Corruption Perceptions Index 2025: key trends and Latvia’s position in the international context

In February 2026, Transparency International published its latest Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), one of the most widely used international indicators for assessing corruption risks in the public sector. The index covers more than 180 countries and territories, assigning scores on a scale from 0 to 100, where a higher score means a lower perceived level of corruption.

This indicator is particularly important for financial institutions, the non-banking sector, accountants, legal service providers, and other entities subject to the AML law, as the level of corruption directly correlates with the risks of money laundering, politically exposed persons (PEPs), and public procurement integrity.

Global trends: stagnation and increased institutional risks

The CPI 2025 results show that corruption remains a systemic problem in all regions, with only a small number of countries showing progress. The global average score has fallen to 42 points, and more than two-thirds of countries remain below the 50-point mark. This indicates structural stagnation and insufficient political will to implement reforms.

The analysis highlights that weaker democratic institutions, limited civil society, and insufficient oversight contribute to the risk of corruption and reduce transparency. At the same time, even countries with high scores can serve as hubs for international financial flows, indirectly contributing to corruption in other jurisdictions, including through illicit transfers of funds and complex ownership structures.

From an AML/CFT perspective, this means that jurisdictions with relatively good scores cannot automatically be considered low-risk countries—individual risk assessment and enhanced due diligence (EDD) are necessary, especially for PEPs and public sector contracts.

Europe: relatively high scores, but stagnant progress

European countries continue to dominate the top of the index, but in recent years the region has seen stagnation or even deterioration in results. This also applies to several traditionally strong democracies.

The Baltic states generally maintain a relatively good position, but there are still significant differences between them. Estonia maintains a significantly higher score, while Latvia and Lithuania are in the middle group, with experts pointing to shortcomings in lobbying regulation, political finance transparency, and whistleblower protection.

These factors are directly related to the risk of financial crime, as insufficient political integrity and a lack of transparency often contribute to an ecosystem of corruption and money laundering.

Latvia: situation in 2025 and dynamics compared to the previous year

According to published data, Latvia scored 60 points in the 2025 CPI, which is one point more than in 2024, when the score was 59 points.

Latvia moved up from 38th to 37th place in the ranking, but progress has been limited in the long term — results have not changed significantly in recent years and have remained at a similar level since 2021.

For comparison:

Experts point out that in Latvia, the result has fluctuated between 55 and 60 points over the last decade. Latvia also continues to lag slightly behind the European Union average of around 64 points, indicating a structurally higher risk of corruption compared to some other EU Member States.

What these results mean in the context of AML/CFT and sanction risk management

The Corruption Perceptions Index is not a direct indicator of financial crime risk, but in practice it is used as an important factor:

1. Customer risk assessment

Jurisdictions with stagnant or average CPI scores are often classified as medium-risk countries where in-depth customer research is required, especially:

2. Public procurement and political influence risks

Transparency International’s analysis indicates that insufficient political financial transparency and lobbying regulations are significant corruption risk factors in the Baltic region.

This means that transactions related to infrastructure projects, construction, energy, or municipal procurement require special attention from the compliance function.

3. Risk of international financial flows

Even countries with relatively good CPI scores can serve as transit jurisdictions for financial flows linked to corrupt funds in other countries.

This is particularly true for cross-border transactions, where risk assessment must take into account not only the customer’s jurisdiction, but also the economic rationale for the transaction and the structure of the beneficiaries.

Outlook: does Latvia have the potential to improve its results?

Latvia has set more ambitious goals in its national plans, but these have not been achieved so far, and experts point to the need for systematic reforms rather than isolated initiatives.

From an institutional perspective, the critical factors that may affect results in the coming years are:

These same factors also directly influence the level of financial crime risk and the confidence of international investors.

Conclusions

The CPI 2025 results confirm that the global fight against corruption is stagnating, and progress in Europe is also limited. Latvia remains in the middle of the pack, with a slight improvement compared to the previous year, but the long-term trend is minimal.

For entities subject to the AML/CFT law, this means that the risk of corruption in Latvia and the region remains a significant factor in assessing customer and transaction risk. On a practical level, this requires a consistent risk-based approach, in-depth research, and constant monitoring, especially with regard to the public sector, PEPs, and cross-border financial flows.

More detailed information on Latvia’s Corruption Perceptions Index is available on the website of the association “Society for Openness – Delna”:  International Anti-Corruption Organization Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index 2025 Analysis of Latvia’s results

Source: Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2025

Need help with customer EDD research and transaction monitoring? Write to us at [email protected]

aml.plus team

Use aml.plus Tips&Tricks and Be Ready for SRS Audit

Entrepreneurs often get really worried when they get a notice from the State Revenue Service (SRS) about checking if they’re following the Law on the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorism and Proliferation Financing (AML/CTF) and the requirements of the International and Latvian National Sanctions (Sanctions) Law, or, as it is also known, a SRS AML (Anti Money Laundering) review.

What can you expect from the review, and how can you prepare for it? If a business owner diligently complies with the requirements of the AML Law and Sanctions Laws, there is no reason to worry.

However, if you feel that something may have been overlooked, read our blog post and check yourself. If any of the points have not been fulfilled, it is advisable to rectify this as soon as possible.

So, make sure that you have:

1. submitted a report to the SRS on your type of activity as a subject of the AML Law;

2. appointed an employee, including from senior management, who is authorized to make decisions and is responsible for compliance with the AML and Sanctions Laws requirements, and reported this to the SRS;

3. performed and documented ML and sanction risk assessments in accordance with your type of activity to identify, assess, understand, and manage the ML and sanction risks inherent in your activity, including:

   3.1. determined the overall ML/TF risk;

   3.2. determined the overall sanctions risk;

4. developed an internal control system for ML/TF and sanctions risk management, providing for:

   4.1. the procedure and scope of customer due diligence,

   4.2. the procedure for documenting and reviewing with the customer, their country of residence, the customer’s economic or personal activities, the services and products used and their delivery channels, as well as the ML/TF and sanctions risk associated with the transactions carried out,

   4.3. the procedure for monitoring customer transactions,

   4.4. the procedure for detecting suspicious transactions,

   4.5. the procedure for preventing suspicious transactions,

   4.6. the procedure for reporting suspicious transactions to the Financial Intelligence Unit,

   4.7. the procedure for reporting violations or attempts to violate sanctions restrictions, as well as circumvention or attempts to circumvent sanctions restrictions, 

   4.8. the procedure for storing and destroying information and documents obtained during research and monitoring of customer transactions,

   4.9. the rights, duties, and responsibilities of employees in complying with the requirements of the AML Law;

   4.10. the procedure for ensuring anonymous internal reporting of violations of the requirements of the law and the evaluation of such reports, if, considering the number of employees of the obliged entity, such reporting is applicable,

   4.11. an independent audit function, if applicable, taking into account the risk of money laundering and terrorist and proliferation financing and the scale and nature of the economic activities of the subject of the law,

   4.12. requirements and procedures for regular review of policies and procedures in accordance with changes in regulatory enactments or the subject’s operational processes, services provided, management structure, customer base or regions of operation;

The SRS will also check whether you have:

5. assessed the reputation of the person applying for the position of responsible employee for compliance with the requirements of the AML law

6. provided regular training to the responsible employee and other employees in the field of AML and sanctions;

In cases where a suspicious transaction has been detected:

7. ensure that all documents, decisions, reports related to the detection, assessment, reporting or prevention of a suspicious transaction are in order.

Keep in mind that the SRS will not only check whether you have an internal control system in place, but will also make sure that you comply with the internal control system’s  requirements, so organize all documents related to customer identification, research (KYC, CDD, EDD), and monitoring, and make sure that you have assessed your and your customers’ ML/TF and sanction risks.

If you have any doubts about the compliance of your Internal Controls System with the current requirements of the AML and Sanctions Laws, or if you need to develop a new system, you can safely contact our experts by writing to [email protected]  or by calling 6000 7770.

aml.plus team

Changes to the EU list of high-risk third countries from 29 January 2026: what does this mean for AML/CFT in practice?

January 29, 2026, is an important date for AML/CFT professionals in the European Union — the updated EU high-risk third country list will come into force, directly affecting customer risk assessment, transaction monitoring and the scope of enhanced due diligence (EDD). This is not just a “list adjustment” — it is a clear message from the regulator about how the EU assesses international financial crime risks and what obligations it expects from responsible entities.

What is changing and why?

On December 3 and 4, 2025, the European Commission adopted two new delegated regulations — (EU) 2026/46 and 2026/83 — amending the list of third countries with strategic deficiencies in their AML/CTF systems. These changes will apply starting from 29 January 2026.

Important point: in the updated version, the total number of high-risk countries is reduced from 41 to 35, reflecting a dynamic and evidence-based approach in line with international assessments.

From January 29, the following jurisdictions will be added to the EU list:

From a practical point of view, this means one thing: any transactions, customer relationships or structural elements related to these countries automatically require enhanced supervision, including EDD measures, additional documentation, explanation of the origin of funds and more frequent monitoring.

Particularly significant — Russia’s inclusion in the EU’s high-risk list at this point reinforces the trend that risk management is based not only on sanctions regimes, but also on AML/CTF vulnerabilities (including risks of corruption, weak controls, shadow economy, and use of intermediaries).

Countries removed from the list:

The European Commission’s announcement indicates that several jurisdictions are being removed from the list:

Such changes often coincide with the FATF’s review of its grey list and progress in addressing strategic deficiencies, but this does not mean automatic risk exclusion for the entities concerned. From a AML/CTF perspective, removal from the list means that the relevant regulatory pressure will decrease, but customer risk assessment must still be based on actual risk factors (business model, transaction profile, UBO structure, etc.).

What does this mean for companies in Latvia and the EU?

In practice, the EU list of high-risk third countries is a direct trigger for the following obligations:

1. Mandatory application of enhanced due diligence to transactions and relationships with countries included in the list;

2. Enhanced transaction monitoring (especially international payments, correspondent banking chains, foreign intermediaries);

3. Additional documentation requirements (origin of funds and wealth, economic justification for the transaction);

4. Risk model adjustments (country risk coefficients, scenarios, automated alerts);

5. KYC/KYB data quality review, including UBO checks and sanctions screening.

Key conclusion

These changes confirm once again that the AML/CTF environment in Europe is becoming increasingly precise, dynamic, and enforcement-oriented. In 2026, country risk is no longer a “formality” — it is a practical tool that affects both the customer service model and reputation protection, as well as the maturity of internal controls expected by regulators.

If your organization has not yet integrated the update into its KYC/monitoring processes, January 29, 2026 is a date that cannot be ignored.

Need advice? Write to us at [email protected]

aml.plus team

Sanctions Enforcement Expands: A Latvian Case Underscores That EU Restrictions Target Services, Not Just Goods

A recent case in Latvia serves as an important reminder for compliance, AML/CTF, sanctions and risk-management professionals: EU sanctions against Russia extend far beyond traditional trade controls. They increasingly focus on services, expertise, and managerial involvement — areas where exposure is often underestimated.

On 8 December, Latvia’s State Security Service (VDD) announced that it has asked the Prosecution Office to initiate criminal prosecution against a Latvian national for providing prohibited consultancy services to Russian companies.

According to the VDD, the individual had signed employment agreements with several Russia-registered entities and served as General Director / Director, offering advice on corporate management, economic activity and taxation — all of which fall squarely within the service prohibitions under EU Council Regulation 833/2014.

Key Compliance Takeaways

1. EU sanctions restrict services — not only goods.

Regulation 833/2014 prohibits EU persons from providing management consulting, business advisory, accounting, auditing, IT consulting, tax advisory and multiple related services to Russian entities.

2. Employment does not create an exemption.

Even when acting as an employee, contractor, or director, an EU person is not allowed to offer prohibited services to Russian companies.

3. Individual criminal liability is real.

The Latvian case was launched under the national Criminal Law for violating EU sanctions — a direct reminder that authorities can pursue individuals, not only legal entities.

4. EU Member States are increasingly proactive.

Security and intelligence services such as VDD are actively investigating service-sector breaches, not solely traditional export-control violations.

5. Governance and management roles are high-risk.

Acting as a director, board member, or strategic advisor to a Russia-registered entity is highly likely to fall under prohibited activity.

The Bigger Trend: Sanctions Now Target Expertise

This case signals a wider regulatory shift: compliance exposure now extends into professional services, consultancy, remote employment, and cross-border corporate governance.

For multinational groups, this reinforces the need for:

As we move, it is evident that EU sanctions policy targets not only the flow of goods, but increasingly the flow of skills, knowledge and strategic influence.

Source: https://vdd.gov.lv/en/news/press-releases/vdd-seeks-prosecution-against-latvian-citizen-for-work-on-behalf-of-companies-in-russia

Be sanctions compliant with aml.plus team

When is Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) Required?

As we all know effective compliance management systems and robust internal control mechanisms are essential for mitigating financial crime risks. Companies must perform regular risk assessments, apply sanctions screening, and strengthen their internal control system to protect against legal and reputational threats.

1. Transactions with High Sanctions Risk Countries

If a company operates in jurisdictions that do not comply with EU sanctions (e.g., UAE, Turkey, China), sanctions checks and thorough compliance and risk management are mandatory.

2. High Priority Goods or Dual-Use Technologies

Transactions involving dual-use or high priority goods require documented risk assessments. Compliance with AML regulations and a strong internal control system are essential.

3. Delivery of Services or Software

Services such as logistics, IT, or software that may be linked to sanctions cannot be routed to Russia or Belarus. These cases require compliance software solutions and periodic re-checks.

4. Negative Reputation or Adverse Media Mentions

If a counterparty or its beneficial owners are flagged in adverse media, this indicates reputational risk. Businesses must apply reputation management, adverse media screening, and continuous media analysis.

5. Operations in High-Risk Industries

Sectors like energy, arms production, and financial intermediation are considered higher risk. Here, companies benefit from external compliance services and advice from compliance experts.

6. High-Value or Complex Transactions

Transactions involving unusually large amounts, multiple intermediaries, or “shell” companies require reinforced internal control processes and the involvement of compliance professionals.

How to Conduct Enhanced Due Diligence?

An effective enhanced due diligence process helps reduce sanctions, reputational, and financial risks. Establishing a transparent compliance management system and documenting each verification step are key to regulatory compliance.

1. Risk Assessment

•             Identify the transaction counterparties, end-users, transport routes, type of goods, and end use.

•             Design internal control mechanisms that define how sanctions and reputation risks will be evaluated.

2. Data and Documentation Collection

•             Collect registration documents, customs declarations, transport and export documents, and end-user certificates.

•             Use intelligent software solutions that automate data comparison and sanctions screening.

3. Public Information Cross-Check

•             Verify goods classification and sanctions applicability (EU Regulations 833/2014, 765/2006, etc.).

•             Perform sanctions screening across official lists (EU, UN, OFAC).

•             Conduct media analysis to identify potential reputational risks.

4. End-User Verification

•             Request end-user statements, verify authenticity, and cross-check with public sources.

•             Apply reputation management and adverse media analysis tools to assess possible sanction connections.

5. Ongoing Monitoring

•             For continuous business relationships, repeat due diligence regularly to ensure no change in risk level.

•             Implement ongoing monitoring systems to detect structural or jurisdictional changes.

6. Internal Control System Development

•             Assign a responsible person for sanctions risk management and define “red lines”.

•             Adapt the internal control system to the company’s size, transaction volume, and resources.

•             Ensure documentation and the involvement of compliance professionals.

7. Cooperation with Financial Institutions

•             Banks must verify the effectiveness of the internal control system and timely document submission.

•             Collaboration with compliance experts improves risk management efficiency and corporate reputation.

19th EU Sanctions Package: New Measures and Sectoral Restrictions

On 23 October 2025, the European Union published its 19th sanctions package in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ L 275).

It includes:

•             Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/2032 on restrictive measures concerning Russia;

•             Council Regulation (EU) 2025/2033 amending Regulation (EU) No 833/2014;

•             and updated acts related to Belarus.

New Criterion “k”

The 19th sanctions package introduces an additional criterion “k” for inclusion under the EU blocking sanctions.

It concerns support for or implementation of actions or policies that contribute to deportation, forced displacement or forced assimilation, including information and psychological influence or militarised education of Ukrainian minors.

Sectoral Sanctions and Key Restrictions

  1. Expanded definitions. Regulation 833 now includes the terms “crypto-assets”, “payment services” and “services directly related to tourism activities”.
  2. Export control. Forty-five new entities have been added to Annex IV.
  3. Export bans. Annex XXIII (Article 3k) now covers items such as roses, rhododendrons, azaleas, motorised toys, tricycles, scooters, dolls, toy strollers and puzzles.
  4. LNG prohibition. From 25 April 2026, new contracts for Russian LNG are banned; from 1 January 2027, a full ban on import and supply applies.
  5. Maritime restrictions. Annex XLII adds 117 vessels of the so-called “shadow fleet”, and a reinsurance ban applies to these ships.
  6. Special economic zones. Article 5ah prohibits relations with residents of SEZs, including Skolkovo, Alabuga and Technopolis Moscow.
  7. Financial systems. EU entities and subsidiaries are prohibited from cooperating with the Russian “Mir” and “SBP” payment systems.
  8. Diplomatic movements. Diplomatic and consular staff must notify travel within the Schengen Area at least 24 hours in advance.

Tourism Services Ban

The Council amended Article 5n of Regulation 833, introducing a ban on providing services directly related to tourism activities in Russia.

These services include:

•             travel agency and tour operator services, including passenger transport;

•             tourism information, consulting and trip planning services;

•             organisation of tours, accommodation, ticketing and baggage transport;

•             tour guide services;

•             advertising services linked to tourism activities.

According to the Regulation’s recital, the ban aims to reduce Russia’s revenue from such services and to discourage non-essential travel and leisure in Russia, especially in view of the heightened risk of arbitrary arrests and detentions of EU citizens.

Full details of the 19th EU sanctions package are available in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Information source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=23102025

Custom KYC questionnaires tailored specifically to you

aml.plus now offers a great opportunity to create individual KYC questionnaires. Users can choose to include only the questions and fields that are necessary in the questionnaires, customize or exclude entire sections, and set their own risk weights according to the specifics of their business and the requirements of their Internal Control System (ICS).

This functionality is essential for implementing a risk-based approach. Each company’s risk profile is different, and a single, standardized solution does not always ensure accuracy and efficiency. By customising questionnaires, it is possible to focus on the risk factors that are relevant to a particular company and the specifics of its operations. This achieves a better balance between compliance requirements and practical usability in everyday work.

Experience and the specific characteristics of each client’s business are important factors in the AML and KYC processes. Thanks to this new option, these nuances can be conveniently reflected in a modern and user-friendly format. This means that compliance specialists, company management, external auditors and regulators can work with the system in a much more understandable and efficient way.

Service price

The development of an individual questionnaire costs EUR 300 including VAT.

If you choose the aml.plus Enhanced annual subscription (EUR 360 per year including VAT), this functionality is free of charge.

If a company does not have an internal control system in place, aml.plus offers to develop one for EUR 970 including VAT, which also includes the Enhanced annual subscription and individually developed custom questionnaires.

aml.plus helps companies not only to comply with regulatory requirements, but also to organize their work effectively, taking into account risks, experience and specific business needs.

aml.plus is always on your side!

If you have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]

aml.plus team

How Illicit Actors Evade Sanctions: FATF’s Latest Insights

In June 2025, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) released a report titled “Complex Proliferation Financing and Sanctions Evasion Schemes”. This document outlines the increasingly sophisticated methods used by actors, especially those linked to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, to circumvent international sanctions and continue illicit financial activity.

The FATF’s analysis is based on case studies submitted by member states, and it identifies common patterns, vulnerabilities, and red flags. The report aims to help financial institutions, governments, and regulators better detect and disrupt such activities.

Key findings:

Recommendations

FATF urges countries to:

Financial institutions should adopt a risk-based approach and remain alert to red flags.

Source: https://www.fatf-gafi.org/content/dam/fatf-gafi/reports/Complex-PF-Sanctions-Evasions-Schemes.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf

aml.plus team

EU’s 18th Sanctions Package – Expanded Tools Against Russia’s War Machine

On 19 July 2025, the European Union published its 18th package of sanctions against Russia, continuing its response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. This package includes some of the most systemic and forward-looking measures yet—targeting Russian oil, banking, shadow fleets, and foreign collaborators, while also escalating pressure on Belarus.

Key New Measures:

1. Oil Price Cap Lowered and Made Adjustable

The EU has unilaterally reduced the oil price cap to $47.6 per barrel—15% below the global benchmark. Unlike previous caps set by G7 consensus, this package also introduces a flexible mechanism, allowing the EU to update the cap independently. Notably, the UK followed this reduction, while the US, Canada, and Japan have not matched the move.

2. Shadow Fleet Expansion

The EU has sanctioned an additional 105 vessels suspected of circumventing sanctions, bringing the total to 444 tankers banned from EU ports and waters.

3. Ban on Refined Oil Imports

Refined petroleum products derived from Russian crude are now prohibited, even if processed in third countries—except for key allies (Canada, Norway, UK, US, Switzerland).

4. Expanded Banking Sanctions

The EU fully banned 22 additional Russian banks, which are now not only disconnected from SWIFT, but also face a total ban on any EU-based transactions involving them.

Sanctioned banks include:

1.            Bank Rossiya

2.            Promsvyazbank

3.            Novikombank

4.            Sovcombank

5.            VTB Group (all units)

6.            VEB.RF

7.            Gazprombank

8.            Rosselkhozbank

9.            Russian National Commercial Bank

10.          Bank Otkritie

11.          Abros

12.          ABR Management

13.          Investcapitalbank

14.          RosEnergoBank

15.          Zest Bank

16.          Entities associated with the Rotenbergs

17–22. Other mid-tier Russian state or private banks (details in official regulation)

Additionally:

•             Third-country banks using Russia’s alternative SPFS messaging system risk secondary sanctions.

•             The EU warns of future exclusions and penalties if foreign institutions facilitate Russia’s war financing.

5. New Mechanisms & Clarifications

•             Secondary sanctions introduced: For the first time, foreign companies involved in Russia’s energy sector can face EU measures.

•             Exemptions revoked: The Czech Republic’s temporary waiver on pipeline oil imports from Russia has ended.

•             Transit exception: The EU still allows coal from Kazakhstan to pass through Russian ports, under a narrowly defined exemption.

6. Anti-Belarus Component

The EU added eight Belarusian military-industrial enterprises to its sanctions list. These companies produce UAVs, optics, fire control, and coordinate systems, directly supporting Russia’s war logistics.

Official EU Documents

The full legal texts were published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 19 July 2025:

Why It Matters?

This package reflects a shift from static deterrence to adaptive sanctions. Flexible oil cap revisions, secondary measures, and dynamic enforcement mechanisms send a strong message: circumvention won’t be tolerated. EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas called it the “most comprehensive package to date.”

Red lines in sanctions risk management: why are they important and how to define them?

Sanctions regimes have recently become increasingly complex and fluid, posing serious risks for businesses operating in an international environment. To help companies better manage these risks, the Financial Intelligence Service (FIU) has published guidance on “Managing sanctions risks when dealing with high risk countries“.

This guidance helps companies to design and implement an internal control system (ICS) to ensure compliance with sanctions regulation. One of the key innovations in this guidance is the concept of “red lines” – a clear and strict set of restrictions that define which transactions, customers or activities a company does not fully tolerate.

What are “red lines”?

“Red lines” are clearly defined conditions that help a company to exclude completely certain jurisdictions, partners, types of transactions or goods/services that carry unacceptable sanctions risk. They are like border lines – if a transaction crosses these boundaries, it is immediately rejected, even if it would otherwise appear commercially viable.

How to define “red lines”?

For a company to effectively identify and respect these boundaries, it is necessary to:

  1. Assess the company’s own scope and customer base.
  2. Determine the risk appetite – how much sanction risk is the company willing to take (or not take at all).
  3. Develop clear, documented criteria, such as:
    • Countries or territories with which no business is done,
    • Categories of goods or services where there is a high risk of dual use or sanctioned items,
    • Non-cooperation with legal or natural persons who cannot be fully identified or whose ownership structure is unclear.

Examples from practice

Why is this important?

“Red lines” are not just a formal document – they are a tool to help protect a company from:

Need help with ICS?

The amp.plus team is ready to help you design or improve your internal control system, including defining the appropriate red lines for your business. We work on the basis of FIU guidelines, international best practices and your specific needs.

Contact us to ensure your company is one step ahead of the risks.

aml.plus team
[email protected]