{"id":12686,"date":"2026-09-15T11:34:47","date_gmt":"2026-09-15T11:34:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/?p=12686"},"modified":"2026-09-15T11:34:47","modified_gmt":"2026-09-15T11:34:47","slug":"acams-cams7-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part11-q201-220","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/acams-cams7-practice-test-questions-and-exam-dumps-part11-q201-220\/","title":{"rendered":"ACAMS CAMS7 Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps Part11 Q201-220"},"content":{"rendered":"

View Full ACAMS CAMS7 Exam Dumps<\/a> and Practice Test Dumps.<\/b><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Question 201<\/b><\/h3>\n

Which of the following may indicate potential misuse of an account by a money mule?<\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The account is used for normal personal expenses<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. The customer receives and transfers funds for unrelated parties without a reasonable explanation<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. The customer receives a regular salary<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. The account activity matches the customer’s documented profile<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

    A money mule may allow an account to be used to receive, transfer, or withdraw funds on behalf of another person or criminal network. A potential red flag is when an individual receives multiple payments from unrelated parties and quickly transfers the funds elsewhere without a reasonable personal or business explanation. Other indicators may include rapid movement of funds, multiple unrelated counterparties, unusual international transfers, or activity inconsistent with the customer’s normal financial profile. However, unusual activity does not automatically prove that someone is knowingly acting as a mule. Institutions should investigate the source and destination of funds, customer circumstances, transaction patterns, and available explanations before determining whether escalation or reporting is appropriate.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Question 202<\/b><\/h3>\n

    Which factor should be considered when determining the risk of a customer’s occupation?<\/b><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Whether the occupation creates particular exposure to cash, corruption, or other financial crime risks<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. Whether the customer works in an office<\/span><\/li>\n
    3. Whether the customer receives email communications<\/span><\/li>\n
    4. Whether the customer has a professional business card<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

      Occupation can be a relevant customer risk factor when it creates specific exposure to financial crime risks. Certain occupations or industries may involve significant cash handling, government contracts, international payments, valuable goods, or other circumstances that can increase exposure to money laundering or corruption. Institutions should not automatically classify an occupation as high risk solely because of its title. Instead, they should consider the nature of the customer’s actual activities, income, geographic exposure, transaction patterns, and other relevant factors. A customer’s occupation should contribute to an overall risk assessment rather than determine the risk rating by itself. Effective AML programs consider multiple factors and apply controls proportionate to the customer’s overall risk profile.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Question 203<\/b><\/h3>\n

      Which of the following may be a red flag involving incoming wire transfers?<\/b><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Transfers are consistent with documented business relationships<\/span><\/li>\n
      2. Payments are supported by contracts and invoices<\/span><\/li>\n
      3. Repeated incoming wires from unrelated parties with no clear economic purpose<\/span><\/li>\n
      4. Transfers match the customer’s expected international activity<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

        Repeated incoming wire transfers from unrelated parties without an apparent economic purpose may indicate potential money laundering, fraud, or use of an account as a pass-through mechanism. Investigators should determine who the senders are, why they are sending funds, the relationship between the parties, and how the customer subsequently uses the money. Supporting documentation such as contracts, invoices, loan agreements, or business records may help establish a legitimate explanation. International transfers are not inherently suspicious, and legitimate businesses can receive payments from many parties. The concern arises when the pattern is inconsistent with the customer’s profile or cannot be reasonably explained. Appropriate escalation should follow the institution’s AML procedures.<\/span><\/p>\n

        Question 204<\/b><\/h3>\n

        What is an important AML consideration when a customer operates in several unrelated industries?<\/b><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Whether the different activities have a reasonable commercial explanation and are consistent with the customer’s financial activity<\/span><\/li>\n
        2. Whether the customer has multiple email addresses<\/span><\/li>\n
        3. Whether the customer uses different accounting software<\/span><\/li>\n
        4. Whether the customer has offices in the same building<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

          A customer involved in several industries may have legitimate business reasons for doing so, but institutions should understand the nature and purpose of those activities. Multiple unrelated businesses can create additional complexity and may make it more difficult to establish expected transaction patterns. Institutions should review ownership, business purpose, source of funds, counterparties, geographic exposure, and transaction activity across the relationship. If funds move between apparently unrelated businesses without a clear rationale, further investigation may be appropriate. The existence of multiple businesses does not itself indicate money laundering. A risk-based approach requires the institution to determine whether the customer’s overall financial activity is reasonable and supported by credible documentation.<\/span><\/p>\n

          Question 205<\/b><\/h3>\n

          Which of the following is a potential red flag involving international remittances?<\/b><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Remittances are consistent with the customer’s known family circumstances<\/span><\/li>\n
          2. Transfers are supported by a legitimate business purpose<\/span><\/li>\n
          3. The customer regularly sends funds to high-risk jurisdictions without a reasonable explanation<\/span><\/li>\n
          4. The amounts and frequency match the customer’s established profile<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

            Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

            International remittances to higher-risk jurisdictions may warrant additional scrutiny when they are inconsistent with the customer’s known circumstances or lack a reasonable explanation. Investigators should consider the destination country, recipient relationship, transaction frequency, amount, stated purpose, source of funds, and customer’s overall profile. Higher-risk geography alone does not prove suspicious activity because legitimate individuals and businesses may have valid reasons to send funds internationally. However, repeated unexplained transfers, particularly when combined with other red flags, may require enhanced investigation. Institutions should apply a risk-based approach and use reliable information when assessing geographic risk. Where concerns cannot be resolved, appropriate escalation and reporting procedures should be followed.<\/span><\/p>\n

            Question 206<\/b><\/h3>\n

            Which of the following is a key purpose of beneficial ownership verification?<\/b><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. To determine the individuals who ultimately own or control a legal entity<\/span><\/li>\n
            2. To calculate the company’s annual tax liability<\/span><\/li>\n
            3. To determine employee salaries<\/span><\/li>\n
            4. To establish the company’s advertising budget<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

              Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

              Beneficial ownership verification helps an institution identify the natural persons who ultimately own or control a legal entity. This is important because companies and other legal arrangements can be used to conceal individuals behind financial transactions and assets. Institutions should understand the ownership chain and identify relevant controlling persons according to applicable requirements. Verification helps support customer risk assessment, sanctions screening, enhanced due diligence, and ongoing monitoring. Institutions should pay particular attention when ownership structures involve multiple entities, nominees, trusts, or jurisdictions that make transparency difficult. Complex ownership does not automatically mean criminal activity, but unexplained or unnecessarily opaque arrangements may increase risk and require additional investigation.<\/span><\/p>\n

              Question 207<\/b><\/h3>\n

              What is one potential AML risk associated with luxury goods dealers?<\/b><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. High-value goods can potentially be used to convert or transfer illicit wealth<\/span><\/li>\n
              2. Luxury goods can never be purchased with illicit funds<\/span><\/li>\n
              3. Dealers are automatically considered criminals<\/span><\/li>\n
              4. Luxury goods eliminate the need for source-of-funds checks<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                High-value goods such as jewelry, precious metals, artwork, vehicles, and other luxury items can potentially be used to store, transfer, or convert illicit wealth. Criminals may purchase valuable goods using illicit proceeds and later sell or transfer them to create an appearance of legitimate wealth. Institutions dealing with or providing services to such businesses should consider customer identity, source of funds, transaction values, payment methods, counterparties, and geographic exposure. The existence of a high-value purchase is not automatically suspicious because wealthy customers and legitimate businesses routinely conduct such transactions. Risk should be assessed based on the customer’s circumstances and whether the transaction has a reasonable economic explanation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                Question 208<\/b><\/h3>\n

                Which practice can help reduce the risk of unauthorized changes to payment instructions?<\/b><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Allowing employees to change instructions without review<\/span><\/li>\n
                2. Using appropriate verification and approval procedures for material changes<\/span><\/li>\n
                3. Disabling customer authentication<\/span><\/li>\n
                4. Removing transaction records after payment<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

                  Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                  Unauthorized changes to payment instructions can create risks of fraud, account takeover, and diversion of legitimate funds. Institutions can reduce these risks by implementing appropriate authentication, independent verification, dual approval, access controls, and audit trails for significant changes. Employees should be trained to recognize unusual requests, particularly those involving urgent changes to beneficiary information or payment destinations. Controls should be proportionate to the risk and should consider the customer’s normal behavior and communication methods. Strong procedures also make it easier to investigate suspected fraud after an incident. Payment instruction controls are part of the broader financial crime framework and can help prevent criminals from exploiting compromised accounts or employee access.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  Question 209<\/b><\/h3>\n

                  Which of the following may indicate potential use of a nominee arrangement to conceal ownership?<\/b><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. The ownership structure is transparent and independently verified<\/span><\/li>\n
                  2. The nominee’s role is clearly documented for a legitimate purpose<\/span><\/li>\n
                  3. A person appears to control the company despite not being formally identified as an owner<\/span><\/li>\n
                  4. The company provides complete beneficial ownership information<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

                    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                    A situation where one person appears to exercise control over a company despite not being formally identified as an owner may indicate the use of nominees or another arrangement designed to obscure beneficial ownership. Institutions should examine who makes key decisions, controls accounts, receives economic benefits, and ultimately directs the entity. Formal ownership records may not always reveal the true controlling person. Legitimate nominee arrangements can exist, but institutions should understand their purpose and identify the relevant beneficial owners or controlling persons as required. Where ownership and control information cannot be reconciled or the structure appears intentionally opaque, enhanced due diligence may be appropriate to establish the true nature of the relationship.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    Question 210<\/b><\/h3>\n

                    What is an important consideration when assessing the risk of a politically exposed person (PEP)?<\/b><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. PEP status can indicate increased exposure to corruption risk and may require enhanced measures<\/span><\/li>\n
                    2. Every PEP is automatically guilty of corruption<\/span><\/li>\n
                    3. PEPs do not require customer due diligence<\/span><\/li>\n
                    4. PEP status automatically requires account closure<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                      Politically exposed persons may present increased exposure to corruption and bribery risks because of their prominent public functions and access to public resources. Depending on applicable requirements, institutions may apply enhanced measures such as senior management approval, additional source-of-wealth and source-of-funds information, and enhanced ongoing monitoring. PEP status itself does not mean that an individual has committed a crime. Family members and close associates may also be relevant depending on the applicable legal framework. Institutions should apply a risk-based approach and consider the person’s position, geography, business interests, transaction activity, and other factors. The objective is to manage elevated risk without treating all PEPs as inherently suspicious.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Question 211<\/b><\/h3>\n

                      Which of the following may indicate potential invoice fraud or money laundering?<\/b><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. Invoices correspond to legitimate goods and services<\/span><\/li>\n
                      2. Invoice values and descriptions are supported by reliable documentation<\/span><\/li>\n
                      3. Repeated invoices contain inconsistent descriptions and unusually high amounts without a clear business explanation<\/span><\/li>\n
                      4. Payments match established supplier contracts<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

                        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                        Repeated invoices containing inconsistent descriptions, unusually high amounts, or other unexplained discrepancies may indicate potential invoice fraud or money laundering. Criminals can manipulate invoices to create a false appearance of legitimate commercial transactions and move value between parties. Institutions should compare invoices with contracts, shipping records, customer business activity, counterparties, and transaction history. They should also consider whether prices are commercially reasonable and whether the goods or services actually exist. Legitimate businesses may occasionally amend invoices or experience pricing changes, so investigators should consider the complete context. Where discrepancies cannot be reasonably explained, the activity may warrant additional investigation, enhanced due diligence, or escalation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Question 212<\/b><\/h3>\n

                        Why should institutions understand a customer’s expected transaction volume?<\/b><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. It provides a baseline for identifying unusual activity<\/span><\/li>\n
                        2. It determines the customer’s credit rating<\/span><\/li>\n
                        3. It eliminates the need for transaction monitoring<\/span><\/li>\n
                        4. It guarantees that every transaction will be legitimate<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                          Expected transaction volume provides an important baseline for ongoing monitoring. When an institution understands the approximate value, frequency, and type of transactions expected from a customer, it can more effectively identify significant deviations. For example, a sudden increase in transaction volume may indicate a change in business activity, account misuse, fraud, or potential money laundering. Institutions should avoid relying on transaction volume alone and should consider the customer’s business, source of funds, counterparties, geographic exposure, and other relevant factors. Expected activity should also be updated when legitimate changes occur. Maintaining an accurate customer profile helps transaction monitoring systems generate more meaningful alerts and supports effective investigations.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          Question 213<\/b><\/h3>\n

                          Which of the following may indicate potential misuse of a corporate credit card?<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. Purchases are consistent with documented business expenses<\/span><\/li>\n
                          2. Transactions are approved according to company policy<\/span><\/li>\n
                          3. Significant personal or unrelated purchases are made without authorization<\/span><\/li>\n
                          4. The card is used for ordinary business travel<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            Correct Answer: 3<\/b><\/p>\n

                            Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                            Significant personal or unrelated purchases made with a corporate credit card may indicate misuse, fraud, or another internal control concern. Institutions should consider the customer’s business purpose, transaction descriptions, merchant types, employee responsibilities, and established spending patterns. Unusual card activity can sometimes also indicate account compromise or unauthorized access. Not every unusual purchase is necessarily fraudulent because legitimate business expenses can vary. However, unexplained personal spending or repeated transactions inconsistent with the business purpose should be investigated. Appropriate controls may include spending limits, approval requirements, transaction monitoring, employee access controls, and periodic reviews. Where potential criminal activity is identified, the matter should be escalated according to the institution’s procedures.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Question 214<\/b><\/h3>\n

                            Which of the following is a potential indicator of tax-related financial crime?<\/b><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. Transactions are fully documented and consistent with the customer’s business<\/span><\/li>\n
                            2. Complex transfers appear designed to conceal assets or income from authorities<\/span><\/li>\n
                            3. The customer maintains accurate financial records<\/span><\/li>\n
                            4. Payments are made to verified suppliers<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

                              Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                              Complex financial arrangements designed to conceal assets or income from authorities may indicate potential tax-related financial crime. Such schemes can involve offshore entities, nominee arrangements, false invoices, undisclosed accounts, or transfers designed to disguise beneficial ownership. Financial institutions should consider the customer’s business model, geographic exposure, transaction purpose, ownership structure, and available documentation. Tax-related concerns should be assessed according to applicable laws and institutional procedures. The existence of offshore accounts or international transactions does not automatically indicate tax evasion because legitimate international businesses and individuals may have valid reasons for using them. However, unexplained structures combined with concealment indicators may warrant enhanced scrutiny and escalation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              Question 215<\/b><\/h3>\n

                              What is one reason institutions should monitor transactions involving high-risk jurisdictions?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. Such jurisdictions may present increased exposure to financial crime or sanctions risks<\/span><\/li>\n
                              2. Every transaction involving such jurisdictions is illegal<\/span><\/li>\n
                              3. International transactions do not require monitoring<\/span><\/li>\n
                              4. Geographic risk never changes<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                                Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                Transactions involving jurisdictions associated with elevated financial crime, corruption, sanctions, or weak AML controls may require additional scrutiny. Institutions should understand why the customer is conducting business with the jurisdiction and whether the transaction is consistent with the customer’s legitimate activities. Geographic risk should not be assessed solely on a country label; institutions should use current and reliable information and consider the customer’s specific circumstances. A transaction involving a higher-risk jurisdiction is not automatically suspicious. However, when combined with unusual counterparties, opaque structures, unexplained funds, or inconsistent activity, geographic exposure may increase the overall risk and justify enhanced due diligence or additional monitoring.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                Question 216<\/b><\/h3>\n

                                Which of the following is an important AML control for correspondent banking?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. Conducting appropriate due diligence on respondent institutions<\/span><\/li>\n
                                2. Allowing anonymous respondent institutions<\/span><\/li>\n
                                3. Eliminating transaction monitoring<\/span><\/li>\n
                                4. Ignoring the respondent’s AML program<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                  Appropriate due diligence on respondent institutions is a fundamental control in correspondent banking. A correspondent bank should understand the respondent’s ownership, management, business activities, reputation, regulatory environment, AML controls, customer base, and geographic exposure, as applicable. The level of due diligence should reflect the risks associated with the relationship and services provided. Institutions should also consider whether the respondent permits nested relationships or provides services that could create additional exposure. Correspondent banking relationships can provide legitimate and essential international financial services, but they may also create indirect exposure to customers the correspondent does not know directly. Strong due diligence and ongoing oversight help manage these risks.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  Question 217<\/b><\/h3>\n

                                  Which of the following may indicate possible use of an account for fraud proceeds?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. The account receives unexpected funds followed by rapid transfers to multiple unrelated beneficiaries<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  2. The account receives regular salary payments<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  3. The customer makes normal household payments<\/span><\/li>\n
                                  4. Transactions remain consistent with the customer’s profile<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                    Unexpected incoming funds followed by rapid transfers to multiple unrelated beneficiaries can be a potential indicator that an account is being used to receive and distribute fraud proceeds. Such activity may also involve money mule networks or pass-through accounts. Investigators should review the source of the incoming funds, identity of the beneficiaries, timing of transfers, customer profile, account history, and any complaints or fraud intelligence. The pattern should be assessed in context because legitimate customers may occasionally receive and distribute funds for valid reasons. However, when the activity is inconsistent with the customer’s normal behavior and lacks a reasonable explanation, it may require enhanced investigation, account restrictions, or suspicious activity escalation.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    Question 218<\/b><\/h3>\n

                                    What is an important consideration when determining whether a transaction monitoring alert is a false positive?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. Whether the activity has a reasonable explanation consistent with the customer’s profile and available information<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    2. Whether the customer dislikes being contacted<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    3. Whether the transaction amount is large<\/span><\/li>\n
                                    4. Whether the account has existed for many years<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                      A transaction monitoring alert may be considered a false positive when investigation establishes that the activity has a reasonable explanation and is consistent with the customer’s known profile. Investigators should review transaction details, customer information, expected activity, source of funds, counterparties, geographic exposure, and relevant documentation. The fact that a transaction is large or unusual does not automatically make an alert suspicious. Conversely, a transaction that initially appears ordinary may become concerning when viewed in the context of other activity. Institutions should document the rationale for closing alerts and use investigation results to improve monitoring scenarios and reduce unnecessary alerts without weakening the institution’s ability to detect meaningful suspicious activity.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      Question 219<\/b><\/h3>\n

                                      Which of the following is a potential indicator of smurfing?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. One large legitimate payment supported by a contract<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      2. Numerous individuals making related small transactions that collectively represent a much larger amount<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      3. A customer’s regular monthly salary<\/span><\/li>\n
                                      4. A documented business payment<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        Correct Answer: 2<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                        Smurfing involves using multiple individuals or transactions to divide funds into smaller amounts, often to avoid detection or reporting controls. A potential indicator is when numerous individuals make related deposits or transfers that collectively represent a much larger amount, particularly when the transactions share common beneficiaries, timing, locations, or other characteristics. Institutions should examine relationships between the individuals, transaction patterns, account activity, and source of funds. Small transactions are not automatically suspicious because legitimate customers frequently conduct transactions of modest value. The concern arises when the pattern suggests deliberate coordination to conceal the total amount or avoid applicable controls. Appropriate investigation and escalation should follow the institution’s procedures.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        Question 220<\/b><\/h3>\n

                                        Which statement best describes continuous improvement of an AML program?<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. It involves periodically assessing risks, reviewing control effectiveness, and making appropriate improvements<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        2. It means keeping policies unchanged once approved<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        3. It eliminates the need for independent testing<\/span><\/li>\n
                                        4. It requires changing every AML procedure every month<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Correct Answer: 1<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          Explanation:<\/b><\/p>\n

                                          Continuous improvement means that an AML program is periodically evaluated and strengthened as risks, regulations, products, technologies, and criminal typologies evolve. Institutions can use information from risk assessments, transaction monitoring results, suspicious activity investigations, audits, independent testing, regulatory findings, employee feedback, and emerging threat intelligence to identify opportunities for improvement. Changes should be proportionate to the identified risks and supported by appropriate governance. Continuous improvement does not mean changing every procedure unnecessarily. Instead, institutions should determine whether existing controls remain effective and make targeted improvements where weaknesses or new risks are identified. This approach helps ensure that the AML framework remains effective and responsive over time.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                           <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                          View Full ACAMS CAMS7 Exam Dumps and Practice Test Dumps.   Question 201 Which of the following may indicate potential misuse of an account by a money mule? The account is used for normal personal expenses The customer receives and transfers funds for unrelated parties without a reasonable explanation The customer receives a regular salary […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1648,1647],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12686"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12686"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12686\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12706,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12686\/revisions\/12706"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12686"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12686"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.examlabs.com\/certification\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12686"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}