This publication has been previously published in this site.
New Zealand’s measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing are delivering good results, but the country needs to focus more on improving the availability of beneficial ownership information, strengthening supervision and implementation of targeted financial sanctions.
The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) assessed New Zealand’s anti-money laundering and counter terrorist financing (AML/CFT) system. The assessment is a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of New Zealand’s measures and their level of compliance with the FATF Recommendations.
New Zealand faces money laundering threats from proceeds of crime generated both domestically and internationally. The country’s large scale terrorist financing risks are mainly in relation to overseas-based groups. Using a comprehensive multi-tiered risk assessment process, the country has developed a robust understanding of these money laundering and terrorist financing risks. New Zealand has implemented an AML/CFT system that is effective in many respects.
This includes the effective use of financial intelligence and investigation tools to support money laundering investigations, prosecutions and criminal asset recovery, with a particularly strong focus on restraint and forfeiture of criminal assets. New Zealand is also particularly effective at cooperating with its international partners to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.
National AML/CFT policies and activities address New Zealand’s money laundering and terrorist financing risks to a substantial extent. However, measures to stop money laundering in the non-financial sector are new and businesses need to better understand and mitigate their risks. New Zealand’s three AML/CFT supervisors have a good understanding of the money laundering and terrorist financing risk profiles of their respective sectors, but there is scope to improve the use of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. Supervision of the banking sector in particular needs greater resourcing.
New Zealand has taken steps to mitigate the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with legal persons and arrangements, but those could be undermined by loopholes regarding beneficial ownership and nominee directors and shareholders.
New Zealand’s authorities remain alert to funds being used for domestic terrorist attacks following the Christchurch attack on March 2019. New Zealand’s investigations of terrorist financing have been thorough, quick, and well-coordinated. But there are gaps in New Zealand’s implementation of targeted financial sanction measures.
- Transferencias internacionales de datos personales: retos y aspectos clave
- Fuerza mayor en contratos SaaS: cómo proteger tu empresa ante caídas y ciberataques
- Acceso a instalaciones mediante control biométrico: identificación vs autenticación
- Pacto de socios en startups tecnológicas: manual de supervivencia para fundadores
- Autoridad Independiente de Protección al Informante (AIPI) en España: qué es y cómo funciona
- El derecho al olvido en el caso de Cecilia Sopeña
- Drones y protección de datos: claves de la guía de la AEPD
- Protección de marcas renombradas en el sector tecnológico: el “efecto extraclase”
- El mal uso de la Inteligencia Artificial en la empresa: consecuencias técnicas, legales y comerciales
- Protección de datos en cámaras de garaje: lo que debes saber antes de instalarlas
- Protección de datos en mirillas electrónicas: un caso resuelto por el Supremo
- Protección de datos en el caso Ter Stegen y el FC Barcelona
- Carteles en comunidades de propietarios y derecho al honor: sentencia del Supremo 1186/2024
- Los principios o «reglas de oro» de la protección de datos
- La AEPD recuerda que ya puede actuar ante sistemas de IA