The curated handbook for Belgium is in review. The obligation register below accounts for the retained units described in its scope statement.
61 retained records are accounted for within this scope. The default view shows only mapped obligations; use the disposition filter to inspect mapped, contextual, outside-scope and unresolved retained records. This register does not establish full-instrument or complete national coverage.
Loi du 18 septembre 2017 - Livre II complet (articles 8-63) et annexes I-IV
Belgian legislature / Moniteur belge / Justel
French Justel consolidation updated through 2026-07-28
61 provisions accounted for · 61 independently reviewed
Public-reuse rights not determined; private analysis only pending independent review.
Loi du 18 septembre 2017 - Livre II complet (articles 8-63) et annexes I-IV
Belgian legislature / Moniteur belge / Justel
French Justel consolidation updated through 2026-07-28
SourcePublic-reuse rights not determined; private analysis only pending independent review.
Download register PDFDownload register CSV
48 provisions match this filter
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
An in-scope entity needs an implemented, senior-approved control framework, not merely policies on paper. The framework covers AML duties, applicable transfer rules and binding embargo measures. Independent audit and recruitment integrity checks carry the stated proportionality qualification; awareness, approval and effectiveness review are separately required.
Establish effective, proportionate AML and embargo controls
Assess Train staff
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Separate highest-level responsibility from the operational AML function and verify the latter's integrity, expertise, autonomy and ability to propose resources. A natural-person entity takes the senior role personally. Combining the two roles is permitted only where the entity's nature or size justifies it; the omitted section 4 is not reconstructed.
Allocate senior responsibility and operational AML functions
Appoint a role Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Staff and relevant intermediaries need a distinct route to the appointed AML persons for confidential or anonymous reports of Book II breaches. This internal route does not replace suspicion reporting to CTIF or the separate supervisory reporting arrangements.
Provide an independent internal reporting channel
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Training must reach the staff whose work requires it and the entity's agents or distributors, cover both legal and internal procedures, and include continuing programmes. Content can be tailored to functions and exposure, but a one-off policy circulation is not the specified training programme.
Train relevant staff, agents and distributors continuously
Train staff
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Group membership requires an effective group-wide framework and useful, safeguarded sharing of the specified customer and transaction information. CTIF can restrict sharing suspicion reports. Foreign establishments must respect the stated local-law floors; legal barriers trigger additional risk measures and notice to the competent supervisor, not a silent waiver.
Implement group-wide policies and lawful information sharing
Report
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Before establishing or acquiring an overseas presence, an entity must check actual Article 54 designations. The prohibition covers branches, representative offices and direct or indirect subsidiaries conducting its activity, not a general ban on dealing with every third country.
Avoid prohibited establishment in designated territories
Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Only the listed establishment/perimeter categories require this Belgian contact point. NBB and FSMA categories have different rule-making and supervisory routes; the added crypto-service category is limited to establishments other than branches. Appointment conditions cannot be inferred solely from this statutory clause.
Appoint the applicable Belgian central contact point
Appoint a role Report
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Assess the entity's own exposure using its customers, offerings, geography and distribution, rather than importing a country score. Annex I variables and Annex III higher-risk factors are minimum inputs; Annex II lower-risk factors may be used. Relevant EU/national findings inform, but do not replace, that assessment.
Identify and assess the entity's overall risk
Assess
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Maintain an accessible and current assessment and show why the control framework fits identified risks. Changes at entity level can require individual customer-risk updates; updating one document without revisiting affected customer assessments is not necessarily sufficient.
Document, update and justify the overall risk assessment
Retain records Assess
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Combine identification, understanding purpose/nature and transaction monitoring, with customer-specific risk assessment informed by the entity-level assessment. High risk requires enhanced measures; low risk permits simplification rather than no diligence. The entity must be able to justify either approach to its supervisor.
Apply and justify individually risk-based due diligence
Assess Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
The listed categories must prevent anonymous, false-name and pseudonymous account or safe-deposit opening. The prohibition is categorical for those actors; the article does not authorize anonymous accounts merely because a transaction is low value.
Prevent anonymous or fictitiously named accounts and safe-deposit boxes
Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Relationship onboarding has no monetary threshold. Outside a relationship, distinguish linked transactions totalling at least EUR 10,000 from qualifying linked credit transfers or transfers of funds totalling over EUR 1,000. Those qualifying transfers also trigger checks at any amount when the relevant funds are received in cash or anonymous e-money; this is not a separate trigger for every cash receipt. Suspicion or identity doubts independently trigger identification. The narrow Belgian goods/services transfer carve-out requires all four conditions, and lower decreed thresholds may apply.
Identify customers at the precise statutory triggers
Verify Collect information
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
When a customer uses a representative, establish who the representative is and whether they can act for the customer. Customer identification alone does not verify delegated authority.
Verify customer representatives and their authority
Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Identify the relevant beneficial owners, reasonably verify them and understand ownership/control. Using a senior managing official as the identified owner does not avoid verification. The listed-company exception depends on the specified market and equivalent disclosure conditions, not merely a claim that a group company is publicly traded.
Identify beneficial owners and understand ownership/control
Verify Collect information
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
For the listed actors handling life-insurance contracts, identifying the policyholder is not enough: beneficiaries and applicable beneficial owners also require checks. Article 23 governs the latter. Article 30's third paragraph sets insurance-beneficiary timing; Article 31 expressly derogates only from Article 30's first and second paragraphs, not its third paragraph.
Identify life-insurance beneficiaries and relevant owners
Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
The e-money identification waiver needs demonstrated low risk and all five safeguards. Cash reimbursement/withdrawal or remote payments over the separate EUR 50 limits restore identity checks. The specified acquiring providers must not accept third-country anonymous cards lacking equivalent safeguards; EUR 150 is not a universal no-identification threshold.
Observe e-money waiver limits and anonymous-card acquisition conditions
Verify Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Identification data depend on person type and assessed risk. Low risk can reduce data items but not the certainty needed to distinguish the person; high risk requires stronger certainty and additional data if needed. Beneficial-owner and insurance-beneficiary qualifications are specific, not permission to omit all birth or beneficiary information.
Collect risk-appropriate identification information
Collect information
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Collection and verification are separate steps. Reliable independent evidence or the named electronic/trust-service routes must support identity certainty. Low-risk reduction cannot undermine that certainty; high risk requires verifying all collected information and closer scrutiny of the evidence.
Verify identity against reliable evidence at the assessed risk level
Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
For a new relationship with the specified legal entities, retain registration proof or a register extract. Registry access does not discharge beneficial-owner identification and verification by itself: additional, risk-proportionate measures are required even where an official register supplies names.
Obtain registration proof without relying solely on beneficial-owner registers
Collect information Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
The default is verification before onboarding or an occasional transaction, and before a representative binds the customer. Life-insurance identification begins when the beneficiary is known, with verification by payout and a separate assignment event. Article 31 is a narrowly conditioned timing derogation, not the default.
Complete identification and verification at the prescribed times
Verify
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Delayed verification needs an exhaustively specified internal circumstance, operational necessity, low risk and completion as soon as possible. For the listed entities opening accounts, including investment accounts, no specified outflow to the customer or representative is permitted before verification. Low risk alone does not unlock the account.
Constrain delayed verification and block account outflows pending checks
Verify Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Failure to identify and verify in time normally blocks onboarding/transactions and requires termination of an existing relationship, plus assessment of whether the failure creates suspicion. Alternative restrictive measures require actual supervisory regulation and the stated circumstances. The legal-professional exception is activity-limited, not a bank exception.
Refuse or terminate when identity duties cannot be met
Prohibited action Assess
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Understand the customer and intended use before acceptance or an occasional transaction, including reasonable checks for PEP/family/associate status. Failure to obtain the required understanding blocks onboarding or the transaction and calls for suspicion assessment. The e-money and protected legal-work qualifications have different conditions and effects.
Understand customer characteristics, purpose and PEP status
Collect information Assess Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Monitoring covers occasional transactions as well as relationships and can require source-of-funds examination. Customer data, PEP status and individual risk must be revisited on the stated events; inability to monitor can prevent or end business and prompt suspicion assessment. The text's Article 41(1)(1) reference is retained as written, without treating senior approval as the whole detection system.
Monitor transactions and keep customer/risk information current
Assess Verify Prohibited action
Original wording is not reproduced. Read the official source. This view contains RegCanary's reviewed analysis, not a copy of the source text.
The full translation is not reproduced. The plain-English explanation below is analysis, not a translation of the original wording.
Protect the persons making the specified internal alerts from retaliation as well as threats or hostility. This covers reports of due-diligence failure, not only a finalized external suspicion report.
Protect staff and intermediaries making internal AML alerts