In earlier posts on this blog I pointed out that there are major deficiencies in the way the European Commission, the Dutch government and international institutions like the undemocratic FATF, treat the not-for-profit sector in relation to anti-money laundering (AML) and anti-terrorist financing (CFT) [*].

The European Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ECNL) is worried also and in the article What can CSOs do when they face abuse or over-regulation caused by AML/CFT standards? ECNL points out that AML-/CFT-legislation should not be misused to restrict civic freedoms. This this point of view is supported by FATF (though I wonder if they really understand the position of the not-for-profit sector in Europe [**]). The problematic attitude of governments / international organisations towards the not-for-profit sector is not only a matter of ‘far away’ and ‘non-civilized’ countries. It is also the case in the Netherlands.

As I wrote earlier, it is necessary that associations of not-for-profit organisations, like ECNL, scrutinize national and international AML-/CFT-legislation and when the concepts or legislation are inadequate provide governments and international organisations with counterbalance.

Notes

[*] Recently:

• Parlementaire onkunde met betrekking tot de not-for-profit | de verdachte stichting, 27 January 2021.
• Misdaadbestrijding door banken leidt tot excessen, not-for-profit ernstig benadeeld | Wwft, 23 October 2020.
• The OECD does not understand Dutch foundations, 22 August 2019.
• Not-for-profit in kwaad daglicht bij Europa | AML, CFT, 27 Februari 2018.
• Not-for-profit in het verdachtenbankje van de Europese Commissie, 27 July 2017.

[**] ECNL mentions a letter of FATF on the Serbian government, in which FATF seems to think that not-for-profit organisations (NPOs) only consist of organisation with ‘charitable’ activities. In the Netherlands a major part of public activities (like schools and hospitals) are the responsibility of the not-for-profit sector.