According to individuals familiar with the matter, a key issue discussed at the agency’s first General Board meeting in Frankfurt was the limited role board members had in selecting AMLA’s executive leadership. Some members expressed frustration that the European Commission had already shortlisted candidates before the board could weigh in, leaving them in what one source described as a “rubber-stamp position” rather than an active decision-making role. There were also concerns that the final selection did not include sufficient representation from Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs), a critical component of AMLA’s structure. A source involved in the discussions told Dnews that without strong FIU representation, the agency risks becoming “a detached regulatory body rather than an active enforcer of anti-money laundering policies.”
Governance issues also emerged in the approval process of AMLA’s Rules of Procedure. Individuals familiar with the meeting said several board members were dissatisfied with what they viewed as a rushed process with inadequate consultation periods. A source described the consultation timeline as “so tight that it left little room for meaningful debate on key procedural aspects.” The lack of discussion, according to the same source, meant that fundamental issues such as decision-making frameworks, conflict-of-interest mechanisms, and coordination between national AML agencies and AMLA were not fully addressed before the rules were adopted.
Operational challenges were another major concern. The agency currently lacks dedicated headquarters, relying on temporary office space provided by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA). This situation is expected to continue until at least early 2026, limiting AMLA’s ability to establish an independent operational base. According to sources within the board, this lack of a permanent location is creating logistical and budgetary pressures, particularly as AMLA has committed to holding frequent in-person meetings. One source noted that while face-to-face discussions are necessary for effective coordination, “the current setup is financially and logistically unsustainable.”
A more fundamental concern, according to officials speaking to Dnews, is that AMLA has yet to define a clear framework for how it will coordinate with national FIUs. The agency was created to improve cross-border enforcement, but some board members are worried that without a structured approach, AMLA could become another bureaucratic layer rather than a central authority capable of leading AML enforcement across Europe. A senior official familiar with the discussions stated that “without a well-defined role for FIUs, there is a real risk that AMLA will struggle to translate its mandate into meaningful action.”
The first General Board meeting was meant to lay the foundation for AMLA’s work, but instead, it highlighted serious obstacles that could undermine its effectiveness. The sources who spoke to Dnews emphasized that unless governance procedures are clarified, transparency in leadership selection is improved, and a stable operational framework is put in place, AMLA risks failing to meet expectations at a time when Europe faces mounting threats from illicit financial activities.
