Final DNB Wwft Q&As and Good Practices published
DNB published the new policy statement on the interpretation of the open standards under the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act (Wet ter voorkoming van witwassen en financieren van terrorisme, Wwft) on 8 May 2024 (see link, Dutch only). This new guidance provides Wwft institutions with practical guidance on how to comply with the various obligations under the Wwft. This final version follows a consultation round of the draft policy statement in October and November last year (see link).
This new guidance replaces the DNB “Guideline Wwft and Sw” (the Guideline) and some additional statements of DNB. DNB has published an overview of the superseded statements on its website (see link, Dutch only). DNB has also decided to temporarily maintain the current guidance on how to deal with obligations under the Sanctions Act 1977 (Sanctiewet 1977, Sw) until there is more clarity on how the new Sw will look like. DNB has also republished this part of the old guidance (see link, Dutch only).
Background
With this revision, DNB aims to provide practical and compact guidance. Each chapter consists of a brief explanation of the legal framework, supplemented by Q&As and Good Practices. At some points, DNB also discusses the rationale for certain legal standards. With the new format, DNB deliberately adopts a tone that is less prescriptive. The guidance explains that the Q&As prepared by DNB demonstrate how DNB views the interpretation and application of certain statutory standards. The Q&As represent an interpretation of those standards. Institutions can also comply with the Wwft in other ways, provided that they can demonstrate that their interpretation meets the requirements of the Wwft. The Good Practices contain suggestions or recommendations for institutions. Institutions are (also on this point) free to choose a different approach, as long as they comply with the laws and regulations and can demonstrate this.
Content
The structure and content of the final version of the guidelines differs slightly from the previously consulted version. For example, the final version has a different structure, and discusses risk management and training (chapter 2), the initial client due diligence (chapter 3), ongoing monitoring (chapter 4), data recording, retention obligations and personal data protection (chapter 5), and other topics (chapter 6). In doing so, DNB has followed the order of the various obligations in the Wwft itself. Also, for example, DNB has chosen not to provide further guidance on compliance with Wire Transfer Regulation 2 as opposed to the draft policy statement, and the final version no longer contains flowcharts.
It is noteworthy that on a number of topics, at the request of the market (see link, Dutch only), DNB went into more detail or upheld its old policy. For example, DNB has not abandoned its current policy on intra-group outsourcing. Moreover, in the context of outsourcing, DNB also notes that, depending on the circumstances, the use of a third party’s software may qualify as outsourcing. It is, according to DNB, the responsibility of the institution itself to assess this.
However, DNB’s (old) explanation of the definition of client under the Wwft has expired with the introduction of the new policy statement. In the new guidance document, DNB only refers to the (relevant) legal framework. It should also not go unmentioned that DNB on a number of points, as follows from the feedback statement, only partially (or not) adopts the recently developed NVB standards (see link). Presumably this has to do with the fact that DNB’s new policy statement has a cross-sectoral focus, and the NVB standards have been drawn up specifically for banks.
Conclusion
As mentioned above, DNB’s new guidance is of a more general nature. This has the advantage that Wwft institutions themselves have more room to interpret the various obligations under the Wwft. The disadvantage is that earlier specific, and useful, guidance from DNB has expired. The question is whether the sector is better off as a result, as it was already familiar with DNB’s explanation of specific elements and had adjusted its policy and working method accordingly.
We understand that the AFM will also soon come out with an updated version of its own Wwft and Sw guidance. It will be interesting to see if the AFM follows DNB’s lead, or maintains its more specific guidelines.