header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 October 2025 / Rebecca Hughes
Issue: 8137 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

A new era for AML supervision

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

London tech and comms team boosted by telecoms and regulatory hires

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
NLJ this week: Volunteers, promotions & perilous appeals
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
NLJ this week: When saying no to mediation pays
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll