CFE Tax Advisers Europe has submitted two Opinion Statements in response to consultations being carried out by the EU AML Authority on draft Regulatory Technical Standards being developed under the EU Anti-Money Laundering Regulation (AMLR), contributing to the ongoing development of the EU AML Sing
CFE Statements on EU AML Authority Draft Standards on Customer Due Diligence & on Business Relationships, Occasional & Linked Transactions and Lower Thresholds
CFE Tax Advisers Europe has submitted two Opinion Statements in response to consultations being carried out by the EU AML Authority on draft Regulatory Technical Standards being developed under the EU Anti-Money Laundering Regulation (AMLR), contributing to the ongoing development of the EU AML Single Rulebook. The submissions concern draft RTS on:
In both Statements, CFE supports the objective of a harmonised and effective EU AML/CFT framework while emphasising that the final standards must remain practical, workable, proportionate and genuinely risk-based, reflecting the realities of tax advisory practice across Europe. The Statements stress that AML obligations designed primarily for financial institutions should not automatically be applied to professional advisory services without appropriate sectoral calibration. CFE highlights that the tax advisory profession contributes to AML prevention through long-term professional relationships, deep understanding of clients’ ownership structures and business activities, and the ability to identify inconsistencies and risks at an early stage. Customer Due Diligence Obligations Under Article 28(1) AMLR In its submission on Customer Due Diligence, CFE highlights the importance of preserving the risk-based approach and avoiding overly prescriptive compliance requirements that may create disproportionate burdens for non-financial obliged entities and SMEs. CFE identifies a number of specific concerns in the submission, in particular: Excessively prescriptive CDD requirements:Overly granular documentation, verification and monitoring expectations risk creating disproportionate compliance burdens without necessarily improving AML effectiveness. CFE recommends that the RTS more clearly preserve the risk-based approach and allow obliged entities to calibrate the level of information collected to the actual ML/TF risk identified. Financial-sector-oriented supervision models:Requirements designed primarily for banks, such as continuous transaction monitoring or extensive verification layers, may not reflect the operational realities of tax advisory services. CFE recommends that the RTS explicitly recognise the distinct nature of non-financial professions and confirm that monitoring obligations for tax advisers should focus on periodic review and reassessment rather than banking-style transaction surveillance. Beneficial ownership and complex structure assessments:Multi-layer ownership arrangements and cross-border structures risk being treated as inherently high-risk despite often forming part of legitimate commercial and tax arrangements. CFE recommends that complexity assessments focus on genuine risk indicators such as opacity, unexplained ownership arrangements or links to high-risk jurisdictions, rather than on structural form alone. Electronic identification and verification expectations:Mandatory or de facto reliance on electronic identification systems may not be proportionate or operationally workable for long-term professional advisory relationships. CFE recommends preserving technological neutrality and explicitly confirming that traditional document-based verification combined with professional judgement remains acceptable. Reliance on official registers and documentation:The Statement notes the importance of allowing proportionate reliance on official company and beneficial ownership registers where available. CFE recommends that the final RTS confirm that obliged entities may rely on such registers absent specific risk indicators suggesting inaccuracies. Legal certainty and proportionality: Divergent interpretations of customer due diligence obligations may create inconsistent supervisory approaches across Member States. CFE recommends clearer definitions, sector-specific Level-3 guidance and implementation measures calibrated to the realities of non-financial obliged entities. Draft RTS on Business Relationships, Occasional & Linked Transaction Under Article 19(9) AMLR In its second submission, CFE addresses the practical application of criteria for identifying business relationships, occasional transactions and linked transactions. The Statement raises several important concerns: Linked transaction criteria:Broad or overly complex linkage tests risk creating disproportionate compliance obligations for ordinary multi-step advisory work and recurring professional engagements. CFE recommends that linkage assessments focus on genuine indicators of intentional threshold circumvention and only on information reasonably available to the obliged entity within the scope of its professional mandate. Distinction between advisory services and transaction execution:Tax advisers generally provide legal and tax advice rather than execute transactions or handle client funds. CFE recommends that AML obligations and transaction triggers reflect the actual activities carried out by the obliged entity rather than the value of underlying transactions undertaken by clients. Business relationship criteria:The recurring nature of annual compliance work should not automatically be treated as evidence of an ongoing business relationship absent specific risk indicators or contractual continuity. CFE recommends that the assessment of duration and continuity remain grounded in the engagement terms and risk-based professional judgement. Operational and implementation burdens:Small and medium-sized non-financial practices may face significant compliance challenges without clearer sector-specific guidance and realistic transition timelines. CFE recommends that AMLA develop sector-specific Level-3 guidance in consultation with professional bodies and European federations. Lower customer due diligence thresholds:CFE welcomes the decision not to introduce additional lower thresholds beyond those already established in the AMLR framework. The Statement recommends maintaining the current approach unless further reductions can be supported by clear evidence of corresponding ML/TF risks. Continued CFE Engagement on the EU AML Framework Across both submissions, CFE calls for sector-specific guidance, legal certainty, consistency with professional secrecy obligations, and implementation measures that are operationally workable for non-financial professions. CFE remains committed to supporting the development of a proportionate, effective and harmonised EU AML framework and stands ready to continue engagement with European institutions and stakeholders throughout the implementation process. We invite you to read the Submissions and remain available for any queries you may have.
Fonte: CFE Tax Advisers Europe. Pubblicazione originale del 2026-05-11.