header-logo header-logo

31 October 2025 / Rebecca Hughes
Issue: 8137 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

A new era for AML supervision

234245
Ambitious plans to transform the FCA into a super regulator will test the organisation’s capacity & adaptability, but the true test will be in delivery, says Rebecca Hughes

After two years of deliberation, the government has finally published its response to the 2023 consultation on reforming the UK’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) supervisory regime. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has been crowned the Single Professional Services Supervisor (SPSS), a surprising outcome for many, not least the professions that will now fall under the FCA’s oversight.

The UK system currently comprises three statutory regulators—the FCA, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and the Gambling Commission, alongside 22 Professional Body Supervisors (PBSs) overseeing the legal and accountancy sectors. Each PBS is responsible for ensuring that its supervised population complies with the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLRs).

This structure has long attracted criticism. The 2015 national risk assessment (the UK’s first comprehensive assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing risk) first

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll