header-logo header-logo

07 April 2017 / Dr Tony Harvey
Issue: 7741 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

The fourth & final act?

nlj_7741_harvey

Dr Tony Harvey examines the new draft money-laundering regulations

Following a Treasury consultation that ended in November 2016, the government has now published new draft anti-money laundering regulations.

The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 will take effect on 26 June 2017 and will replace entirely the current Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/2157).

The new regulations implement the Fourth EU Money Laundering Directive and the Fund Transfer Regulation. This is the fourth attempt by the EU to try to crack down on money laundered through criminal activity involving drugs, prostitution, slavery, racketeering, arms and, in particular, terrorism. It is estimated that these criminal activities are worth over £350bn worldwide annually.

The new regulations will attempt to ensure that the UK’s anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing regime is kept up to date, is effective and is proportionate.

Many of the provisions of the 2007 AML Regulations are repeated and will be familiar to legal compliance teams but there are some significant and important changes

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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