Amendments to the Proof of Identity Act that came into force on 1 September 2022 will also affect entities that are subject to the Anti Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism and Proliferation Financing Act (“AML/CTPFA subjects”). If you want to keep your client relationships then you should evaluate how the amendments will affect them, and you should adopt solutions that will allow you to legally continue those relationships.
The transitional provisions of the Proof of Identity Act have been amended to make a number of changes. For example, a passport is currently a mandatory ID document for a Latvian citizen, and the person may choose an ID card as additional proof of identity. The lawmaker had previously ruled that from 1 January 2023 an ID card would be a mandatory ID document for any Latvian citizen aged 15 or older. The deadline from which an ID card will become a mandatory ID document has been extended by the amendments to 1 May 2023. An exception to this extended deadline will apply only to persons that have duly provided details of their foreign residence, as they will be allowed to take out an ID card by 31 December 2024.
Yet it’s important for AML/CTPFA subjects to be aware of another amendment to the Proof of Identity Act. Clause 9 of the transitional provisions states that where an ID document issued to a Latvian citizen, a Latvian non-citizen or a stateless person in Latvia has expired after 1 March 2020, this is considered a valid ID document for proving its holder’s identity in person in Latvia up to 30 April 2023 unless it has become invalid for other reasons.
AML/CTPFA subjects should revise their internal control systems to ensure a procedure is adopted that will allow the identification of individuals holding an expired ID document.
Clause 9 of the transitional provisions makes it clear that such an expired ID document can be used as proof of identity in person only. So AML/CTPFA subjects have to adopt a procedure that meets this requirement. This might be difficult if there are many individuals whose identity must be verified in person. In such cases, AML/CTPFA subjects may adopt a remote identification procedure if they have not done so already.
Any AML/CTPFA subjects that have set up, for instance, automated IT systems generating automatic warnings about the expiry date of an ID document should revise their system algorithms to avoid having to terminate a client relationship that could legally continue once identification in person is adopted.
It’s even more important to remember that the expiry date of an ID document is just one of the aspects that AML/CTPFA subjects need to check, because in any case they should check that the document is not invalid for other reasons. Since AML/CTPFA subjects are currently required to check the expiry date of an ID document on the Register of Invalid Documents, it’s worth noting that after 2005 this register no longer carries any expired documents. So, if a particular ID document still appears on the register as an invalid document, this means the clause 9 condition is met and the document is considered invalid “for other reasons” and cannot therefore be used for identifying the person.
We are happy to help if you have any questions about the most efficient ways to identify people.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionIn statutory cases, the taxpayer is liable to prepare transfer pricing (TP) documentation and file it with the State Revenue Service (SRS). An examination of TP documentation helps the SRS monitor the correctness of corporate income tax (CIT) payments because the difference between a controlled transaction’s value and market price must be included in the taxable base under the CIT Act. If the taxpayer defaults on the obligation to prepare and file TP documentation, then in addition to the opportunity to start an audit and assess the correctness of the CIT calculation, the SRS may start a data assesment in the field of tax revenue risks and charge a hefty fine on the company if an offence is found. This article explores what offences relating to TP documentation permit the taxpayer to be fined outside an audit and how the SRS should evaluate and justify the size of fine.
When it comes to personal data processing, political parties are no exception, being subject to the same requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that apply to any other data controller. It’s noteworthy the National Data Office has recently issued new guidelines on personal data processing in the run-up to the general election. Could this mean the regulator will be scrutinising the political parties for GDPR compliance? This article explores what measures a political party should take to ensure its data processing complies with GDPR.
We use cookies to make our site work well for you and so we can continually improve it. The cookies that keep the site functioning are always on. We use analytics and marketing cookies to help us understand what content is of most interest and to personalise your user experience.
It’s your choice to accept these or not. You can either click the 'I accept all’ button below or use the switches to choose and save your choices.
For detailed information on how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please visit our cookies information page.
These cookies are necessary for the website to operate. Our website cannot function without these cookies and they can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences.
These cookies allow us to measure and report on website activity by tracking page visits, visitor locations and how visitors move around the site. The information collected does not directly identify visitors. We drop these cookies and use Adobe to help us analyse the data.
These cookies help us provide you with personalised and relevant services or advertising, and track the effectiveness of our digital marketing activities.