12 November 2025
FATF ¦ R.2 National Cooperation and Coordination
Recommendation 2: Strengthening National Cooperation and Coordination in AML/CFT/CPF
Effective national responses to money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation require more than individual laws or isolated agency efforts. Recommendation 2 focuses on creating and maintaining national anti-money laundering, counter-financing of terrorism and counter-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (AML/CFT/CPF) policies that are risk-informed, regularly reviewed and driven by clear leadership. Without a designated authority or an established coordination mechanism, gaps arise: intelligence does not reach investigators in time, supervisors miss emerging threats, and policy-makers lack a holistic view of national vulnerabilities. A structured inter-agency framework closes those gaps by aligning priorities, clarifying responsibilities, and enabling timely operational cooperation.
Designating leadership and building the framework
Countries should designate one or more authorities responsible for setting national AML/CFT/CPF policy and ensuring cooperation across agencies. That leadership can take the form of a single coordinating body or several specialized frameworks tailored to ML, TF and PF risks. The designated authority must have the mandate to convene relevant stakeholders, drive periodic reviews of risk assessments and policies, and monitor implementation across the whole national framework. Leadership is not merely symbolic: it must include authority to set priorities, resolve jurisdictional frictions, and ensure accountability for delivering operational outcomes.
Who belongs in the national architecture
A functioning national framework brings together the full range of competent authorities whose mandates intersect with financial crime risks. Typical participants include central government departments (finance, trade, justice, home affairs, foreign affairs), law enforcement, asset recovery and prosecution offices, the financial intelligence unit, security and intelligence services, customs and border agencies, financial and non-financial supervisors and self-regulatory organizations, tax authorities, import/export control bodies, company registries and beneficial ownership registries where they exist. Inclusion should be risk-based and flexible: countries must ensure the set of participants reflects national institutional arrangements and the specific threats identified in the national risk assessment.
Mechanisms for timely operational cooperation and information exchange
Recommendation 2 emphasizes not only policy coordination but practical, operational cooperation. Mechanisms must support both proactive information sharing and rapid responses to requests. Effective arrangements include clear articulation of each agency’s role, the information they need and the sources they can access; standardized formats and secure channels for data exchange; and practical tools such as joint task forces, shared data platforms or co-located teams for case work. These mechanisms reduce delays, prevent duplication, and enable combined use of financial intelligence, investigative capabilities and regulatory oversight.
Ensuring compatibility with data protection and other legal frameworks
Cooperation must operate within the boundaries of privacy, data protection, and other national legal constraints such as data localisation rules. Recommendation 2 requires authorities to build coordination arrangements that are compatible with those rules, ensuring that information sharing is lawful, proportionate and secure. This means designing protocols for classification, retention, access control and cross-agency queries that satisfy both operational needs and legal privacy obligations. Where necessary, legal or procedural adjustments should be made to remove barriers while safeguarding fundamental rights.
Keeping policies risk-informed and regularly reviewed
National AML/CFT/CPF policies should be informed by up-to-date risk assessments and subject to regular review. Risk intelligence evolves as criminal methods change, technologies develop and geopolitical conditions shift. The coordinating authority must ensure that new risks are incorporated into policy, that resource allocations reflect prioritization, and that stakeholders adapt operational practices accordingly. Regular reviews of the framework’s effectiveness — including testing information flows, joint exercises and after-action reviews of operations — help identify weaknesses and drive continuous improvement.
Practical steps for implementation
Countries can take several practical steps to implement Recommendation 2. First, formally designate the authority or mechanism responsible for national policy and coordination. Second, map the relevant agencies and establish clear mandates and points of contact. Third, develop legal and procedural instruments to enable timely, secure information exchange consistent with data protection rules. Fourth, create practical cooperation channels such as joint task forces, secure shared platforms and standard data formats. Finally, institutionalize periodic review cycles tied to the national risk assessment so policy and operations remain aligned with emerging threats.
Conclusion
Recommendation 2 places national cooperation and coordination at the heart of an effective fight against financial crime. By establishing a designated leadership role, bringing together the relevant authorities, building secure and lawful information-sharing mechanisms, and keeping policies risk-driven and regularly reviewed, countries can transform fragmented capabilities into an integrated, responsive system. That system improves detection, enhances prosecution and strengthens resilience against money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation financing.
FATF Ratings Overview
Luxembourg ¦ FATF Effectiveness & Technical Compliance Ratings
Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures
Luxembourg Mutual Evaluation Report, September 2023
This assessment was adopted by the FATF at its June 2023 Plenary meeting and summarises the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) measures in place in Luxembourg as at the date of the on-site visit: 2-18 November 2022.
Table 1. Effectiveness Ratings
Note: Effectiveness ratings can be either a High- HE, Substantial- SE, Moderate- ME, or Low – LE, level of effectiveness.
IO1 Risk, policy and coordination
Money laundering and terrorist financing risks are identified, assessed and understood, policies are co-operatively developed and, where appropriate, actions co-ordinated domestically to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism.
Substantial
IO2 International cooperation
International co-operation delivers appropriate information, financial intelligence and evidence, and facilitates action against criminals and their property.
Substantial
IO3 Supervision
Supervisors appropriately supervise, monitor and regulate financial institutions and VASPs for compliance with AML/CFT requirements, and financial institutions and VASPs adequately apply AML/CFT preventive measures, and report suspicious transactions. The actions taken by supervisors, financial institutions and VASPs are commensurate with the risks.
Moderate
IO4 Preventive measures
Supervisors appropriately supervise, monitor and regulate DNFBPs for compliance with AML/CFT requirements, and DNFBPs adequately apply AML/CFT preventive measures commensurate with the risks, and report suspicious transactions.
Moderate
IO5 Legal persons and arrangements
Legal persons and arrangements are prevented from misuse for money laundering or terrorist financing, and information on their beneficial ownership is available to competent authorities without impediments.
Substantial
IO6 Financial intelligence
Financial intelligence and all other relevant information are appropriately used by competent authorities for money laundering and terrorist financing investigations.
Substantial
IO7 ML investigation & prosecution
Money laundering offences and activities are investigated, and offenders are prosecuted and subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions.
Moderate
IO8 Confiscation
Asset recovery processes lead to confiscation and permanent deprivation of criminal property and property of corresponding value.
Moderate
IO9 TF investigation & prosecution
Terrorist financing offences and activities are investigated and persons who finance terrorism are prosecuted and subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions.
Substantial
IO10 TF preventive measures & financial sanctions
Terrorists, terrorist organisations and terrorist financiers are prevented from raising, moving and using funds.
Moderate
IO11 PF financial sanctions
Persons and entities involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are prevented from raising, moving and using funds, consistent with the relevant UNSCRs.
Moderate
Table 2. Technical Compliance Ratings
Note: Technical compliance ratings can be either a C – compliant, LC – largely compliant, PC – partially compliant or NC – non compliant.
R.1 Assessing Risks and applying a Risk-Based Approach
C – compliant
R.2 National Co-operation and Co-ordination
C – compliant
R.3 Money laundering offence
C – compliant
R.4 Confiscation and provisional measures
LC – largely compliant
R.5 Terrorist financing offence
C – compliant
R.6 Targeted financial sanctions related to terrorism and terrorist financing
LC – largely compliant
R.7 Targeted financial sanctions related to proliferation
LC – largely compliant
R.8 Non-profit organisations
PC – partially compliant
R.9 Financial institution secrecy laws
C – compliant
R.10 Customer due diligence
C – compliant
R.11 Record-keeping
C – compliant
R.12 Politically exposed persons
C – compliant
R.13 Correspondent banking
C – compliant
R.14 Money or value transfer services (MVTS)
C – compliant
R.15 New technologies
LC – largely compliant
R.16 Payment transparency
C – compliant
R.17 Reliance on third parties
C – compliant
R.19 Higher-risk countries
C – compliant
R.20 Reporting of suspicious transactions
C – compliant
R.21 Tipping-off and confidentiality
C – compliant
R.22 DNFBPs: Customer due diligence
C – compliant
R.23 DNFBPs: Other measures
C – compliant
R.24 Transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons
LC – largely compliant
R.27 Powers of supervisors
C – compliant
R.28 Regulation and supervision of DNFBPs
C – compliant
R.29 Financial intelligence units
C – compliant
R.30 Responsibilities of law enforcement and investigative authorities
LC – largely compliant
R.32 Cash Couriers
LC – largely compliant
R.33 Statistics
LC – largely compliant
R.34 Guidance and feedback
C – compliant
R.35 Sanctions
LC – largely compliant
R.36 International instruments
LC – largely compliant
R.37 Mutual legal assistance
C – compliant
R.38 Mutual legal assistance: freezing and confiscation
C – compliant
R.39 Extradition
C – compliant
R.40 Other forms of international co-operation
LC – largely compliant