Is It Illegal to Lend or Provide Your Bank Account? Understanding Account-Transfer Liability, Aiding Fraud, and Self-Protection Under Taiwan’s Money Laundering Control Act

20小时前

讀畢需時 15 分鐘

1. Why Can Lending Your Account Lead to Criminal Liability?

“I only lent my account to receive money,” “I only gave my ATM card to a friend,” “I was just helping someone collect a payment,” or “I merely followed someone else’s instructions to operate online banking.”

Although these actions may appear harmless to the account holder, they can allow the account to be used by a fraud ring to receive, transfer, or conceal illicit funds.

Once a victim reports the fraud, the recipient account will often be flagged by the bank as a warning or high-risk account. The account holder may then receive a notice from the police or prosecutors and face three different types of legal risk:

■ Liability under the Money Laundering Control Act for providing or transferring an account without a legitimate reason;

■ Criminal liability for aiding fraud or money laundering; and

■ Civil liability for damages claimed by the victim.

Whether a crime has been committed does not depend solely on whether the account was used or whether the account holder received payment. The authorities will consider how the account was provided, what information or access was handed over, the recipient’s identity, the stated purpose of the transaction, whether compensation was involved, how the funds moved, the account holder’s conduct before and after the incident, and the extent to which the account holder understood the risks.

2. What Does It Mean to “Transfer or Provide an Account Without a Legitimate Reason”?

Under Article 22 of Taiwan’s Money Laundering Control Act, a person generally may not transfer or provide another person with access to a bank account opened in their own or another person’s name. The rule also applies to accounts registered with virtual asset service providers and third-party payment service providers.

However, the law does not prohibit every act of sharing account information. Providing an account for ordinary commercial or financial transactions, based on a genuine relationship of trust between family members or friends, or for another reasonable and legitimate purpose may fall outside the prohibition.

A legitimate reason must be supported by the specific transaction, the need to provide the account, and the manner in which access was given. Simply saying, “They were my friend,” “I was trying to help,” or “I did not know the account would be used for a crime” is usually not enough.

In practice, the following situations must be distinguished:

■ Providing only an account number and account name so that an employer, customer, or contracting party can make a payment is generally different from handing over an ATM card, password, or control of online banking. If the payment genuinely concerns wages, goods, or services, supporting records such as contracts, messages, invoices, and order details may help establish a legitimate reason.

■ Giving another person a passbook, ATM card, seal, online banking username, login password, SMS verification code, one-time password, or remote access—allowing that person to withdraw funds, make transfers, or change account settings—creates a significantly greater legal risk.

■ Opening a new bank, electronic payment, or virtual asset account at another person’s request and then handing over the login credentials or authentication information may also constitute providing an account for another person’s use.

■ Allowing another person to receive money through your account and then withdrawing, transferring, or using the funds to purchase virtual assets according to their instructions goes beyond merely providing an account. Such conduct may also involve fraud, money laundering, or assistance in the commission of another crime.

3. Legal Consequences of Providing an Account: An Official Warning Does Not Mean the Matter Is Over

If a person merely violates Article 22, Paragraph 1 of the Money Laundering Control Act, the police may issue an official warning as an administrative disposition. Although a warning is not the same as a criminal conviction, its consequences should not be underestimated.

Financial institutions and related service providers may suspend or restrict some or all functions of the relevant accounts for a specified period, or even close the accounts. This may prevent the account holder from withdrawing or transferring money, using online banking, receiving salary payments, paying loans, or carrying out ordinary financial transactions.

If the person violates the rule again within five years after receiving a warning, or if other statutory aggravating circumstances exist, criminal liability may arise.

★ The administrative warning procedure is separate from any criminal investigation, prosecution, or judgment. Receiving a warning does not necessarily mean that the person will be convicted. However, the fact that only a warning has been issued at the current stage does not mean that possible criminal or civil proceedings can be ignored.

4. When Can Providing an Account Result in Criminal Liability?

Under Article 22 of the Money Laundering Control Act, a person who transfers or provides an account without a legitimate reason may face imprisonment for up to three years, short-term detention, or a fine of up to NT$1 million, either separately or in combination, if any of the following circumstances apply:

■ The person agreed to receive or actually received compensation. This may include payment calculated per transaction or withdrawal, monthly account rental fees, referral fees, commissions, or other benefits.

■ The person transferred or provided a total of three or more accounts. The relevant issue is the number of accounts provided—not the number of transfers. Bank accounts, electronic payment accounts, and virtual asset service accounts may all need to be counted together.

■ The person violates the same rule again within five years after receiving an official warning from the police.

Therefore, an account may still create legal risk even if it never actually receives fraud proceeds. Conversely, the fact that an account was used does not automatically mean that the account holder committed a crime. Prosecutors and courts must still determine whether the statutory elements are satisfied and whether a legitimate reason or another defense applies.

5. What Is the Difference Between Unlawfully Providing an Account, Aiding Fraud, and Money Laundering?

Liability for providing an account focuses on the act of transferring or providing an account to another person for use without a legitimate reason.

Aiding fraud requires proof that the person provided assistance that enabled another party to commit fraud and that the person acted with the legally required intent. This may include circumstances in which the person knew—or at least foresaw—that the account could be used for fraud but nevertheless accepted that possibility.

Money laundering generally involves concealing or disguising criminal proceeds, obstructing the investigation, discovery, preservation, or confiscation of those proceeds, or receiving, possessing, or using criminal proceeds belonging to another person.

Simply owning or holding an account does not automatically constitute money laundering. The authorities must still examine whether the person actually participated in processing the funds and whether they knew or foresaw that the funds were connected to criminal activity.

Common legal assessments may include the following:

➡︎ If a person merely provides account information, there is no evidence that any funds entered the account, and no other criminal conduct occurred, the case may primarily concern the transfer or provision of an account under Article 22.

➡︎ If a person knows that another party is using the account to collect money from fraud victims but still provides an ATM card, password, or other means of access, the conduct may be treated as aiding fraud.

➡︎ If fraud proceeds enter the account and the account holder then follows instructions to transfer the funds in separate transactions, withdraw cash, purchase virtual assets, or deliver the money to another person—and has some awareness of the unlawful source—the conduct may also constitute money laundering or another criminal offense.

➡︎ If the account holder personally participates in recruiting victims, preparing fraudulent scripts, directing transfers, or distributing criminal proceeds, they may face the more serious risk of being treated as a joint principal rather than merely an account provider.

6. What Facts Do Courts Consider When Determining Criminal Intent?

A common statement in these cases is: “I genuinely did not know they were fraudsters.”

Courts, however, do not rely solely on what the defendant says after the incident. They examine objective circumstances to determine what the person likely knew or foresaw at the time.

The following circumstances may lead a court to conclude that the person at least foresaw the possibility that the account would be used unlawfully:

■ The other party requested an ATM card, online banking password, SMS verification code, or complete login credentials instead of merely asking for an account number.

■ The other party offered an obviously unreasonable or unusually high payment in exchange for multiple accounts or assistance with withdrawals and transfers.

■ The other party’s identity could not be verified, there was no formal agreement, and all communications took place through anonymous accounts, messaging apps, or social media.

■ The person was instructed to transfer incoming funds immediately to a designated account, withdraw the money in cash, purchase cryptocurrency, or hand the funds to another person.

■ Large sums unrelated to the account holder’s ordinary work or living expenses entered the account, yet the account holder failed to verify their source or stop handling the funds after discovering the irregularity.

■ The account holder had already received a warning from the bank, a police notice, or information from another person that the account activity was suspicious, but continued to provide additional accounts or assist with transfers.

📢 Conversely, if the person was genuinely deceived through a job offer, online transaction, family emergency, or another situation—and can provide complete messages, transaction records, payment information, police reports, and evidence of what they did after discovering the problem—those materials may help explain why the information was provided, whether there was a reasonable basis for trust, and whether criminal intent was absent.

7. What Qualifies as a “Legitimate Reason”?

The law recognizes ordinary commercial and financial practices, relationships of trust between relatives or friends, and other legitimate reasons so that normal social transactions are not automatically treated as criminal conduct.

However, the reason must be genuine and specific, and the information or access provided must be proportionate to the stated purpose.

For example, an employer asking an employee for a bank account number to deposit salary is different from demanding the employee’s ATM card and password. Likewise, a company’s obligation to pay for goods does not justify requiring the other party to hand over online banking login credentials.

The fact that a relative or friend needs financial assistance also does not automatically justify allowing them to use someone else’s account to receive unexplained payments.

💡When assessing whether a legitimate reason exists, the following questions are often relevant:

■ Can the other party’s identity be verified?

■ Is there a written agreement or a clearly defined transaction?

■ Why was it necessary to use another person’s account?

■ Did the account holder provide more information or authority than the transaction reasonably required?

■ Was any compensation or benefit exchanged?

■ Were the source and intended use of the funds reasonable?

■ Did the account holder immediately stop the activity and report the matter after discovering something unusual?

Even where the other person is a relative or long-term acquaintance, handing over an ATM card and password and allowing unrestricted control of the account may still exceed what can reasonably be justified by a personal relationship of trust.

8. What Non-Criminal Consequences May the Account Holder Face?

■ Account restrictions

Once an account is designated as a warning or restricted account, the account holder may be unable to receive salary payments, pay living expenses, make mortgage payments, arrange automatic credit card payments, or use other banking services. If the person holds accounts with several financial institutions, they may be required to explain the source and purpose of transactions in each account.

■ Civil liability for damages

If a fraud victim transfers money into the account and alleges that the account holder negligently contributed to or assisted the fraud, the victim may bring a civil claim for damages.

Even if the account holder is ultimately not found criminally liable as an accomplice to fraud, civil liability may still exist. Criminal and civil proceedings involve different legal requirements and may apply different standards when evaluating the evidence.

■ Preservation, seizure, and return of suspected criminal proceeds

If suspicious funds remain in the account, the account holder should not independently transfer, withdraw, or deliver them to another person. Doing so could turn a situation in which the account was merely misused into a new dispute involving active handling of suspicious funds.

■ Long-term effects on credit and financial records

After an account is flagged, restricted, or linked to an official warning, the account holder may face additional scrutiny when opening new accounts or applying for loans, credit cards, and other financial services.

9. What Should You Do If You Have Already Given Your Account to Someone?

If you have already transferred or provided your account information, or discovered that another person has used your account, you should take the following steps as soon as possible:

■ Contact the bank or relevant account service provider immediately. Explain that the account may have been misused or involved in fraud, and ask whether the ATM card, online banking, electronic payment functions, or other access can be suspended.

■ Preserve all evidence, including messaging app conversations, voice messages, emails, job or transaction advertisements, contracts, transfer records, the other party’s identifying information, details of when and where cards or passwords were delivered, and records of the actions you took after discovering the issue.

■ If unexplained funds enter the account, do not withdraw, transfer, use them to purchase virtual assets, or give them to anyone. Notify the bank and police immediately and ask about the proper procedure for preserving or returning the funds.

■ Contact Taiwan’s 165 Anti-Fraud Hotline, the police, or the relevant financial institution to confirm how the matter should be handled. If you have already received a police notice, prosecutors’ summons, or court document, preserve it and consult a criminal defense lawyer as early as possible.

■ Before attending a police interview or prosecutorial questioning, prepare a clear timeline. Record when you met the other party, how the request was made, what information or access you provided, whether you received compensation, whether any funds entered the account, and what you did after discovering the problem.

Do not delete messages, create documents after the fact, or invent a transaction that never existed in an attempt to avoid liability.

10. What Should You Know After Receiving a Police Notice or Prosecutors’ Summons?

Receiving a notice does not mean that you have already been found guilty. However, a police interview or criminal investigation should not be treated as a casual opportunity to “explain everything.”

Account-related cases often involve complicated fund flows, multiple victims, and numerous account holders. Inconsistent statements may affect how prosecutors assess whether the person acted with criminal intent.

Before attending, confirm whether the notice identifies you as a witness, complainant, criminal suspect, or defendant. Each status carries different procedural rights and legal consequences.

If you are a suspect or defendant, you have the right to remain silent and the right to appoint a defense lawyer. Exercising the right to remain silent is not an admission of guilt, but you should understand the circumstances of the case and the legal consequences before deciding how to respond.

When answering questions, limit your statement to facts you genuinely remember. Do not guess about uncertain dates, amounts, or conversations. You should also avoid giving a definite answer merely to satisfy the interviewer when the information has not yet been verified.

⚠️If documents or communications can show that you were deceived, misled, or exploited, present them in an organized manner. Simply repeating “I did not know” or “I had no criminal intent” is rarely enough.

11. Main Defense Strategies in Account-Transfer Cases

■ Determine whether the account was actually “transferred or provided for use”

It is necessary to clarify whether the person provided only an account number or a copy of the passbook cover, or whether they also handed over an ATM card, password, authentication code, or actual control of the account.

Relevant questions include whether the other party could independently withdraw or transfer funds, change account information, and whether the account holder retained practical control. Different levels of access may lead to different legal conclusions.

■ Explain the specific reason for providing the account

It is not enough to make a general statement such as “I was helping a friend” or “I was looking for work.” The person should explain the other party’s identity, the purpose of the transaction, how the contact began, why providing the account appeared necessary, what information was provided, and why the person trusted the arrangement at the time.

■ Determine whether compensation was promised or received

Compensation is not limited to cash. It may include commissions, profit sharing, referral fees, loan benefits, service fees, or other financial advantages.

The complete absence of compensation does not automatically establish innocence, but it may be important when distinguishing the seriousness of the conduct and determining whether specific statutory elements are present.

■ Review the number of accounts and any prior warning record

Whether three or more accounts were provided, whether the person had previously received a police warning, and whether the subsequent conduct occurred within five years can directly affect whether criminal penalties apply.

■ Distinguish account-transfer liability from fraud and money laundering liability

If prosecutors allege that the person participated in fraud or money laundering, they must establish additional objective and subjective links between the person and the fraudulent fund flow. The mere fact that an account was used should not automatically prove that the account holder knew about the crime.

■ Address civil compensation and the return of victims’ funds

If money entered the account, the person should discuss with a lawyer how to identify the relevant funds, avoid duplicate repayment, preserve proof of repayment or settlement, and provide consistent and complete explanations in both criminal and civil proceedings.

12. Frequently Asked Questions

Question 1:

Can I still be charged if I only gave someone my bank account number and did not hand over my ATM card?

Not necessarily. Providing an account number for legitimate salary, commercial, or service payments is different from handing over an ATM card, password, or verification code that allows another person to control the account.

However, the authorities will still consider the purpose of providing the information, the identity of the other party, the nature of the funds, and whether a legitimate reason existed. It cannot be assumed that providing only an account number is always risk-free.

Question 2:

If I did not receive payment, does that mean I cannot be criminally liable for providing the account?

Not receiving payment may mean that the aggravating circumstance involving promised or received compensation does not apply. However, other statutory circumstances must still be examined, such as whether three or more accounts were provided or whether the person reoffended within five years after receiving an official warning.

If fraud or money laundering is also involved, compensation is not the only factor used to determine liability.

Question 3:

My account was used for fraud, but I did not know. Am I automatically responsible?

No. The use of the account is an important fact, but it is still necessary to determine whether you had a legitimate reason for providing it, whether you foresaw the possibility of criminal use, what information or control you handed over, and whether you later helped transfer or withdraw the funds.

Your position should be supported with objective evidence instead of being assessed solely based on the fact that the account ultimately received money.

Question 4:

Is it safe to lend my account to a family member?

Not necessarily. A family relationship may be relevant when determining whether a genuine relationship of trust existed, but it does not provide automatic immunity.

If a family member asks you to receive money from strangers, hand over your ATM card and password, or assist with withdrawals or transfers, you may still face legal liability.

Question 5:

If my account has been frozen, can I transfer the money to another account myself?

You should not handle the funds on your own. If the source of the money is unclear or the funds may belong to a fraud victim, transferring, withdrawing, or giving them to another person may complicate the evidence and the repayment process.

Contact the bank, police, and a lawyer first, and follow the appropriate legal procedure.

Question 6:

Can I ignore a police notice?

Whether you are legally required to attend and the consequences of failing to appear depend on the type of notice, your procedural status, and how the document was served.

Failing to appear without justification may create adverse consequences or affect subsequent proceedings. After receiving the notice, confirm your status and the nature of the case. If necessary, ask a lawyer to contact the officer or authority handling the case.

Question 7:

Will every account-transfer case result in a criminal conviction?

No. The outcome depends on the statutory elements, the person’s intent, how the account was provided, whether a legitimate reason existed, the flow of funds, the number of victims, whether compensation was involved, any prior warning record, and the available evidence.

Possible outcomes may include non-prosecution, deferred prosecution, acquittal, a fine, or imprisonment. The result cannot be predicted solely on the basis that the person is a first-time offender or did not receive payment.

13. A Reminder from Chien Sheng International Law Firm

The central issue in an account-related case is rarely resolved by simply saying, “I was also a victim.”

What matters is whether the evidence can clearly reconstruct what happened before and after the account was provided, what the account holder actually did, what they knew, and whether they foresaw that the account might be used for criminal activity.

If you have only received a suspicious request and have not yet provided your account, stop communicating immediately. Do not click unknown links or provide an ATM card, online banking password, SMS verification code, one-time password, or remote access.

If you have already provided account information, contact the bank and police as soon as possible to prevent further misuse.If you have received a police interview notice, prosecutors’ summons, indictment, or civil claim from a victim, consider seeking legal assistance at an early stage.

👨🏻‍⚖️A lawyer can help organize the timeline, review account transactions, assess whether Article 22 of the Money Laundering Control Act applies, distinguish the case from aiding fraud or money laundering, prepare statements for the investigation, and address account restrictions and potential civil liability.

Conclusion

A bank account is not something that should be casually rented out or handed over.

Providing an account number for an ordinary payment is fundamentally different from giving another person an ATM card, password, verification information, and unrestricted control over the account. Once an account is used in connection with fraud, the account holder may face administrative, criminal, and civil consequences at the same time.

When evaluating an account-related case, begin with four questions:

1、Why was the account provided?

2、What information and authority were actually handed over?

3、Was there a legitimate transaction or another reasonable justification?

4、What did the account holder do after discovering the suspicious activity?

➟Preserving evidence early, stopping unusual fund movements, and seeking appropriate legal assistance can prevent further losses and help demonstrate clearly how the account holder was deceived, exploited, or otherwise drawn into the case.

💡 Chien Sheng International Law Firm reminds readers that this article provides general legal information only. It does not guarantee the outcome of any individual case and is not a substitute for legal advice based on the specific facts and evidence involved. If your account has been designated as a warning account, you have received a notice from the police or prosecutors, you have been accused of providing a mule account, aiding fraud, or money laundering, or a victim has filed a claim for damages against you, you should seek professional legal assistance as early as possible to protect your procedural rights and lawful interests.