EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Biases in risk assessments under EU anti-money laundering law – evidence of the better-than-average effect from Germany

Lars Haffke

Journal of Money Laundering Control, 2022, vol. 26, issue 4, 751-766

Abstract: Purpose - Anti-money laundering (AML) obligations follow a risk-based approach, making their extent subject to the degree of AML risk. Money Laundering Reporting Officers (MLROs) must constantly assess risks, for example, by conducting annual risk assessments of the company. The purpose of this paper is to analyse whether MLROs’ risk assessments are biased in form of a better-than-average (BTA) effect, meaning whether they favourably assess their own company’s risk compared to that of the average competitor. Additionally, MLROs’ general risk assessment capabilities are researched. Design/methodology/approach - A survey of MLROs of German companies was conducted (n= 228). It tests for a BTA effect in participants’ risk assessments of their own company as well as for errors in risk assessments of other industries. Findings - MLROs’ risk assessments are biased by a BTA effect across all industries. They view their own company’s risk to be below that of the average competitor. Additionally, MLROs are not able to correctly assess industries’ AML risks compared to the national risk assessment. Risks were especially underestimated for high-risk industries. Biases were partially found to be higher among MLROs from the non-financial sector. Practical implications - Risk-based AML measures are likely to be at least partially ineffective, calling the risk-based approach into question. Regular trainings of MLROs need to include awareness for biases in risk assessments. A more stringent and effective supervision, especially in the non-financial sector, is called for. Originality/value - To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper is the first to show that a BTA effect exists among MLROs.

Keywords: AML risk assessment; Better-than-average effect; Illusory superiority; Bias; Risk-based approach; Germany; Assessments (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:jmlcpp:jmlc-03-2022-0045

DOI: 10.1108/JMLC-03-2022-0045

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Money Laundering Control is currently edited by Dr Li Hong Xing and Prof Barry Rider

More articles in Journal of Money Laundering Control from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:eme:jmlcpp:jmlc-03-2022-0045