On 29th March, RUSI reported on the launch of the first annual report of the UK Office for Professional Body Anti-Money Laundering Supervision, saying that it signals a bold step forward for UK AML supervision, but many questions about the wider government supervision strategy remain unanswered.  The article says that is not clear whether the government’s underlying intention with the creation of OPBAS was to encourage some players to simply relinquish their roles and, by proxy, give a greater lead to the state in AML supervision; this is certainly not the official line. However, this is not the only unanswered question.  It also asks what happens if OPBAS advises HM Treasury to consider removal of a supervisor or indeed a supervisor decides to walk away – where does the supervised population go?

The report is available at –

Author: raytodd2017

Chartered Legal Executive and former senior manager with Isle of Man Customs and Excise, where I was (amongst other things) Sanctions Officer (for UN/EU sanctions), Export Licensing Officer and Manager of the Legal-Library & Collectorate Support Section

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: