Brussels, March 11, 2026 – Belgian financial regulators are set to intensify anti-money laundering (AML) oversight by publicly identifying banks that repeatedly breach compliance rules. This “name and shame” approach aims to deter financial institutions from lax practices amid rising money laundering risks across Europe. The policy shift follows a series of high-profile fines and signals a tougher stance from the National Bank of Belgium (NBB) and the Financial Services and Markets Authority (FSMA).
Background on Belgium’s AML Enforcement Landscape
Belgium has long grappled with AML challenges, particularly in its banking sector, which handles significant cross-border transactions. The NBB, as the primary prudential supervisor, has historically imposed fines for deficiencies in customer due diligence (CDD), transaction monitoring, and suspicious transaction reporting (STR). For instance, in 2023, BNP Paribas Fortis, Belgium’s largest bank, faced a €15 million penalty for “egregious” AML failings between 2014 and 2019, including inadequate controls for precious metals trading and incomplete transaction-monitoring rules. These shortcomings allowed potential illicit flows to go undetected, highlighting systemic vulnerabilities.
The FSMA complements this by focusing on market conduct and has issued regular newsletters urging AML compliance officers to adopt risk-based approaches. Recent editions emphasized updates from the European Banking Authority (EBA) on ML/TF risk factors, especially in crypto-assets, mandating banks to align internal policies accordingly. Despite these efforts, enforcement data shows persistent issues: since 2013, the NBB’s Sanctions Committee levied only a handful of fines on major banks, ranging from €50,000 to €350,000, often criticized as insufficient deterrents.
The ‘Name and Shame’ Policy Explained
Under the proposed escalation, regulators will publish lists of non-compliant banks on official websites, detailing breach types, durations, and remedial actions required. This transparency measure draws from EU-wide momentum, including the 6th AML Directive (AMLD6), which harmonizes sanctions and public disclosures across member states. Belgium’s move aligns with the newly established EU Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA), launched in 2025, which prioritizes high-risk jurisdictions and institutions.
Sources indicate the NBB’s horizontal analyses—such as its 2023 risk assessment of Belgian financial institutions and reviews of payment institutions’ tied agents—uncovered widespread gaps in identity verification and risk-based supervision. The policy targets “serial offenders,” where fines alone fail to prompt lasting change. Public naming aims to damage reputations, spur board-level accountability, and pressure shareholders, similar to tactics used by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority.
Recent Precedents and Fines Fueling the Change
High-profile cases underscore the urgency. BNP Paribas subsidiaries have been repeat targets: a Luxembourg arm drew a €3 million fine in 2024 for AML breaches, while Belgium’s NBB flagged ongoing precious metals risks. Broader EU trends amplify this: in 2025, Germany fined Varengold Bank €3.3 million and Sutor Bank €702,500 for KYC/CDD failures; Italy penalized Olinda/Qonto €390,000; and the UK hit Barclays with £42 million and Monzo £1.5 million for financial crime controls. These enforcement surges, amid EC infringement proceedings against 11 states for transparency gaps, have prompted Belgium to adopt naming as a next-level tool.
Domestically, the Belgian Financial Intelligence Processing Unit (CTIF-CFI) enhanced its suspicious transaction portal in 2024, streamlining STR filings. Yet, FinCEN Files revelations linked 365 reports to Belgium, with 179 involving ING Belgium, exposing underreporting. Regulators now view public shaming as essential to close these loops, especially with crypto and cross-border growth straining legacy systems.
Industry Reactions and Statements
Banking associations express mixed views. The Belgian Banking Association (BBA) acknowledges the need for robust AML but warns that naming could undermine market confidence without due process. “Firms have invested heavily in compliance; public lists risk stigmatizing resolved issues,” a BBA spokesperson stated, referencing post-2019 rectifications at BNP Paribas Fortis.
NBB Governor Pierre Wunsch emphasized deterrence: “Fines are tools, but visibility ensures cultural shifts. Banks must scale controls with risks.” FSMA Chair Jean-Paul Servais echoed this, citing EBA guidelines: “Crypto and fintech demand proactive ML/TF frameworks; non-compliance invites scrutiny.” Industry experts like Dries Cools and Kurt Van Raemdonck, in an NBB blog, praised Europe’s AML package for milestones in terrorist financing prevention.
Critics, including compliance consultants, argue the approach mirrors 2020 scandals where €600 million in global fines failed to curb recidivism, as boards prioritized profits over due diligence.
Implications for Banks and Compliance
For Belgian banks, the policy mandates enhanced documentation, audit trails, and STR timeliness. Smaller institutions face disproportionate reputational hits, potentially accelerating consolidations. SEO-relevant keywords like “Belgium AML fines,” “bank name and shame,” and “NBB compliance breaches” highlight searchable pain points for compliance officers.
Globally, this fits a crackdown trend: the NBB’s international focus includes FATF standards and UBO register access. Firms must now evidence risk assessments scaling with client profiles, payment methods, and geographies—omissions seen in recent cases.
Broader EU and Global Context
Europe’s AML evolution, post-2024 legislative package, integrates AMLA oversight with national bodies like NBB/FSMA. Belgium’s banks once proposed internal data-sharing to combat laundering, but regulators now favor public accountability. As crypto risks mount—per EBA updates—expect cross-border collaborations.
This policy, if implemented by mid-2026, could set precedents, pressuring laggards while rewarding proactive players. Stakeholders urge balanced enforcement to safeguard financial stability.