data are discovered.
Identification of previously missing identifiers as a trigger for retrospective review.
Which steps demonstrate a sound governance framework? (Select Two.)
A sound governance framework, according to Sanctions and Compliance Domains, includes:
* Senior management ensuring adequate resources to investigate violations, identify weaknesses, and remediate control gaps.
* Updating the sanctions risk assessment to incorporate findings and root causes from prior incidents.
Human resources actions (A) are not a primary governance function. Reporting based on ''lack of penalty'' (D) is not a risk-based governance indicator. Zero-tolerance statements (E) do not constitute governance processes and may conflict with risk-based management expectations.
Governance expectations under OFAC Framework for Compliance Commitments.
Requirements for resource allocation and risk assessment updates.
The funds of a client have been frozen by a financial institution. Subject to the Office of Foreign Assets Control's (OFAC's) regulations, the best course of action for the client to take would be to:
Under OFAC regulations, when a customer's funds are blocked, the individual or entity may apply to OFAC for a specific license to authorize the release or movement of the funds. Only OFAC has the authority to approve the unblocking of assets.
Attempting new transactions (A) is prohibited. Banks cannot refund blocked funds (B). Notifying local authorities (C) does not resolve the issue, because OFAC authorization is required.
OFAC Licensing Guidelines.
Procedures for requesting a specific license to release blocked property.
A compliance officer at a US company discovers one of its European subsidiaries was altering the end-user's location information for certain dual-use goods ultimately being sent to Iran. Which should be the next step?
US sanctions and export-control laws apply to US companies and their owned or controlled foreign subsidiaries. Shipping dual-use items to Iran and falsifying end-user location information constitutes a serious sanctions violation and potential export-control breach.
Sanctions and Compliance Domains emphasize that upon discovery of such activity, the company must immediately cease the shipment of goods to sanctioned destinations and strengthen its sanctions compliance program. This must include enhanced oversight, stricter internal controls, and remediation of misconduct.
Reliance on subsidiary attestations or attempts to route transactions through non-US institutions does not eliminate US sanctions liability.
US sanctions applicability to foreign subsidiaries of US companies.
Requirements for ceasing prohibited exports and implementing remediation.
Export-control restrictions on dual-use goods and falsification of end-use information.
A bank is processing a trade finance transaction and has a legal obligation to complete the transaction. After completing its sanctions review, the bank determines there are multiple red flags indicative of counterfeiting. Which are the appropriate next steps for handling the transaction?
Sanctions and Compliance Domains specify that when a transaction shows significant sanctions or illicit-trade red flags, a bank must avoid executing the transaction if it risks breaching sanctions restrictions. If the bank identifies discrepancies, counterfeiting indicators, or potential sanctions violations, the transaction must be rejected unless a blocking requirement applies.
Blocking applies only when a sanctioned party or property interest is identified. In this scenario, because there are red flags but no confirmed designated person, the appropriate action is to reject the transaction and file the relevant report with the competent authority.
Banks should not process the transaction and investigate later, nor should they disclose red-flag details to customers. Reporting requirements prohibit tipping-off in such regulatory contexts.
Reference from Sanctions and Compliance Domains:
Guidance on rejection versus blocking in trade finance risks.
Reporting obligations when red flags indicate possible sanctions exposure.
Prohibition on providing details of internal investigations to customers.
Those in the virtual currency industry are required to prevent sanctioned persons from exploiting virtual currency to undermine US foreign policy and national security interests. Which internal controls are most appropriate?
Effective internal controls for virtual asset service providers include:
* Sanctions screening of users, wallets, and transactions.
* IP blocking/geolocation controls to stop access from sanctioned jurisdictions.
* Keyword screening for wallet names, addresses, or known illicit indicators.
* Reviewing and enforcing end-user agreements, including prohibitions on using the platform for sanctioned activity.
Other options include unnecessary or ineffective controls (downsizing staff, screening employees, or vendor-only screening), which are not aligned with sanctions-control best practices.
OFAC Guidance for the Virtual Currency Industry.
Controls for preventing sanctioned-person access to digital assets.
Exam domains verified against: Official Acams CGSS exam guide, last checked October 2026.
This section measures the skills of a Sanctions Compliance Analyst and emphasizes understanding the intent, legal foundation, and overall coverage of sanctions. Candidates must grasp how sanctions frameworks operate across different jurisdictions and the potential penalties organizations may face for noncompliance. This area ensures learners can recognize the regulatory objectives behind sanctions and apply them accurately in routine operational decisions.
Sample question from this domain above: Q4
This section measures the skills of a Financial Crime Investigator and focuses on the real world application of screening controls, including checks on customers, transactions, and external parties. It explains how screening systems function, why accurate name matching is important, and how alerts should be reviewed and managed. The section ensures that candidates can oversee risk exposure effectively by using automated tools, manual assessments, and established documentation protocols.
This section measures the skills of a Sanctions Compliance Analyst and explores how institutions establish governance structures that support sanctions requirements. It outlines the essential components of a sanctions compliance framework, the responsibilities of senior leadership, and the supervisory expectations issued by regulators. It highlights the need for policies, internal controls, clear reporting lines, and formal escalation pathways so that professionals can uphold their organization's governance duties and maintain compliance with legal standards.
Sample question from this domain above: Q3
This section measures the skills of a Financial Crime Investigator and focuses on how to design a strong sanctions compliance program. It introduces key elements such as sanctions risk assessments, enhanced due diligence measures, beneficial ownership reviews, and documentation principles. Candidates also gain an overview of screening technology, workflow structures, and how policy rules are incorporated into daily operational activities.
Sample question from this domain above: Q7
This section measures the skills of a Sanctions Compliance Analyst and examines how sanctioned individuals or entities attempt to bypass restrictions through layered ownership, manipulated trade activity, or concealed payment channels. It outlines the warning signs linked to common evasion methods and the investigative actions needed when potential violations arise. Learners also study the requirements for freezing assets and submitting reports, with a focus on managing these cases while ensuring full regulatory adherence.
Sample question from this domain above: Q5
This section measures the skills of a Financial Crime Investigator and brings together all previous concepts through scenarios based on real operational challenges. It enables candidates to apply their understanding of screening, due diligence, governance frameworks, and investigative techniques in practical examples. This section strengthens critical thinking and illustrates how sanctions rules function in day to day environments, preparing learners for the complexities they will encounter in real compliance roles.
Common questions about the exam itself
