Exactly the same for me.
To those screaming because of this: ANY company managing funds on behalf of third-parties is required to comply with both AML and KYC requirements.
1) AML is pretty straight forward. You need to ask a) ID and b) proof of residence of your customers. That's what all exchanges do to verify their customers and it is standard procedure.
2) KYC is trickier. There's no "official" procedure, but any company managing funds on behalf of third parties is required to "know their customers" - as broad as that definition might seem. If shit hits the fan and LE investigates one of the company's customers, the company needs to have as much info as possible on that customer to avoid to face any legal problems.
Summing up: to comply with current AML regulations an ID and proof of residence should be enough, but any company willing to avoid problems *must* do their own due diligence when they spot something suspicious. Probably none of our transfers/withdrawals were suspicious, but in my personal case I was asking a big fiat withdrawal. With *big* I mean an order of magnitude bigger than what I guess is the average withdrawal requested by a small-time trader. I'm not surprised Bitstamp is asking that kind of questions, and in my opinion they are as general and vague as they could be. In my case I also replied with vague answers ("I bought those Bitcoins a few years ago"; "I don't know when I will use your service again or how many bitcoins I will buy or sell in the future, it depends on the market", etc.). Bitstamp gave me the OK to those questions in 24 hours and processed that withdrawal the day after. It looks like they are doing what they should be doing: asking for as much info as possible to their "bigger volume" customers.
IMO there's absolutely nothing to be worried about and in fact it is good news that Bitstamp is gathering KYC info on their customers.
1) Again, AML is required when transferring CASH above 15000 in one transaction in one month (EU Declaration on AML).
2) KYC is not required for non-licensed businesses almost everywhere. Most of KYC is to protect from suing by another party because a contract is signed with particular data according to law. What they should be asking for is ID number, Name, Address. That is all legally they are allowed to ask. If they want ID scan, Bill Scan etc - they need to comply with private data laws and provide an option to recover funds in case I do not want the private data to be kept with them (THUS recovery of my actions and return to original transfer). As they are not a bank they can do KYC as a normal business. BUT KYC might be required by their Bank so that's why I wait for their reply...
I'm worried because data is being passed through a company which has no rights for that data as I see no banking license...