ITS on cooperation for the purposes of direct supervision

For the first selection process starting no later than 1 July 2027, a dedicated data collection should be conducted in 2026 to identify the first obliged entities to be assessed. The cut-off to use for this dedicated data collection exercise should be 31 December 2025 to identify the obliged entites that meet the criteria set out in Article 12(1) Regulation (EU) 2024/1620. As from the second selection process in 2030, the financial supervisorsmeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; should, to the extent possible, use data that has been collected for other purposes to reduce the burden on the obliged entities. Where such data is not available or suitable, a dedicated data collection may be required. These other purposes can include data collected in view of the periodic risk assessment at the national level. By utilizing such pre-existing data, the aim is to streamline the process and minimize additional reporting requirements for obliged entities, thereby optimising efficiency.

To ensure the orderly and timely submission of information necessary for the selection process referred to in Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620, the Authority should communicate and, where applicable, publish all relevant details on deadlines, data exchange format specifications including data and metadata information, and related submission procedures. This proactive dissemination of information will enable obliged entities and financial supervisorsmeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; to adequately prepare and adhere to the reporting requirements.

To ensure the quality and integrity of submitted information, it is essential to implement robust validation rules, quality checks and plausibility assessments prior to transmission to the Authority. Field validation rules verify the technical accuracy of the data, ensuring compliance with required formats such as field length, numeric and text types, date formats, boolean values, positive integers, and the correct handling of empty fields. Data quality checks focus on internal consistency within the dataset. They verify that reported information is coherent and complete. For example, ensuring that no transaction values are recorded for services marked as not provided. Plausibility checks assess the logical consistency and realism of the data. These checks help identify values that, while technically valid, may be improbable or inconsistent such as drastic fluctuations in reported amounts across different reporting periods or unusually high or low figures that deviate from expected norms.

The Authority should provide a list of blocking and non‑blocking validations. Blocking validations typically cover structural checks, such as correct data types, mandatory fields, and expected value lists, that must always be satisfied for a submission to be processed and accepted. Non‑blocking validations identify potential quality issues that do not prevent immediate acceptance but should be reviewed by the entity submitting the data. These may include plausibility checks such as information outside an expected range that may indicate potential errors or other non‑material discrepancies that may require attention and correction when necessary.

To ensure transparency and accountability in the selection process of obliged entities for direct supervision, the Authority should communicate the results of this process clearly and promptly to the General Board in supervisory composition and selected obliged entities.

In the interest of legal certainty and procedural fairness, it is important that selected obliged entities are immediately informed of their rights and obligations, including options for legal recourse and appeal, upon notification of the selection decision. In particular, in order to guarantee the procedural rights of the selected obliged entities, they should be informed of the fact that the notification constitutes a decision that is subject to appeal with the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as of the date of publication of the list.

Publishing the list of selected obliged entities on the Authority’s website facilitates easy access to accurate information regarding those entities under direct supervision and the timelines involved, and ensures transparency and clarity for those entities.

The transfer of supervisory tasks and powers may occur from national level to the Authority and from the Authority back to national level following a selection process. Reciprocal arrangements are thus essential for ensuring the continuity of supervision as well as the seamless continuation of pending supervisory procedures or investigations.

To ensure the continuity and effectiveness of the supervision, the authority whose competence is to end should provide the authority assuming supervision with all necessary information to enable a comprehensive understanding of the main risks and supervisory history associated with the obliged entity. This transfer of information is critical to allow the authority assuming supervision to efficiently take over its supervisory responsibilities and to ensure that there is no disruption in the monitoring and mitigation of money launderingmeans the conduct set out in Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 5, of Directive (EU) 2018/1673 including aiding and abetting, inciting and attempting to commit that conduct, whether the activities which generated the property to be laundered were carried out on the territory of a Member State or on that of a third country; knowledge, intent or purpose required as an element of that conduct may be inferred from objective factual circumstances; and terrorist financingmeans the conduct set out in Article 11 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 including aiding and abetting, inciting and attempting to commit that conduct, whether carried out on the territory of a Member State or on that of a third country; knowledge, intent or purpose required as an element of that conduct may be inferred from objective factual circumstances; risks.

To ensure efficiency and consistency of supervision, the authority assuming supervision may decide to takeover pending supervisory procedures or investigations when there is a transfer of supervisory tasks and powers between financial supervisorsmeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; and the Authority. The authority assuming supervision should take into account its capacity and resources before taking the decision of taking over a pending supervisory procedure or investigation.

In the case of groupsmeans a group of undertakings which consists of a parent undertaking, its subsidiaries, as well as undertakings linked to each other by a relationship within the meaning of Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU;, consistent with the identification of the entire groupmeans a group of undertakings which consists of a parent undertaking, its subsidiaries, as well as undertakings linked to each other by a relationship within the meaning of Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU; as a selected obliged entity, the arrangements outlined in Articles 9, 10 and 11 should apply to the Authority and to each relevant financial supervisormeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; in the Member States where the selected obliged entity operates, on a bilateral basis.

To ensure the effective transfer and continuity of supervision when there is a change in competence between the Authority and financial supervisorsmeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620;, it is imperative that comprehensive and timely communication is maintained. The authority whose competence ends should promptly inform the authority assuming supervision of all pending supervisory procedure or investigation, including their respective status. This exchange of information is crucial not only for transparency but also for facilitating informed decision-making by the authority assuming supervision.

At the moment of transferring supervision between a financial supervisormeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; and the Authority, supervisory procedures and investigations on a selected obliged entity may be pending. Such procedures and investigations may include any ongoing actions regarding potential non-compliance with AML/CFT obligations or any supervisory activity which may be directed towards preparing the issuance of a supervisory decision, including the imposition of administrative measures, pecuniary sanctions and periodic penalty payments, addressed to one or more obliged entities or individuals. To ensure effectiveness of supervisory actions, and given the fact that supervisory procedures or investigations remain pending from their formal initiation until a final decision is reached, it is important to ensure precise coordination during changes in supervisory competence to maintain continuity and certainty vis-à-vis the selected obliged entity.

To promote impartiality and foster supervisory convergence, the JST Coordinator should be subject to rotation. Such rotation shall not undermine the effectiveness or continuity of supervision. In duly justified cases, rotation may be adjusted. Any such adjustment shall be appropriately documented.

It is essential that all members of the joint supervisory team from both the Authority and the financial supervisorsmeans the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including AMLA when performing the tasks entrusted to it in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1620; ensure the effective and timely exchange of the information necessary for the performance of their supervisory task, as well as equal access to participation in meetings, discussions and other collaborative platforms relating to the supervisory tasks assigned to the joint supervisory teams.