I shouldn't say they won't do "any" KYC, but if you see all ZA requires is a HK ID card. As long as that matches the linked bank then all the rest is assumed compliant. HKMA has decreed open APIs for sharing information including employment, income and transaction history.
As for Anti Money Laundering, there are two key points: 1) they'll still flag large deposits and 2) Money Laundering is pretty much the only thing driving the HK economy.
Sorry, but I have to disagree on both of these points.
People trying to launder money know the triggers for reporting to JFIU as well as anyone and a lot of money laundering involves small amounts of money (sometimes very small amounts) – see the Westpac case in Australia for one prominent example – to avoid detection.
As to the second, there are many things driving the HK economy (property, logistics, finance etc). Claiming that "Money Laundering is pretty much the only thing driving the HK economy" is simply not remotely credible.
I believe greenmark may be referring to the fairly lax, by global standards, AML requirements on cash rather than on what businesses such cash funds. Hong Kong only in the last two years introduced the requirement to declare cash when entering - does anyone recall the numerous cash moving travellers being targeted and mugged once they enter Hong Kong?
Anyways, back to Digital Banks, I am still not seeing how this can be any different from a mobile/ internet banking channel? Unless they want to re-enter higher risk/ return business segments and want to separate risk and capital constraints from their existing balance sheets. Knowing bankers, this is more likely.
Anyone else - telcos, tech companies, retailers - will likely want to benefit from the higher cost of acquiring contactable customers. Most people are more connected than ever, but at the same time, we are the most least contactable ever!
They may *not need* to verify the address, depending on what type of services they offer you, e.g. simple savings account, low limits, no cards.Original Post Deleted
Actually the requirement to verify an address was removed in 2017 (which surprised me when I checked). Link to HKMA circular below. However, at least some banks (possibly most) are still asking for it because it is still required by overseas regulators.
As a commercial matter, if there are any credit facilities being offered an address proof would be a must even if the HKMA no longer requires it.
https://www.hkma.gov.hk/media/eng/do...20171011e1.pdf
HKMA has been working so that banks with the same customer share information about that customer to each other.
So if a VB requires you to link to another HK bank account, the VB will get all that address info from the other bank.
So instead of the customer providing a bank statement as proof of their identity, the VBs get that info directly from linked bank.
Not based on that. The second bullet point still requires the bank to obtain the residential address of the customer - but this can now be provided by the customer without the need for verification through utility bills etc.Original Post Deleted
I agree that most banks will still ask for this - if they do business in a place which still requires verification then they will impose the more stringent requirement across the entire group.
I was surprised to find this. As a practical matter I'd expect most banks to still require it.Original Post Deleted