Anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism: Supervision Report 2020-22
Annual report for 2020 to 2022 on anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) supervision.
Documents
Details
This report provides information about the performance of AML/CTF supervisors between 6 April 2020 – 5 April 2022 and fulfils the Treasury’s obligation, under Section 51 of the MLRs, to publish an annual report on supervisory activity. The report includes supervisory and enforcement data on both the Statutory and Professional Body Supervisors, highlighting any notable changes in supervisory activity and any fines that supervisors have issued. This report provides supervisory and enforcement data for both the 2020-2021 period (6th April 2020 – 5th April 2021) and the 2021-2022 period (6th April 2021 – 5th April 2022). The two years have been combined to address delays in reporting that developed during the pandemic and ensure data is available as close to the relevant period as possible.
The Treasury appoints supervisors to monitor the anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) compliance of businesses in scope of the Money Laundering Regulations (MLRs). In order to improve the transparency and accountability of supervision and to encourage good practice, the Treasury has worked with supervisors to develop this annual report on the performance of AML/CTF supervisors. The report fulfils the Treasury’s obligation under the MLRs to ask all designated AML/CTF supervisors to provide information on their supervisory activity and publish a consolidated review of this information. This is the Treasury’s tenth annual report on AML/CTF supervision.
Updates to this page
Published 19 December 2022Last updated 1 May 2024 + show all updates
-
Two statistics have been changed in paragraph 3.58 (page 28) of this report regarding the percentage of desk-based reviews (DBR) and onsite visits conducted by PBSs in 2021-22 that resulted in informal and formal enforcement action being taken. The report now states that PBSs took informal action against 29% (rather than 9%) of those who received a DBR/onsite visit in 2021-22 and formal action against 18% (rather than 12%) of those who received a DBR/onsite visit in 2021-22.
-
First published.