On 5 July 2016, a legislative proposal for implementation of the Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (Directive (EU) 2015/849, the 4AMLD) in the Netherlands was published for consultation. In addition, on 31 March 2017 a proposal for a legislative proposal for implementation of the new requirement under the 4AMLD to maintain a public register of ultimate beneficial owners (the UBO register) was published for consultation.

Following these consultations, the legislative proposal for implementation of the 4AMLD, except for the UBO register, was published on 13 October 2017. The legislative proposal will have to be adopted by the Dutch Parliament (Tweede Kamer) and Dutch Senate (Eerste Kamer) before it can enter into force.

The date of entry into force is expected to be ‘as soon as possible’. This is in any event way after the date on which the 4AMLD had to be implemented in the Netherlands (namely, 26 June 2017). This has no consequences for the parties that are subject to the requirements under the implementation of the 4AMLD in the Dutch Act on Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing (Wet ter voorkoming van witwassen en financieren van terrorisme, Wwft) (so-called ‘institutions’). They have to comply with the new requirements as of the date of entry into force of the Dutch implementation legislation. The legislative proposal for implementation of the UBO register is expected to be published in December 2017.

The legislative proposal differs on some points from the consultation proposal for implementation of the 4AMLD. Among the clarifications are the following:

  • The clarification that the definition of UBO is laid down in the Wwft. The governmental decree will only clarify which persons qualify in any event as UBO.
  • Further clarification of the requirements for an institution that forms part of a group and has branches or subsidiaries in a third country.
  • Further clarification of the situations in which simplified customer due diligence is justified and enhanced due diligence is required.
  • The clarification that an institution has to take reasonable measures to verify the identity of an UBO instead of being bound to the verification requirements that apply in relation to the identity of clients.
  • Clarification when existing client files have to be updated to align those with the requirements under the 4AMLD.

Click here for the 4AMLD implementation legislative documents (Dutch).