MONEYVAL Forum: Bennie Burger’s Key Takeaways on Beneficial Ownership 

As a financial services firm, we understand the importance of risk, regulation and meaningful engagement with the wider financial crime prevention community. That is why JTC was proud to be represented at the MONEYVAL Public-Private Learning and Development Forum on Beneficial Ownership, held in Jersey on 25 to 26 June 2026. The event placed transparency firmly in focus, with discussion centred on how jurisdictions, regulators and firms can strengthen the effectiveness of ownership frameworks in practice.

The Forum brought together representatives from government, regulatory authorities, law enforcement, international organisations and industry to explore emerging financial crime risks and the importance of strong public-private cooperation in tackling money laundering, terrorist financing and other illicit activity. This included a focus on transparency, verification, access to reliable ownership information and the practical implementation of international AML/CFT standards.

Designed to encourage practical discussion and shared learning, the two-day event provided an important platform for policymakers, supervisors and industry practitioners to exchange perspectives on the challenges facing the global financial system. For firms operating across international finance centres, those discussions are particularly relevant as expectations around transparency, due diligence and financial crime risk management continue to evolve.

As part of the programme, Bennie Burger, Senior Director – Risk & Compliance, joined a panel discussion on complex corporate structures alongside representatives from both the public and private sectors.

Following the Forum, Bennie reflected on one of the most important questions raised during the discussions: what does an effective transparency regime really look like in practice?

Beneficial ownership transparency in practice 

One of the clearest themes to emerge was that transparency is no longer simply about collecting forms and documentation. The real test is whether information is accurate, up to date, understood and accessible when it is needed. When approached effectively, it supports better decision-making, stronger risk management and greater trust across the financial system. It also helps firms identify who ultimately owns, controls or benefits from a structure, which is central to effective customer due diligence and anti-money laundering controls.

Managing risk in complex corporate structures

There are many legitimate reasons why clients use companies, trusts, foundations, partnerships and cross-border arrangements. Complexity alone should not automatically be viewed as suspicious. The real risk arises where structures cannot be clearly understood or properly explained. Put simply, complexity is not a crime — but opacity should always prompt closer scrutiny. For risk and compliance teams, the priority is to understand the rationale, ownership and control behind a structure, rather than treating complexity as an automatic red flag.

A key part of assessment is understanding why a structure exists in the first place. Who benefits from it? Who controls it? Why have particular jurisdictions, entities or arrangements been chosen? What is the commercial, family, investment or governance rationale? If these questions cannot be answered clearly, the risk profile changes significantly. Clear purpose helps firms distinguish legitimate structuring from arrangements that may obscure control, ownership or the movement of funds.

Policies, procedures and documentation remain important, but the real measure is whether they work in practice. Are the right risks being identified? Are concerns escalated appropriately? Is enhanced due diligence applied where needed? Are inconsistencies challenged? And can firms demonstrate the judgement behind the decisions they make? Effective AML compliance depends on the quality of analysis and decision-making, not simply the existence of a completed file.

Compliance teams are essential, but they cannot carry responsibility for financial crime risk alone. Client-facing teams are often closest to the client relationship, the structure and the commercial rationale. That proximity gives them an important role in identifying concerns early, asking the right questions and escalating issues where something does not feel right.

Public-private cooperation in financial crime prevention

One of the most valuable aspects of the forum was its public-private nature. Regulators, supervisors, law enforcement, international bodies and industry participants each see different parts of the same picture. Bringing those perspectives together helps create standards and approaches that are more practical, proportionate and effective. For transparency to work, information sharing and cooperation between public and private sector stakeholders must continue to develop alongside emerging financial crime typologies.

What this means for risk and compliance

The conference reinforced a simple but important message: effective compliance is not about more paperwork. It is about better judgement, stronger collaboration and safer business. By focusing on the substance behind ownership and control, firms can support stronger financial crime prevention, more proportionate risk management and greater confidence in the integrity of the financial system.