Money Laundering

(asked on 17th January 2022) - View Source

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the September 2021 report of the Office for Professional Body Anti-Money Laundering Supervision, what plans, if any, they have to ensure that (1) the 80 per cent of bodies identified as having failed to implement an effective risk-based approach to anti-money laundering do so without delay; and (2) the 66 per cent of bodies identified as not having or having only ineffective systems for recording sector risk profiles, move swiftly to develop them.


Answered by
Viscount Younger of Leckie Portrait
Viscount Younger of Leckie
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
This question was answered on 31st January 2022

Since 2018, the Office for Professional Body Anti-Money Laundering Supervision (OPBAS) has worked with the accountancy and legal sector professional body anti-money laundering supervisors (PBSs) to increase the consistency of their anti-money laundering/counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) supervision and facilitate increased intelligence and information sharing. OPBAS has independently assessed how each PBS carries out their AML/CTF supervisory responsibilities.

In its third report, published in September 2021, OPBAS found that although PBS compliance with the Money Laundering Regulations continues to improve, there were some weaknesses in the effectiveness of their supervision, including risk assessment, governance and enforcement.

OPBAS noted significant improvements in PBSs’ technical compliance, driven in part by PBSs’ positive response to action plans drawn up as a result of the first annual report. However, OPBAS will continue to work with individual PBSs to address issues identified in the third report.

In addition, HM Treasury is currently reviewing the UK’s AML/CFT regulatory and supervisory regimes.

Reticulating Splines