AFM 1 min read

FD-column Laura van Geest: 'Zie AI als klankbord, niet als beslisser bij geldzaken'

RegCanary analysis of a AFM publication

Representative image

Why it matters

RegCanary's analysis of what this means for regulated firms.

Greater access to AI-generated financial information can improve engagement, but inaccurate outputs, overreliance and echo-chamber effects may lead to poor decisions and unclear responsibility. Compliance teams should treat this as an AI governance and customer-outcomes issue: map where AI tools or third-party outputs could be perceived as advice, maintain human oversight and clear disclaimers, test for accuracy and bias, and include AI-related consumer harm in conduct-risk monitoring. Firms should also consider financial-literacy messaging and staff training so customers understand the limits of AI.

No immediate rule change is indicated, but firms using robo-advice, chatbots, comparison tools or AI-enabled support should review controls before scaling. The opportunity is to use AI responsibly for education, triage and support while preserving trust through human verification and transparent guardrails.

Who this affects

Sectors and firm types identified in the analysis.

  • General Regulation

Source

AFM

Original publication, 23 October 2026

Read the original publication (opens in a new tab) afm.nl

This is RegCanary's analysis, not the regulator's text. It summarises and interprets the publication above; it is not the AFM's original wording, and it is not legal advice. Always rely on the original source.

Share

Weekly Briefing

Get the weekly briefing.

The regulatory changes that matter, with RegCanary analysis of what they mean for your firm. Delivered every Friday. Unsubscribe anytime.

Need this tailored to your firm's permissions? Book a demo