Country Risk Analysis Framework: The Basel AML Index

 Country risk analysis in AML/CFT assesses a country's vulnerability to money laundering and terrorism financing, helping organizations and financial institutions make informed decisions about business operations and customer onboarding. This has three aspects such as :

ü  Assessing the money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF) risks related to the countries you deal with.

o   This forms part of the risk assessment that you are required to undertake prior to establishing your AML/CFT programme.   

ü  Determining whether a country has insufficient AML/CFT systems or measures in place.

o   Various requirements of the Act require you to apply measures to customers or situations involving a country that has insufficient AML/CFT measures or systems in place.

ü  Determining whether another entity is resident in a country with sufficient AML/CFT systems in place and supervised or regulated for AML/CFT purposes.

o   This is a requirement if you intend to form a designated business group with a member in another country, or if you intend to rely on an entity in another country to undertake customer due diligence (CDD) for you.

The Basel AML Index, Country Risk analysis framework of IMF, World bank , FATF Classification of Countries and also   Self-assessment etc provide  significant tools in this respect.

 

The Basel AML Index

Published annually, the Public Edition of the Basel AML Index ranks countries with sufficient data to calculate a reliable risk score. It is a snapshot of global ML/TF risks and progress by countries and regions over time.

This map displays overall ML/TF risk scores for the 152 jurisdictions included in the 2023 Public Edition of the Basel AML Index. Only jurisdictions with sufficient data are included. The maximum risk is 10.

The Basel AML Index measures the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing (ML / TF) in jurisdictions around the world. It is based on a composite methodology, with 18 indicators categorised into five domains in line with the five key factors considered to contribute to a high risk of ML/TF. The following five aspects get assessed

The Basel AML Index is a leading independent ranking of money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) risks around the world.

It provides risk scores based on data from 18 publicly available sources such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), Transparency International, the World Bank and the World Economic Forum. The risk scores cover five domains considered to contribute to a high risk of ML/TF:

1.      Quality of AML/CFT Framework

2.      Bribery and Corruption

3.      Financial Transparency and Standards

4.      Public Transparency and Accountability

5.      Legal and Political Risks

 

The Basel AML Index is developed and maintained by the Basel Institute on Governance through its International Centre for Asset Recovery. The Basel Institute was established in 2003 as a not-for-profit Swiss foundation. It is one of four “Associated Institutes” of the University of Basel.

The Basel Institute identifies its work as being focused in six areas:



a. Asset Recovery;

b. Anti-Corruption Collective Action;

c. Corporate Governance and Compliance

d. Public Governance;

e. Illegal Wildlife Trafficking; and

f. Public Finance Management 

 

 

The aim of the Basel AML Index is to provide a holistic picture of ML/TF risk. Risk, as measured by the Basel AML Index, is defined as a jurisdiction’s vulnerability to ML / TF and its capacities to counter it. It is not intended as a measure of the actual amount of ML / TF activity in a given jurisdiction.

The 18 indicators differ in focus and scope. Indicators are chosen based on several criteria, including their relevance, methodology, jurisdiction coverage, public availability, and the availability of recent data. The indicators and weighting are reviewed annually by an independent expert group.


Domain 1: Quality of AML / CFT Framework (65%)  

  • FATF:  Mutual Evaluation Reports and Follow-up Reports (35%) 
  • Tax Justice Network: Financial Secrecy Index (15%)  
  • US State Department: International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (Volume II) (5%)  
  • US State Department: Trafficking in  Persons Report (5%)  
  • GITOC: Flora, fauna, non-renewable resources (5%) 

Domain 2: Corruption Risk (10%)  

Domain 3: Financial Transparency and Standards (10%)  

  • World Bank: Extent of Corporate Transparency Index (2.5%)  
  • WEF: Global Competitiveness Report - Strength of auditing and reporting standards  (5%)  
  • World Bank: IDA Resource Allocation Index – Financial sector regulations (2.5%) 

Domain 4: Public Transparency and Accountability (5%)  

  • International IDEA: Political Finance Database – Political disclosure (1.66%)  
  • International Budget Partnership: Open Budget Index – Budget transparency score (1.66%)  
  • World Bank: IDA Resource Allocation Index – Transparency, accountability and Corruption  in the public sector (1.66%) 

Domain 5: Legal and Political Risk (10%)  

  • Freedom House: Freedom in the World – Political rights and civil liberties (1.67%)  
  • Reporters Without Borders: World Press Freedom Index (0.83%)  
  • WEF: Global Competitiveness Report – Institutional pillar (2.5%)  
  • WEF: Judicial independence data (2.5%)  
  • World Justice Project: Rule of Law Index (2.5%) 

 

Although the country risk score is established by 18 factors, the FATF Country Risk Analysis reports and lists play a significant determining role. If any of the 18 data sets mentioned above for any of the countries included in the ranking are not accessible, the corresponding country's overall score is determined using the data that is available. Only the "Quality of AML / CFT Framework" global average increased from the previous year, according to the examination of the main titles based on country averages; the global averages for the other 4 titles decreased. 


Some highlights from the Basel AML Index 2023 report : 

  • The average global ML/TF risk level increased from 5.25 in 2022 to 5.31 in 2023, where 10 is the maximum risk.
  • Risks increased in four of the five domains measured by the Basel AML Index: corruption and bribery; financial transparency and standards; public transparency and accountability; and political/legal risks. Scores for the quality of AML/CFT frameworks remained static. 
  • Analysis of data from the FATF shows a continued decline in the effectiveness of AML/CFT systems globally. Effectiveness scores dropped from the already low level of 30 percent to 28 percent over the last two years. Among the least effective areas are those that are key to AML/CFT: the misuse of non-profit organizations for terrorist financing, transparency of beneficial ownership, supervision, prosecution, confiscation, and measures to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Many of these areas are also problematic in terms of compliance, together with new technologies and the regulation and supervision of so-called “enablers” – designated non-financial businesses and professionals.
  • Countries are getting better at tracing and seizing illicit assets domestically. But permanent confiscations are rare – and even more rare when assets are hidden in a foreign jurisdiction. Stronger laws will help, but won’t solve gaps in implementation and crossborder cooperation.
  • We need to do better at preventing terrorist financing through bogus non-profit organisations. But for the sake of humanitarian assistance and human rights, it is essential to avoid collateral damage on legitimate organisations and the people they serve.
  • Countries need to supercharge their efforts to understand the evolving financial crime risks of new technologies like cryptocurrencies. Getting regulation, supervision and enforcement right is the only way to foster a thriving FinTech industry while protecting financial integrity, crypto users and investors.
Self-Assessment of Country risk analysis -AML/CFT

The nation may choose to conduct an analysis of other countries w r t the threats, vulnerabilities and risk it is posed from the   rest of the world and classify them. For example, Draft of a 2.0 travel ban of USA,  the countries on the list would be sorted into three different tiers: red, orange, and yellow.

Citizens from the 11 countries in the “red” category would reportedly be flatly barred from entering the United States. The 11 countries listed include Afghanistan, Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. The Times reported, though, that this list was formed by the State Department a few weeks ago and changes could well be made.

Citizens from the countries in the “orange” category 10 in all —which includes Haiti, Russia, and Pakistan, would have their visas heavily restricted. Per the Times' reporting, citizens traveling to the U.S. from these countries would be subjected to “mandatory in-person interviews” in order to receive a visa. 

The third category includes countries in the “yellow” groupwith 22 nations —meaning they have 60 days to address concerns from the Administration, or else each country risks being moved up to the other categories. Countries reportedly listed under this category include Cambodia, Zimbabwe, and The Republic of Congo.

Trump made promises on his campaign trail, stating his intention to restore the travel ban which caught much attention during its initial introduction during his first term. His signing of an Executive Order titled “Protecting The United States From Foreign Terrorists And Other National Security And Public Safety Threats” on Jan. 20, 2025 only served to reaffirm his intentions.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

National Risk Assessment (NRA): India

Customer Due Diligence(CDD) : Individuals

Periodic Updation of Customer Risk Profile