Structuring in Money Laundering: How Criminals Evade Detection and How Banks Fight Back
September 25, 2025
Money laundering continues to be one of the greatest threats to the global financial system. Criminals create complex strategies to disguise illicit funds, making them appear as if they came from legitimate sources. Among these strategies, structuring in money laundering—often referred to as “smurfing”—is one of the most common.
By dividing large sums into smaller transactions, criminals avoid reporting thresholds, escape suspicious activity reports (SARs), and move money unnoticed through banks and financial platforms. Without effective AML compliance software and modern monitoring systems, institutions risk fines, reputational damage, and regulatory penalties.
At BusinessScreen.com, we help organizations strengthen their defenses with transaction monitoring, sanctions screening, and structuring AML detection tools that uncover suspicious activity before it escalates.
Structuring is a scheme money launderers use to avoid detection by splitting large financial transactions into smaller amounts. Instead of depositing $50,000 in a single instance, someone may break it into five deposits of $9,000 to remain under the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reporting threshold of $10,000.
The structuring AML definition is the deliberate manipulation of transactions to bypass government reporting requirements. Regulators, including the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), classify structuring as a serious red flag.
Some variations include: structuring meaning in banking (avoiding mandatory reporting), money structuring definition (splitting deposits and withdrawals), micro structuring (many very small transactions), and structuring dalam pencucian uang adalah (a term used in Indonesia for breaking down transactions to conceal funds).
While often confused, structuring and smurfing are not identical. Structuring refers broadly to dividing large sums into smaller deposits. Smurfing means in banking that multiple individuals—known as “smurfs”—are recruited to make those deposits across accounts or branches. Both aim to obscure the origin of illicit funds, but smurfing adds another layer of complexity by involving multiple people.
Structuring typically occurs at the placement stage of money laundering, where illicit funds first enter the financial system. For example, multiple small deposits at ATMs or purchases of money orders just below reporting thresholds are forms of placement by structuring.
The second stage is layering in money laundering, where structured funds are moved through multiple complex financial transactions. Examples of layering include wiring money through offshore accounts, funneling deposits through shell companies, or converting cash into cryptocurrency. These methods create confusion and distance between the money and its criminal origin.
Finally, integration in money laundering means bringing laundered funds back into the legitimate economy. At this stage, funds might appear as business income, real estate investments, or securities trading.
The distinction is clear: structuring occurs during placement, while layering in money laundering means disguising funds once they are already inside the system.
One of the most common cash structuring examples involves customers depositing $9,500 repeatedly across multiple branches to avoid the $10,000 reporting threshold. Regulators have penalized major banks for failing to detect such patterns, often citing weaknesses in AML transaction monitoring.
Casinos and other cash-heavy businesses are also common channels. Structured deposits may be disguised as legitimate gaming revenue, then withdrawn as “winnings.” Another tactic is micro structuring, where launderers make hundreds of small online payments or transfers over time, effectively blending illicit funds into routine digital banking activity.
Increasingly, criminals combine structuring with layering fraud, converting deposits into cryptocurrency and transferring them across international exchanges before reintegration into the economy.
Although structuring is designed to avoid attention, it leaves behind patterns that compliance teams can detect. Warning signs include repeated deposits just under reporting thresholds, sudden spikes in unexplained cash activity, and customers using multiple accounts or branches for similar transactions. Transfers that quickly move abroad after structured deposits are also considered red flags.
These behaviors often trigger suspicious activity reporting requirements. While not every small deposit signals money laundering, recognizing unusual transaction activity helps institutions stay ahead of financial crime.
Regulators treat structuring as both a money laundering technique and a crime in itself. In the U.S., deliberately structuring transactions to avoid reporting thresholds violates the Bank Secrecy Act. Financial institutions that fail to detect such activity may face multimillion-dollar fines, as seen in enforcement actions against global banks.
Internationally, the FATF provides guidelines on detecting placement, layering, and integration methods, including structuring. Many jurisdictions now require AML compliance technology capable of identifying structured activity, making detection not just good practice but a regulatory necessity.
Modern financial institutions rely on advanced AML detection software to identify structuring. Traditional rule-based systems may flag customers who make multiple deposits of $9,000 in a two-week span, but criminals often adapt once they understand static rules.
This is where hybrid approaches add value. BusinessScreen.com combines rule-based thresholds, dynamic analytics, and machine learning models to identify evolving structuring patterns. Our systems analyze millions of transactions in real time, helping compliance officers detect activity inconsistent with customer profiles while minimizing false positives.
Staff training also plays a role. Frontline employees must understand the structuring meaning in money laundering so they can recognize suspicious behavior, from unusual cash deposits to inconsistent explanations for large transactions.
By embedding AML monitoring with compliance automation, sanctions screening, and suspicious activity reporting, businesses gain a holistic defense against structuring and layering schemes.
While many vendors offer AML solutions, few provide the depth and adaptability needed for modern compliance. BusinessScreen.com integrates structuring AML detection, layering fraud analytics, and KYB/KYC verification into a unified platform. This approach allows organizations to:
By combining transaction monitoring, identity verification, and sanctions screening, BusinessScreen.com equips businesses with the tools to fight structuring at every stage.
What is structuring in money laundering?
Structuring is the deliberate breaking up of transactions into smaller amounts to avoid detection or regulatory reporting.
What is layering in money laundering?
Layering means obscuring illicit funds by moving them through multiple complex financial transactions.
What are examples of structuring?
Examples include multiple deposits just under thresholds, micro structuring through online payments, or disguising deposits as casino winnings.
What is placement in money laundering?
Placement is the first stage of money laundering, where illicit funds are introduced into the financial system—often using structuring.
How can structuring be detected?
By using AML detection software like BusinessScreen.com, which combines transaction monitoring, AI, and suspicious activity reporting.
.png)
