Last updated: August 14, 2024
Curacao’s new AML rules effective September 2024 reflect a shift towards stricter compliance, mirroring practices in Malta and EU countries. Despite initial concerns, these updates aim to enhance regulatory robustness and align with international norms, impacting operators across diverse iGaming jurisdictions. Join our webinar for in-depth analysis and licensing insights.
Indeed, it is quite difficult to explain Anti-Money Laundering (AML) rules with passion and enthusiasm in the context of iGaming. Phrases such as KYC (Know Your Customer), AML (Anti Money Laundering) CDD (Customer Due Diligence), SoWs (Source of Wealth) seem to be misleading and cause discriminations regarding certain jurisdictions that are considered having low AML standards and much relaxed conditions. For instance, Curacao is among the places that have been considered as such for quite a long time.
However, a significant change is under process as Curacao is planning a comprehensive and drastic Change in its current AML regulation by August 31, 2024. This update has raised controversies amongst gambling operators that deem the new rules as hostile and especially so, given that Curacao’s updates are ordinarily slow up to this.
The amendments are intended to prosecute AML practices in Curacao to international standards; such as Maltese and EU territories that have been tightening their legislation. While this may be a radical shift to some of the operators, it draws attention to Curacao’s readiness to increase the shield and stringency of the iGaming markets.
This report evaluates that Curacao is experiencing considerable amendments in its pole settings, with the purpose of enhancing its AML standards in the gaming industry. These updates were developed as a result of Malta’s approach of aligning Curacao to international standards despite the initial worries of escalating regulative frameworks.
Some of the main elements of newly adopted Curacao’s AML regulations involve elaboration of clear cut offs of CDD, regulating that operators must perform CDD at the earliest time possible, which, in particular, shall be done prior to certain transactions equalling approximately to 2200 EUR. Also in the pipeline will be mandatory screening for sanctions and politically exposed persons (PEP) emanating from EU, US and UN lists.
The regulations also include a very specifics list of measures for detecting high-risk operations, recognizing the higher risk in crypt mödutations. Previously, the responsible person required to fill the position as an AML officer, and at least each gaming operator had to allocate sufficient resources to counter the risks efficiently.
Further enhancing compliance, Curacao expects operators to develop and maintain internal policies, documentation, and practice guides. These measures aim to ensure transparency and consistency across licensed entities.
Despite the perceived burden, these regulatory updates closely mirror standards enforced in Malta, other EU countries, and jurisdictions offering flexible licensing options. An upcoming webinar hosted by 4H Agency and Hipther Agency will provide a comparative analysis, exploring how these changes position Curacao alongside jurisdictions like Anjouan, Kanawake, and Tobique in the evolving landscape of gaming regulation.
As for the breadth and volume of AML regulations in the sphere of gaming in the various jurisdictions, Curacao and Tobique are recognised to be toeing the most rigorous policy. A similar assertion can be made about the AML standards in Kanawake that are also rather thorough but less detailed as those of Curacao. Major points of concern are the CDD thresholds of predominantly EUR 2000 followed by temporal differences which vary in terms of their timing after the player has registered on the company’s website.
It now also turns into the flexibility in approaches to the compliance, and all jurisdictions allow outsourcing of some of the AML functions to the third-party providers. Tobique’s guidelines are significantly more rigorous than any other solutions, that is why they add such measures as adverse media search to risky profiles.
On the other end of the extreme of good compliance we have Anjouan which has an AML framework that is not only outdated but fails to contain specific provisions for the gambling sector as such a space maybe attractive to operators who are used to operating under less compliant jurisdictions. However, as Anjouan is gradually seeking to diversify its economy and develop online gambling, such practices as the enhancement of AML legislation to match the level of Curacao’s reforms may become unavoidable.
The modifications of Curacao’s AML systems in recent years are a step up to more stringent rules to meet international requirements. Even though there was some apprehension created by the changes in the UK regulatory legislation, such modifications are viewed as helpful to improve the gaming industry’s compliance and sustainable competitive advantage. There will be a webinar on these topics in the near future where the representatives of the industry are going to discuss the changes and the possibilities for the future licensing in the context of 2024.
