For the first time, this tracker consolidates statistics on how UK anti-money laundering supervisors are conducting their work in one place and provides a tool to evaluate individual supervisory progress. The tracker is designed to help hold supervisors to account for maintaining and improving their performance and provide policy makers and the public with insights into how well AML supervision is working in the UK.
Click here for background on the UK’s AML supervisory regime
The UK’s status as an international financial centre makes UK businesses vulnerable to wittingly or unwittingly facilitating money laundering. Robust supervision of those firms which are required to comply with the Money Laundering Regulations (MLRs) is critical for ensuring that UK businesses play a proactive role in preventing money laundering from taking place.
Those firms covered by the MLRS are supervised by a patchwork of 25 different bodies (comprising three statutory bodies and 22 professional bodies). The legal and accountancy sector are supervised by their professional bodies directly.
This is set to change. The government has announced major plans to consolidate the UK’s fragmented supervisory landscape, and move supervision of lawyers and accountants from the 22 professional body supervisors, and of company formation agents from HMRC, to the Financial Conduct Authority.
1. Regulated firms’ compliance with the MLRs
Explore this chart for insights into compliance outcomes resulting from desk-based and onsite reviews of regulated firms carried out by all 25 AML supervisors. Percentages may not add up to 100% in all cases due to incomplete assessment cycles or where not all assessments resulted in a compliance rating.
How compliant are firms with AML rules?
Hover over the charts on individual supervisors for data on the total annual number of reviews they have each carried out.
2. Supervisors’ use of formal versus informal actions
Explore the chart below for insights into supervisors’ use of informal actions (such as guidance or reminder letters and engagement with firms to correct errors) and formal actions (such as fines or cancellations of membership or registration).
The UK government notes that: “due to the specific attributes and differences between the regulated sectors …it is not always appropriate to compare supervisors based on quantitative data alone“.
How do supervisors respond when firms break AML rules?
Hover over the year 2023-24 for data on whether statutory supervisors’ actions relate to high, medium, or low risk firms.
3. Supervisors’ use of their strongest sanctions
Explore the chart below for insights into trends on how often supervisors use their toughest sanctions: fines and cancellation of membership or registration (or strike off in the case of solicitors).
How much do AML supervisors use their strongest sanctions?
FCA
HMRC
Gambling Commission
Accountancy
Legal
Supervisory bodies
FCA
Financial Conduct Authority
HMRC
HM Revenue & Customs
Gambling Commission
Gambling operators regulator
Accountancy (13)
Professional accountancy bodies
Legal (9)
Professional legal bodies
4. Resourcing of AML supervisors
Explore the chart below for insights into how well supervisors are resourced in comparison to the number of firms they supervise.
How are UK AML Supervisors resourced?
