Financial Integrity Monitor

Finland FI

Domains (D1–D6)
2
Sources
18
Role actions
8
Horizon <90d
1
Jurisdiction profile
Largely CompliantTier ARisk: StableMixed

Finland's AML/CFT Act implements EU 4th/5th AMLD; FIN-FSA, Police (NBI), Patent and Registry Office, regional state agencies and the Bar Association supervise obliged entities.

MoreFATF rates Finland compliant on 9, largely compliant on 28, partially compliant on 3 of 40 Recommendations (Oct 2023 re-rating), with DNFBP supervision and BO-information access still flagged as weak.

Key deficiencies
  • Weak/fragmented risk-based supervision of DNFBPs (lawyers, real estate agents, casinos) who rarely file STRs
  • Beneficial ownership register gated behind 'legitimate interest' access and a per-search paywall (~€7/company)
  • Åland provincial authorities do not participate in national AML/CFT coordination mechanisms
  • NPO sector terrorist-financing risk-mitigation Action Plan 2021-2023 not fully implemented
  • Legal continuity of Russian-origin critical-mineral (nickel) imports via a Finland-based Russian subsidiary despite allied sanctions gaps
Recent developments (18m)
  • FATF technical-compliance re-rating (Oct 2023 FUR) upgraded R.13, R.19, R.27, R.35 to Largely Compliant; R.28 remains Partially Compliant
  • Finnish court sentencing of a transport-company CEO for sanctions-busting exports of trucks/trailers to Russia (2026)
  • Teboil (Lukoil's Finnish subsidiary) forced into corporate restructuring after October 2025 OFAC sanctions on Lukoil
  • EU added Russia to the AMLD high-risk third-country list (Delegated Regulation 2026/46, Dec 2025), directly affecting Finnish obliged entities' EDD obligations toward Russian counterparties
  • Continued Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) interdiction operations by Finland against Russian shadow-fleet tankers transiting the Gulf of Finland/Baltic Sea

Law made at European Economic Area level that applies in Finland is covered once, on the European Economic Area page. This page covers Finland’s own layer: implementation, national authorities, national options and local enforcement.

Brief

Lead signal

Lead Signal

Read full brief

Lead Signal

Finland's national virtual-currency provider regime has been fully repealed and replaced by MiCA authorisation as the exclusive route for crypto-asset service provision, with the national transition period closing on 30 June 2025. Only seven companies filed complete MiCA applications by the 31 October 2024 national deadline, a small fraction of the prior registered population, creating a visible supervisory gap for legacy applicants whose authorisation status remains unconfirmed. This is a Confirmed structural finding directly from FIN-FSA, and it represents the most consequential financial-integrity development for Finland this cycle: the shift from a light-touch national registration regime to a harmonised EU authorisation standard changes both the supervisory architecture and the population of entities actually subject to Finnish oversight.

Alongside this crypto-sector transition, FIN-FSA's own updated sanctions risk assessment, published 12 February 2026, identifies payment service providers as the sector with the most room for improvement on sanctions and national freezing-order compliance. This is a proactive, self-identified supervisory priority from the primary regulator rather than an externally-driven finding, and it points to payment service providers as the sector most likely to see intensified sanctions-compliance supervisory attention in the near term.

Other Developments

FATF compliance ratings stand largely favourable. Finland is rated compliant on 9 FATF Recommendations, largely compliant on 28, and partially compliant on 3, a standing baseline position pending Finland's 5th round mutual evaluation. This compliance profile is broadly strong by FATF standards, with the partial-compliance gaps being the area most likely to be tested when the next evaluation cycle proceeds.

Legacy supervisory-concentration finding remains cited. Secondary commentary continues to cite an older FATF finding that Finland lacked ongoing AML/CFT supervision of lower-risk obliged entities, with supervisory effort concentrated on the largest banks. This finding is Uncertain in the current evidence base, sourced only from a Tier-3 secondary summary not independently corroborated against the primary FATF mutual evaluation report this cycle, but it remains part of the compliance commentary landscape ahead of the next evaluation.

Cross-Monitor Connections

The MiCA cutover and the seven-filer supervisory gap are shared directly with the crypto monitor's D5-equivalent tracking, where the same transition is read through a licensing-continuity lens rather than an AML/CFT exposure lens; the two readings of the same underlying fact reinforce each other. The payment-sector sanctions finding also touches world-payments' territory to the extent that FIN-FSA-supervised payment institutions are the same entities world-payments tracks for licensing and market-access purposes, though no world-payments claim this cycle specifically addresses sanctions compliance.

Outlook

The resolution of the seven legacy crypto-applicants' authorisation status is the most concrete near-term item to watch: until FIN-FSA confirms how many have secured full MiCA CASP authorisation, the true supervisory perimeter for Finnish crypto-asset activity remains unclear. FIN-FSA's payment-sector sanctions-compliance priority, identified in February 2026, should be expected to generate concrete supervisory action or guidance in coming cycles given its status as a self-identified regulatory focus area. Finland's 5th round FATF mutual evaluation, expected in Q4 2026, will be the next major test of whether the country's current compliance ratings and the legacy supervisory-concentration finding still hold.

weekly_brief_draft · JID FI
Domain intelligence (D1–D6)

D1 Sanctions Architecture and Evasion

Sanctions Architecture and Evasion

Continue reading

FIN-FSA's updated sanctions risk assessment, published 12 February 2026, identifies payment service providers as the sector with the most room for improvement in complying with sanctions regulations and national freezing orders. This is a Confirmed, primary-source finding from Finland's own financial supervisor, notable for being a proactive self-identification of a supervisory weak point rather than a finding surfaced through external enforcement or scandal. The obligation basis sits within the AML/CFT Act (444/2017), Chapter 3, section 10, which governs screening obligations for obliged entities including payment companies.

Read through the sanctions-architecture lens, this finding is significant less for what it says about any specific evasion pattern and more for what it signals about supervisory prioritisation: FIN-FSA has flagged payment service providers, rather than banks or other obliged-entity categories, as the sector requiring the most improvement. This distinguishes Finland's current sanctions-compliance posture from a pattern where enforcement volume concentrates on banking-sector screening; here the regulator itself is directing attention toward a non-bank obliged-entity category. No enforcement action against a specific payment service provider was identified this cycle; the finding remains at the risk-assessment and supervisory-priority stage rather than having yet produced a named enforcement outcome.

Outlook

Whether FIN-FSA's February 2026 sanctions risk assessment translates into concrete supervisory action, guidance, or enforcement against specific payment service providers is the item to watch. Given that this is a self-identified regulatory priority rather than an externally-forced finding, FIN-FSA is well positioned to follow through with targeted supervisory engagement in the payment-services sector over the coming cycles.

D2 Beneficial Ownership

Not covered

Beneficial Ownership is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

D3 Enabler Jurisdictions

Not covered

Enabler Jurisdictions is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

D4 Conflict Finance

Not covered

Conflict Finance is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

D5 Crypto / Digital Assets / Financial Innovation

Crypto / Digital Assets / Financial Innovation

Continue reading

Finland's national virtual-currency provider regime has been fully repealed and replaced by the European Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, with FIN-FSA confirming that the national transition period for virtual-currency providers ended 30 June 2025. This is a Confirmed, Tier-1 finding directly from Finland's financial supervisor: national legislation has been repealed and replaced, meaning MiCA CASP authorisation is now the sole basis on which a crypto-asset service provider may lawfully operate in Finland.

The transition carries a specific and material supervisory-gap signal. Legacy Finnish virtual-currency registrants who filed a complete MiCA application by the 31 October 2024 deadline could continue operating under national law until 30 June 2025 or a FIN-FSA authorisation decision, whichever came first. Only seven companies met this filing deadline. This is a Probable finding, reported in secondary coverage of the FIN-FSA transition announcement, but it corroborates the crypto monitor's own independent finding of the same seven-filer figure, giving the number cross-source support even though the underlying evidence tier for the figure itself remains secondary. The obligation architecture here runs through MiCA (Regulation (EU) 2023/1114), Article 63, governing the transitional and ongoing authorisation requirements for crypto-asset service providers, with VASP counterparties as the relevant customer typology this cycle.

The financial-integrity reading of this transition centres on the supervisory-continuity question: a shift from a comparatively larger, nationally-registered population to a much smaller MiCA-authorised population creates a period in which the population of entities under active Finnish AML/CFT supervision may be significantly smaller than it was under the prior regime, at least until authorisation decisions for the seven filers, and any subsequent new applicants, are resolved.

Outlook

The outstanding question is how many of the seven legacy filers have since received full MiCA CASP authorisation from FIN-FSA, and what happened to any that did not. Until this is resolved, the effective AML/CFT supervisory perimeter for crypto-asset activity in Finland cannot be precisely characterised. This is the single most concrete open item for the D5 domain heading into the next cycle.

D6 Compliance Technology & Active Defence

Not covered

Compliance Technology & Active Defence is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

D7 AML/CTF Regime

Not covered

AML/CTF Regime is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

D8 Commercial Activity

Not covered

Commercial Activity is not yet covered for this jurisdiction in this report.

Regulatory horizon
Consultation2026-Q4 · ±half_year

Finland's 5th round FATF mutual evaluation

Finland's compliance ratings (currently 9 compliant / 28 largely compliant / 3 partially compliant) are due to be reassessed.
1 dated · 4 pending date · baseline financial-integrity-2026-07-05
Role action cards
MLRO

FIN-FSA flags payment service providers as the sector most needing sanctions-compliance improvement, and Finland's crypto-asset regime has cut over to MiCA authorisation with only seven legacy filers.

MLROs at Finnish payment service providers should expect intensified sanctions and freezing-order screening scrutiny following FIN-FSA's February 2026 self-identification of this sector as its top improvement priority. MLROs at any entity with crypto-asset exposure should note that the population of MiCA-authorised counterparties in Finland is currently very small, with outcomes for the seven 2024 legacy filers unconfirmed.

3 evidence refs
Compliance

Two structural supervisory changes converge this cycle: a sanctions-compliance priority flagged for payment service providers, and a hard cutover to MiCA authorisation for crypto-asset service providers.

Compliance functions should review sanctions and freezing-order screening controls in light of FIN-FSA's stated priority, and confirm the MiCA authorisation status of any Finnish crypto-asset counterparties before relying on their continued lawful operation.

3 evidence refs
Legal

No material change this cycle.

No material change for this persona this cycle

Board

Finland's FATF compliance ratings remain largely favourable (9 compliant, 28 largely compliant, 3 partially compliant) pending the 5th round mutual evaluation expected Q4 2026.

The Board should note that Finland's standing AML/CFT compliance position is strong by FATF standards, with the forthcoming mutual evaluation the key event that could shift this rating either direction.

1 evidence refs
CTO

Finland's national virtual-currency registration regime has been repealed; MiCA CASP authorisation is now the sole legal basis for crypto-asset service provision.

Technology teams supporting crypto-asset integrations involving Finnish counterparties should confirm counterparty MiCA CASP authorisation status directly, since the legacy national registration status is no longer a valid basis for operation.

2 evidence refs
Risk

A supervisory-population gap in Finnish crypto-asset services following the MiCA cutover is a concentration and counterparty-risk signal worth tracking.

Risk functions should treat the small number of confirmed MiCA-authorised Finnish crypto-asset counterparties (only seven legacy filers, outcomes unconfirmed) as a factor in counterparty due diligence until FIN-FSA clarifies authorisation outcomes.

2 evidence refs
Operations

No material change this cycle.

No material change for this persona this cycle

Audit

The legacy FATF finding on thin supervision of lower-risk obliged entities remains uncorroborated against primary evaluation text and should be tracked pending the 5th round mutual evaluation.

Internal audit should note this finding is Uncertain-confidence and sourced from a Tier-3 secondary summary; it should not be treated as a confirmed control gap absent primary-source corroboration.

1 evidence refs
Decision lens
MLRO

FIN-FSA flags payment service providers as the sector most needing sanctions-compliance improvement, and Finland's crypto-asset regime has cut over to MiCA authorisation with only seven legacy filers.

Compliance

Two structural supervisory changes converge this cycle: a sanctions-compliance priority flagged for payment service providers, and a hard cutover to MiCA authorisation for crypto-asset service providers.

Legal

No material change this cycle.

Board

Finland's FATF compliance ratings remain largely favourable (9 compliant, 28 largely compliant, 3 partially compliant) pending the 5th round mutual evaluation expected Q4 2026.

CTO

Finland's national virtual-currency registration regime has been repealed; MiCA CASP authorisation is now the sole legal basis for crypto-asset service provision.

Risk

A supervisory-population gap in Finnish crypto-asset services following the MiCA cutover is a concentration and counterparty-risk signal worth tracking.

Operations

No material change this cycle.

Audit

The legacy FATF finding on thin supervision of lower-risk obliged entities remains uncorroborated against primary evaluation text and should be tracked pending the 5th round mutual evaluation.

Shared evidence: 3 refs
Scenario sketches

AMLA direct-supervision transition and cross-border obliged entities

Illustrative scenario for analytical orientation only. As the AMLA Regulation (Reg (EU) 2024/1620) moves toward operational direct and indirect supervision of cross-border obliged entities, alongside the directly-applicable AMLR (Reg (EU) 2024/1624) and per-state 6AMLD transposition, the supervisory landscape for EU member states such as Finland could shift from a purely national FIN-FSA-led model toward a hybrid EU-level structure for cross-border-active obliged entities. This is illustrative orientation on a structural architecture shift, not a prediction of a specific Finnish outcome or a statement of observed fact.

Illustrative scenario for analytical orientation only. Not compliance advice, not a prediction, and not a statement of observed fact.

Standing trackers (T1–T6)
TrackerStatusNote
T1 · Russian Sanctions-Evasion Architectureno_change
T2 · EU AML Package / AMLAno_changeFinland bound directly by AMLR; no FI-specific 6AMLD transposition delta surfaced this cycle.
T3 · FATF Grey Listno_changeJune 2026 Plenary removed Algeria and Namibia, added Bosnia and Herzegovina and Iraq; 22 jurisdictions remain under increased monitoring. Finland is not and has not been listed.
T4 · Beneficial-Ownership Register Statusno_change
T5 · Crypto & Digital-Asset Integritymaterial_changeFinland's national transition period for legacy virtual-currency providers ended 30 June 2025; MiCA CASP authorisation now exclusive; only seven registered providers filed by the 31 October 2024 deadline, with zero fully authorized Finnish CASPs reported mid-2025.
T6 · Sanctions Regime Divergenceno_changeNo FI-specific divergence from the EU autonomous-listing baseline surfaced this cycle.
Registers

Enforcement actions

  • A Finnish court sentenced the chief executive of a transport company to three years and eight months in prison for exporting trucks and trailers to Russia in violation of EU sanctions, as first reported by Finnish broadcaster Yle. 2 Jul 2026
  • Finland has carried out operations against suspected illegal shadow-fleet vessels in the Baltic in coordination with Joint Expeditionary Force allies, closing off transit routes used by Russia's sanctioned tanker fleet, complementing UK, Estonian and EU maritime enforcement. 26 Mar 2026
  • Following October 2025 OFAC sanctions on Russia's Lukoil PJSC, Finland-based fuel retailer Oy Teboil Ab was rendered unable to conduct normal business and filed for corporate restructuring at the Western Uusimaa District Court. 21 Nov 2025
  • Danish prosecutors continued to pursue their AML Act indictment against Nordea over $3.7bn of insufficiently investigated Russian-client transactions (2012-2015); reporting into 2026 shows the Nordic banking sector, including Finland's largest bank, working through years of associated costs and fines as the case nears resolution. 20 Apr 2026

Sanctions changes

  • The European Commission adopted Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/46 (3 December 2025), adding Russia to the EU's AMLD list of high-risk third countries with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies, directly raising the enhanced-due-diligence bar for Finnish obliged entities dealing with Russian counterparties across their long shared border and residual trade/energy links. 3 Dec 2025
  • The EU's 19th sanctions package (23 October 2025) targeted Russian energy, third-country banks and crypto providers, and was followed by further vessel and entity designations (41 shadow-fleet vessels, 18 December 2025; 120 further listings in the 20th package, April 2026) directly affecting Finnish-facing maritime and correspondent-banking exposure to Russia. 23 Oct 2025
  • OFAC's October 2025 designation of Lukoil (and Rosneft) had direct extraterritorial effect on Finland, forcing Lukoil's Finnish retail subsidiary Teboil into insolvency proceedings by November 2025 absent an equivalent EU-level designation of Lukoil at the same intensity. 1 Oct 2025

Regulatory horizon (register)

  • EU AML Regulation (AMLR) becomes directly applicable
  • AMLA first direct-supervision selection and start of oversight
  • Finland's 5th-round FATF mutual evaluation on-site window
  • FATF reports on underground banking/hawala and DeFi regulatory challenges

Active schemes

  • [HIGH] Russian shadow-fleet oil transit via Gulf of Finland
  • [HIGH] Nordic-Baltic correspondent-banking laundering conduit (Nordea/Danske legacy)
  • Russian critical-minerals sanctions gap via Nornickel Harjavalta
  • Beneficial-ownership register access gating in Finland
Sources
  1. FATF
  2. FATF
  3. FATF
  4. Financial Supervisory Authority (FIN-FSA), Finland
  5. FATF
  6. European Commission
  7. Council of the European Union
  8. OCCRP
  9. ICIJ
  10. OCCRP
  11. Global Witness
  12. Global Witness
  13. Bloomberg
  14. Bloomberg
  15. UK Government (Prime Minister's Office)
  16. UNODC / UNCAC Implementation Review Group
  17. European Commission
  18. FATF
Coverage gaps
Finland's beneficial ownership register requires users to de…
Finland's beneficial ownership register requires users to demonstrate 'legitimate interest' and charges a per-search fee (~€7/company), placing it among the more restrictive EU BO-transparency regimes despite EU 5AMLD's public-access intent.
FATF's technical-compliance follow-up (Oct 2023) maintained …
FATF's technical-compliance follow-up (Oct 2023) maintained Finland at Partially Compliant on R.28 (regulation/supervision of DNFBPs), reflecting continued weak risk-based supervision of lawyers, real estate agents and casinos, sectors that rarely file suspicious transaction reports.
The EU's failure to mirror the April 2024 US/UK ban on Russi…
The EU's failure to mirror the April 2024 US/UK ban on Russian-origin nickel/copper/aluminium leaves Finland (via the Nornickel Harjavalta refinery) as a legal transit and processing point for sanctioned-adjacent Russian metals, undermining allied sanctions coherence even as Russian troops build up on Finland's border.
FATF's 2021 follow-up noted that Åland provincial authoritie…
FATF's 2021 follow-up noted that Åland provincial authorities do not participate in Finland's national AML/CFT coordination mechanisms, leaving a minor but structurally unresolved coordination deficiency between mainland and autonomous-region supervision.
Finland's NPO-sector terrorist-financing Action Plan 2021-20…
Finland's NPO-sector terrorist-financing Action Plan 2021-2023 (developed following the 2021 NRA) had, per FATF's 2021 follow-up, not been fully implemented, with risk-based supervision and monitoring of NPOs at highest TF risk still inadequately targeted.
This baseline could not independently confirm, via a nationa…
This baseline could not independently confirm, via a national primary source, the precise national transposition instrument/date for the 6th AML Directive specific to Finland (as distinct from the AMLR, which applies directly). Finland's existing AML/CFT Act already reflects 4th/5th AMLD obligations, but the 6AMLD-specific transposition milestone requires verification against Finlex/Ministry of Finance sources at the next cycle.

Evidence

Confidence-tiered claims

Bound directly by EU AML Regulation (AMLR 2024/1624) as EU-27 Member State; FIN-FSA supervises obliged entities; Money Laundering Clearing House (National Bureau of Investigation) is the national FIU; FATF 2023 follow-up rates Finland compliant on 9, largely compliant on 28, partially compliant on 3 Recommendations SRC-fim-FI-002
Probable · 1 source