The EACB is grateful to have been able to provide comments on the EBA consultation and highlights the need to continue consulting the industry when drafting level 2 and 3 measures of the AML legislative package.
We would like to see a number of clarifications on various topics related to the four draft RTS (namely the RTS on the assessment inherent and residual risk profile for obliged entities - Article 40(2) AMLD, the RTS on the risk assessment for the purpose of direct supervision - Article 12(7) AMLAR, the RTS on Customer Due Diligence - Article 28(1) AMLR, and the RTS on pecuniary sanctions, administrative measures and periodic penalty payments - Article 53(10) AMLD). For these four RTSs, preserving the co-legislators’ risk-based approach - rather than a purely principles-based one - is crucial for an effective AML framework.
Our response focuses on the RTS concerning CDD, and requests clarification on this RTS on several points, including the timing of the RTS’s entry into force, the importance of not broadening the AML legislative package provisions, and the need to define certain concepts (such as “person purporting to act” and “senior managing officials”). Additionally, we seek guidance on customer verification in non-face-to-face contexts and emphasize the necessity of maintaining flexibility for obliged entities when implementing Customer Due Diligence, Simplified Due Diligence, and Enhanced Due Diligence requirements.
The EACB would have also welcomed the opportunity to comment on the RTS under Article 16(4) AMLR on the development of guidance on “group-wide policies, procedures, and controls, including minimum standards for information sharing and criteria for identifying the parent undertaking”. Cooperative banks emphasize the need to ensure the diversity of banking models by further clarifying the definition of "group" and insert examples of banking groups when drafting the RTS on group-wide policies.
Please download the EACB response to see our full comments.