What are the obligations under German AML law? | FinTech online course #20

Obligations under German AML law | PayTechLaw | FinTech online course | sutthinon602

Before answering this question, we must first clarify who has to comply with the German AML law. Legally speaking: Who are the obliged entities according to German AML law? The obliged entities are listed in Section 2 para. 1 no. 1 to no. 16 German Money Laundering Act (Geldwäschegesetz – GwG). We do not want to spoil the Pre-Christmas mood entirely by enumerating them all and will therefore focus on the most important ones:

The obliged entities are first all service providers who offer (regulated) banking services, insurances, financial services and payment services. Besides, depending upon situation, real estate agents, lawyers and goods dealers for particularly expensive goods are considered as obligated by the GwG as well. Companies that are not obligated are, for example, those that provide payment services but can invoke an exception, e.g. limited range, or group exception. If the obliged entity is the parent company of a group, these obligations may also extend to the entire group (Section 9 GwG).

Among others, the obliged entity is subject to the following obligations under German AML law:

Preparation of a risk analysis (Section 5 GwG)

The obliged entity must prepare a risk analysis in which it analyses the money laundering risks associated with its products. These risks vary greatly from product to product. To put it bluntly: a payment service that allows North Koreans to anonymously pay for high-quality products in Europe in cash carries a higher risk than a product without cash payment and with limitation on small amounts for domestic products.

Creation of internal security measures (Section 6 GwG)

Internal safeguards include the development of internal principles and procedures that define how money laundering risks are dealt with and how AML regulations are met. This in turn varies greatly depending on the respective business model of the obliged entity. These processes are usually recorded in a so-called money laundering manual. The security measures also include the obligor’s verification of the reliability of its employees. For example, the certificates submitted are checked when the employee is hired, or a police record is required on employment. In addition, employees must regularly attend training courses about money laundering.

Appointment of a money laundering officer (Section 7 GwG)

The obliged entity must appoint a money laundering officer. The money laundering officer is responsible for ensuring compliance with the money laundering regulations. He or she must have a minimum qualification, must be located directly below the management level, and must carry out his or her duties in Germany.

Identification of the contracting party and its representative (Section 10 para. 1 no. 1 GwG)

The obligor must identify his contractual partner and his representatives. The identification process consists of two steps. Certain data must be requested from the customer and then be verified. As an example, in the case of a natural person, the personal data must be recorded and then verified by means of an identification document. This is usually done in the “Postident” or “Videoident” procedure. The data from legal entities are verified by extracts of the commercial, article of association or similar documents.

The identification must take place at the time of the conclusion of the contract. Not only the customer, but also the persons acting on behalf of the customer (e.g. managing director, authorized signatory) must be identified.

Clarification of the beneficial owners (Section 10 para. 1 no. 2 GwG)

The obligor must identify the economic beneficiaries of each contracting party. In simplified terms, an economic beneficiary is any natural person in whose ownership or under whose control the contracting party ultimately stands or at whose instigation a transaction is ultimately carried out or a business relationship is ultimately established. Control is assumed if the natural person directly or indirectly holds 25% of the shares in the contractual partner or controls 25% of the voting rights.

Examination whether a PEP (politically exposed person) is involved

The obligor must check whether the contracting party or its beneficial owner is a PEP. In simple terms, a PEP is any person holding a high political office.

Monitoring of the business relationship / Obligations to keep records / Reporting obligations

The obligor must continuously monitor the business relationship including the transactions. The obligor must keep the data collected in the KYC (know your customer) process for five years and destroy it after ten years at the latest. The obligor must report suspicious transactions to the German Financial Intelligence Unit.

 

LINK TO THE HOMEPAGE OF THE FINTECH ONLINE COURSE

 

Cover picture: Copyright © Adobe/ sutthinon602

 

 



By continuing, you accept our privacy policy.
You May Also Like
Der Bafin-Jahresbericht 2025: Zwischen Cyber-Resilienz, Geldwäscheprävention und dem Blick nach Europa The BaFin Annual Report 2025: Between Cyber Resilience, Anti-Money Laundering and a European Perspective
Read More

The BaFin Annual Report 2025: Between Cyber Resilience, Anti-Money Laundering and a European Perspective

The BaFin Annual Report 2025 highlights a profound transformation of financial supervision. Alongside cyber resilience, DORA and ESG regulation, data-driven supervision, anti-money laundering and stronger European harmonisation are moving centre stage. At the same time, requirements for governance, IT structures and management accountability are increasing significantly.
Read More
Kreditwürdigkeitsprüfung unter der CCD2: Was sich jetzt konkret ändert | ALLES LEGAL #135 Creditworthiness Assessments under CCD2: What Is Changing in Practice | ALLES LEGAL #135
Read More

Creditworthiness Assessments under CCD2: What Is Changing in Practice | ALLES LEGAL #135

The new Consumer Credit Directive CCD2 significantly tightens the requirements for creditworthiness assessments. In future, credit may only be granted where repayment in accordance with the contract appears likely. Discussing what this means for banks, fintechs and BNPL providers, how scoring and automated decisions will be affected and why companies should now take a close look at their processes.
Read More
9. MaRisk-Novelle und DORA: Digitale Resilienz wird Chefsache 9th MaRisk Amendment and DORA: Digital Resilience Becomes a Board-Level Responsibility
Read More

9th MaRisk Amendment and DORA: Digital Resilience Becomes a Board-Level Responsibility

The draft of the 9th MaRisk amendment systematically integrates the requirements of DORA into the existing MaRisk governance framework without creating a separate national regime. As a result, digital operational resilience is becoming a core management responsibility: ICT risks are no longer viewed solely as an IT security issue but as part of overall bank management, risk strategy, and institution-wide governance.
Read More