Regulators across the globe are widening the scope of anti-money laundering (AML) and counter terrorist financing (CTF) obligations, extending scrutiny beyond traditional financial institutions to sectors such as manufacturing, exporters and property firms.
Napier AI, a provider of next-generation AML and financial crime compliance software, has delved into how to calculate the total cost of compliance for AML.
While fines are issued across industries, the heaviest weight of compliance expenditure continues to fall on banks, it said. In the UK alone, around 900 financial institutions shoulder sanctions control responsibilities, many of them long-established banking groups that have invested heavily in compliance systems and specialist teams.
For these organisations, understanding the total cost of ownership (TCO) for AML has become a strategic necessity rather than a theoretical exercise.
Recent findings from the Napier AI / AML Index highlight how geography and market structure can significantly influence compliance spend.
One factor is proximity to sanctioned nations. Poland, for example, faces elevated AML costs due to its geographical closeness to Russia while operating under European Union standards, Napier AI said.
Financial services hubs face their own cost dynamics. As founding members of the new Anti-Money-Laundering Authority (AMLA), France and Germany have committed to leading Europe’s enforcement agenda. Their status as major financial centres makes them prime targets for attempted money laundering, requiring significant investment in detection and prevention. While this drives high compliance expenditure, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) within transaction monitoring and sanctions screening offers a pathway to greater efficiency and potential reductions in TCO, it said.
The Index also identifies countries where regulatory support for AI in AML is seen as particularly effective. Singapore, the United Kingdom and Italy score strongly in AI/AML regulatory leadership, reflecting national strategies that encourage safe and controlled innovation through initiatives such as regulatory sandboxes and structured oversight. France, Germany and Poland have also shown year-on-year improvements.
Historically viewed as a cost centre, anti-financial crime capability is increasingly seen as a competitive differentiator. However, reducing AML TCO is not simply a matter of investing in automation. It requires robust governance, strong data quality and clear oversight frameworks.
The Napier AI / AML Index suggests that the ‘ideal’ ratio of compliance spend to money laundered now sits between 1.36% and 3.36%, revised down from last year’s 3–6% range. This adjustment reflects improved performance in higher-ranked markets, demonstrating that effective AML regimes can operate more efficiently than previously assumed.
Countries such as Canada, Spain, the UAE and Switzerland currently sit within this optimal range. Spain in particular stands out for balancing efficiency and effectiveness, ranking highly for TCO performance and AI/AML regulatory alignment despite experiencing one of the fastest compliance cost growth rates.
For more insights, read the full story here.
Read the daily RegTech news
Copyright © 2026 RegTech Analyst
Copyright © 2018 RegTech Analyst
