Complex rules, clearly seen.
What is already in force, what applies next, and what AMLA still has to deliver, alongside the FATF and MONEYVAL meeting weeks where listings and evaluations are decided. Dates written into the legislation are kept separate from dates calculated by running the procedural clocks it sets, so you can see what is safe to plan on.
Published or statutory date Estimated from the legal timetable Scheduled meeting, not a legal deadline
A Regulation applies directly and identically in every Member State on the date it gives; no national law stands between it and your firm. A Directive binds Member States to a result but must first be written into twenty-seven national laws, so the date shown here is a deadline for governments, not the day your obligations change – and in practice the national texts arrive at different speeds and in different words. AMLR is a Regulation. AMLD6 is a Directive.
An act enters into force a few days after publication in the Official Journal: that is when it legally exists. The day it starts to bite can be years later. Entries here give whichever date you can plan against, and say which one it is.
Where the legislation sets a clock rather than a date – “within twelve months of entry into force” – the date shown is calculated by running that clock, not quoted from the text. Those entries carry a hollow dot and an estimated tag.
Upcoming is the default: it shows the last fifteen days, and never fewer than the five most recent entries however quiet the period has been. All brings back everything, as does the Show earlier entries link at the top of the list. AMLA narrows to AMLA’s own acts and deadlines. Estimates shows only calculated dates. FATF shows FATF and MONEYVAL meeting weeks together with the EU acts that implement their listing decisions – an EU act taken on the Commission’s own assessment is deliberately not tagged FATF.
These link to the Regulatory Tracker, where the same development is followed through the legislative procedure and mapped to the FATF Recommendations.
A resolution is non-binding. It puts Parliament's collective opinion to the Commission on the record, nothing more. Four points bear on AML/CFT.
AMLA moves closer to law enforcement.Para 12 Parliament wants AMLA brought into cooperation and data sharing with Europol, Eurojust, the EPPO and OLAF – not only on money laundering, but on corruption offences and on tracing, freezing, confiscating and recovering assets. The call comes with a condition attached: full compliance with fundamental rights and EU data protection rules.
Corruption and money laundering treated as one problem.Para 21 The strategy should address the links between corruption, money laundering, organised crime and asset concealment, rather than handling them as separate files.
Crypto, in the context of the MiCA review.Para 22 Parliament notes the growing misuse of crypto-assets, encrypted communication tools, AI and complex digital financial systems to facilitate corruption, disguise beneficial ownership and evade detection.
Investor residence schemes.Para 30 Parliament reiterates its call for all remaining schemes across the Member States to be phased out, citing their documented use as vectors for money laundering, tax evasion and corruption. This is a position it has held for years. Whether the Union has the competence to ban them is arguable, and the Commission is unlikely to step into that territory.
The Commission's text is expected in Q4 2026.
Paragraph references are to the resolution as adopted on 8 October 2026 – P10_TA(2026)0341 ↗
Abbreviations
A published reference, not advice to any particular firm; reading it creates no professional relationship.
Enquiries: office@theamlmonitor.eu · Legal notice · Privacy · Terms