logo
Australians warned against renting bank details to crime networks

Australians warned against renting bank details to crime networks

News.com.au6 days ago
Australians have been warned against some think is a 'harmless crime', by becoming 'money mules' and renting out their bank details to criminals.
In its latest warning the Australian Federal Police said many Australians were knowingly or unknowingly becoming money mules for criminals who used their bank accounts to move illicit money into a personal account to make the funds appear legitimate.
According to the Australian Banking Association, the major banks made moves to shut down almost 13,000 suspected accounts in the 2024 financial year, up from the 9000 accounts they had discovered in the previous year.
The big increase was largely due to an increase in detection capabilities and greater intelligence sharing between the banks and law enforcement.
These mules are paid anywhere between $200 to $500 plus a commission, which is usually 10 per cent on any money moved through the account.
ABA chief executive Anna Bligh said mule accounts were a key part of a scammer's business model and banks were focused on identifying, investigating and shutting them down.
'Renting or selling your bank account may seem harmless, but you may be unwittingly helping a scammer to rip-off a family member or someone else you know,' she said.
'Don't let criminals cash in on your bank account.
'There's a good chance you're being recruited to hide the profits of criminal activity.'
According to the AFP, criminals are targeting Australians through social media, messaging or gaming platforms, chat forums, online advertisements and even in face-to-face meetings.
These individuals will then be recruited by money laundered in three main ways.
•Employment scams – these are designed to exploit job seekers by offering what seems like quick and easy money for little work. Applicants are asked to have an Australian bank account to transfer funds and are promised a commission for their work.
•Threat scams – scammers contact victims threatening criminal charges and arrest unless they transfer and receive funds.
•Romance scams – scammers build a relationship online and then request the victim to transfer money to other accounts, typically overseas, using their personal bank account.
From here the criminal networks are increasingly telling these money mules to move the funds into a cryptocurrency exchange or ATM and global money transfer apps to make it harder to detect.
AFP Detective Superintendent Marie Andersson said it was illegal to rent, buy or sell bank account details.
'Your account may be housing money derived from scams, extortion, drug trafficking and terrorism,' Ms Andersson said
'If a criminal has access to your bank accounts and personal details, they may use this information to commit other crimes, potentially implicating you in their illegal activities.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Victoria says $776 million treaty negotiations claim ‘cherry-picked', but $308 million spent since 2020
Victoria says $776 million treaty negotiations claim ‘cherry-picked', but $308 million spent since 2020

News.com.au

time27 minutes ago

  • News.com.au

Victoria says $776 million treaty negotiations claim ‘cherry-picked', but $308 million spent since 2020

The Victorian government has hit back at 'cherry-picked analysis' that claimed it has spent more than $776 million on treaty negotiations since 2016. The Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), a conservative think tank, on Sunday published analysis of spending items in Victorian government budget documents relating to treaty or 'self-determination' initiatives. The report claimed Victoria had spent $776.2 million on programs related to the development of a state treaty since 2016, with $100.6 million committed in the 2026 financial year alone and $220 million in the first two full financial years following the defeat of the Voice referendum. 'This is cherry-picked analysis from a Liberal Party-aligned think tank,' a Victorian government spokesperson said. 'If you listen to the people directly affected by policies, you get better outcomes — that's common sense. Treaty is about making a better and fairer state for all Victorians — negotiations are underway and we look forward to bringing Treaty to the Parliament.' The government would not confirm the IPA's figures, but noted $308 million had been invested into the Treaty since the 2020-21 budget, according to publicly available annual reports. Analysis of annual reports and budget papers by the Herald Sun put the figure at $382.4 million over the past 10 years. Some of that funding has gone into setting up the Treaty Authority, an 'independent umpire' created by the First Peoples' Assembly of Victoria and the State of Victoria to oversee the process. The Herald Sun reported in 2023 that members of the Treaty Authority panel could be paid a salary of up to $380,000 per year plus expenses if they worked full-time. The Victorian government first committed to advancing a treaty with Indigenous Victorians in 2016. Negotiations formally began in November 2024, and Victoria plans to finalise a treaty by the end of the 2026 financial year. Victoria would be the first Australian jurisdiction to negotiate a formal treaty with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. But the IPA said Victorians remained largely in the dark about what a treaty would entail, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars spent and hundreds of meetings held since 2017 in preparation for negotiations. 'Despite the Victorian government spending in excess of $776 million on secret treaty negotiations, mainstream Victorians are none the wiser as to what special rights and reparations it will grant to some Victorians based solely on race,' IPA research fellow Margaret Chambers said in a statement. The report noted that between July 2016 and June 2025, 727 meetings had been held by the Victorian government in relation to the development of a treaty — but just four public statements had been issued and the 'substance of these negotiations remains largely undisclosed'.That number included meetings between First Peoples' negotiating parties and the state of Victoria to negotiate or prepare for Treaty agreements, and meetings with departments to support whole of Victorian government co-ordination and engagement in Treaty negotiations. 'The Victorian government is not being honest and upfront with Victorians about its plan to divide the community by race,' Ms Chambers said. 'With a treaty scheduled to be finalised in the next 12 months, and despite the volume of secret meetings over the past decade, very little is known about what this treaty will entail. 'Any treaty will fundamentally change Victoria's legal structure and will likely require already financially stretched Victorian taxpayers to pay billions of dollars to activists aligned to the Allan government. 'Yet, for a government which operates one of the most sophisticated and well-funded spin machines ever seen, just four statements, totalling 1588 words, have been released on the Allan government's plan to divide Victorians by race.' Recent IPA analysis claimed the monetary compensation, tax relief and litigation which would flow from a treaty in Victoria based on the landmark Yoorrook report would be in excess of $48 billion annually. 'Victorians voted against racial division at the Voice referendum,' Ms Chambers said. 'Jacinta Allan is demonstrating complete and utter contempt for the Victorian people, and our democracy, by pursuing this treaty that will divide and cripple Victoria. 'With all the problems that Victoria faces, the last thing the community needs is a two-tiered legal system where some have special rights and get special government payments. Every Victorian should be treated equally under the law.'

Strange bedfellows
Strange bedfellows

ABC News

timean hour ago

  • ABC News

Strange bedfellows

MYLEE HOGAN: Today the president filing a libel lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, his company News Corp and the reporters behind this article that claims Trump sent Epstein a 'bawdy' 50th birthday letter in 2003 … - Seven News 6pm (Sydney), 19 July 2025 Hello, welcome to Media Watch, I'm Linton Besser. And first tonight, the vortex of intrigues and deceptions now threatening to engulf the White House as Donald Trump tries and fails to douse the flames of the Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy theory he helped to set alight. And not for the first time, marshalling a brigade of lawyers to his cause. MYLEE HOGAN: Seeking $15 billion in damages, the president called it a 'FAKE NEWS 'article' … - Seven News 6pm (Sydney), 19 July 2025 Ten days ago the US president filed a lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, a Rupert Murdoch-controlled newspaper, after its team reported evidence of just how pally Donald Trump was with the financier and convicted sex trafficker—a letter to Epstein bearing Trump's name in a 2003 album of warm felicitations: It contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts, and the future president's signature is a squiggly 'Donald' below her waist, mimicking pubic hair. - The Wall Street Journal, 18 July 2025 And what did those typewritten words say? Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey. Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it… Donald: A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret. - The Wall Street Journal, 18 July 2025 Cue apoplexy from Camp Trump with his usual purple denials, before pulling the trigger on a lawsuit that very same day and yanking the newspaper's White House access to his trip to Scotland. Murdoch's Journal was undeterred however, and soon after took another swing at the President. Donald Trump rode to power on the back of a MAGA obsession with deep-state secrecy, whose flames he's happily fanned: DONALD TRUMP: … her friend, or boyfriend … JONATHAN SWAN: Epstein. DONALD TRUMP: … was either killed or committed suicide in jail … DONALD TRUMP: … he died in jail. Was he killed? Was it suicide? - AXIOS on HBO, Youtube, 4 August 2020 Now the crows have come home to roost, because, despite the efforts of his administration, and some right-wing media, to distance Trump from Epstein it's obvious to everyone with half a brain that Donald Trump was indeed an Epstein familiar, with The New York Times also reporting the album story late last week. Trump is now seeking 15 billion dollars in damages from the Murdoch empire, marking a new twist in the on-and-off-again affair between the two men. After years of boosting by Murdoch's Fox News, in February the 'Dirty Digger' was invited to play a bit part during yet another piece of Oval Office theatre: DONALD TRUMP: … Rupert is in a class by himself, he's an amazing guy … - C-SPAN, 4 February 2025 But along the way Murdoch's occasional distaste for Trump has surfaced in his other outlets: TRUMPTY DUMPTY - The New York Post, 10 November 2022 Trump Is the Republican Party's Biggest Loser - The Wall Street Journal, The Editorial Board, 9 November 2022 Donald Trump's litigation against The Wall Street Journal is far from his first foray against the press. Trump has become accustomed to handing out libel lawsuits like confetti. The writs have returned meanwhile, a handsome $100 million windfall in settlements paid by media companies cowed perhaps by the prospect of presidential retaliation including ABC America, social media giant Meta, and most infamous of all, CBS owner Paramount which settled a Trump complaint over a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris as CBS talk show star Stephen Colbert explained earlier this month: STEPHEN COLBERT: This settlement is for a nuisance lawsuit Trump filed claiming that 60 Minutes deceptively edited their interview with then candidate Kamala Harris last fall. Paramount knows they could have easily fought it because in their own words 'the lawsuit was completely without merit'. - The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, CBS/YouTube, 15 July 2025 Three days later Colbert was opening his show like this: STEPHEN COLBERT: I want to let you know something that I found out just last night. Next year will be our last season. The network will be ending The Late Show in May. And… AUDIENCE: Boo! Nooo! - The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, CBS/YouTube, 18 July 2025 Speculation ran rife this was yet another capitulation, with Paramount doing anything in its power to grease the way for a multibillion-dollar merger needing US Government approval. Paramount claimed its decision to axe the show was 'purely financial', which means of course whatever warmth the decision brought to the breast of the president was but mere serendipity. Then last week, lo and behold, it emerged that Paramount's betrayal of its 60 Minutes team, its pay-off to Trump and its cancellation of America's number one late night show franchise had done little harm to its interests, the mega-merger getting the rubber-stamp. So, does the latest Wall Street Journal investigation mean Rupert Murdoch is making a stand for America's free press? Not everyone is convinced: If Rupert Murdoch becomes a white knight standing up to a rampantly bullying US president, the world has moved into the upside-down. - The Conversation, 22 July 2025 Which could mean Americans have to look elsewhere for a white knight: DONALD TRUMP: Why is my dick so small? ARTIST: But that's the size it is in the photo. DONALD TRUMP: Get that guy outta here. I'm gonna sue you. I'm gonna sue both of you. Hahahah. - South Park, Network Ten, 24 July 2024 The creators of comedy cult-hit South Park launching a scathing take-down of both Donald Trump and Paramount's 60 Minutes settlement less than 24 hours after signing a multi-billion dollar deal with, yes, Paramount which bothered Donald Trump not one little bit. South Park and Rupert Murdoch linking arms in defiance of an increasingly authoritarian White House, what a bizarre footnote in the unravelling of the great American experiment.

Half disclosure
Half disclosure

ABC News

timean hour ago

  • ABC News

Half disclosure

And now we turn to the pages of the financial press where, in a bid to fatten our wallets, Australia's business barons have been doling out market intelligence: There are clear reasons for a more bullish sentiment to take hold in private capital investment in 2025. - The Australian Financial Review, 20 March 2025 Rightio then … … prudent investors recognise that today's investments form the bedrock for tomorrow's portfolio health. - The Australian Financial Review, 20 March 2025 And in a stroke of great fortune, the AFR's correspondent happens to be one such prudent professional investor who's just a click away via this helpful link. In fact, The Australian Financial Review's 'Industry Insight' column is a veritable well of wisdom drawing as it does right from the source. Last month it warned not to be left behind by the AI revolution: … for those prepared to adapt, complexity is not a threat; it's a chance to thrive. … this is the moment to shift gears. - The Australian Financial Review, 25 June 2025 And as luck would have it, our scribe just so happened to work for an IT consultancy—no doubt happy to muck in and help. Two weeks earlier, the AFR sounded the alarm on underinsurance: In a worst-case scenario, investors may have to sell their property … - The Australian Financial Review, 12 June 2025 And a handy thing it was, that the author happened to work for a company that flogs insurance. And on it goes. The booming Asia Pacific market, by fundies who specialise in the Asia Pacific market. Electric vehicle subsidies by the CEO of an electric vehicle manufacturer. And the very many advantages of real-time banking rendered into poetry by a real-time banker. So why on earth is Australia's premier financial rag printing columns which read like advertising dross? I'll give you one guess. Because that's what they are. 'Industry Insight' might have done little to help readers make coin, but they have certainly been a nice little earner for the AFR. And how do we know? Because open 'Industry Insight' on the AFR's website and the sponsorship is plain as day. A mere oversight, I hear you say? The Fin's poor harried subs too busy to scratch themselves let alone lay-out a proper disclosure in print. Just one problem with that theory, because for all of 2021 and 2022 The Australian Financial Review clearly marked its 'Industry Insight' feature as sponsored content, allowing readers to choose whether to read the balderdash or turn the page and find some real news instead. But from about August 2023, the disclosure mostly disappeared. Now, could it be that ads disguised as genuine articles might be better read? 'Not at all', we were assured by Nine. A spokesperson for the paper said it was a mere: … unintentional discrepancy in content published in some print editions of the AFR. We have reviewed our operational processes with the commercial team to help ensure it doesn't happen again. - Email, Nine Spokesperson, 25 July 2025 Just some print editions? Try almost two years' worth. But with its half-pregnant disclosures, perhaps we shouldn't be too harsh. After all, the AFR is all about squeezing the lemon consciously or otherwise and what better than passive income!

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store