AML Enforcement Actions and Crypto Risk Supervision Expand
This Week in Global Compliance — AML Enforcement Actions and Crypto Risk Supervision Expand
February 13, 2026 — Week of 7–13 February
Executive Summary
The second full week of February reflected a widening supervisory perimeter, with AML enforcement actions and crypto-related risk oversight gaining renewed momentum across multiple jurisdictions.
Authorities in the United States and Europe advanced enforcement measures tied to deficiencies in customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and suspicious activity reporting. In parallel, regulators in Asia and the EU reiterated expectations that virtual asset service providers maintain AML and sanctions controls equivalent in rigor to traditional financial institutions.
Collectively, these developments reinforce a clear supervisory direction: control scalability, governance accountability, and digital asset risk integration remain priority themes for 2026.
Top Signals
1. AML enforcement underscores deficiencies in monitoring and reporting
Recent enforcement actions highlighted gaps in transaction monitoring calibration, customer risk assessment, and timely suspicious activity reporting, particularly in institutions experiencing rapid growth or operational complexity.
Why it matters:
Regulators continue to signal that scaling customer acquisition and transaction volumes without proportionate control investment constitutes a material governance failure.
2. Crypto supervisory expectations align with traditional AML standards
Supervisory communications this week reaffirmed that virtual asset service providers (VASPs) are expected to meet equivalent AML and sanctions standards as banks, including travel rule compliance, transaction monitoring, and sanctions screening.
Why it matters:
Crypto-native firms and institutions offering digital asset exposure must ensure alignment of compliance frameworks with evolving global standards, including cross-border coordination and data-sharing obligations.
Deep Dives
1. Enforcement — Transaction monitoring calibration in focus
Enforcement outcomes emphasized weaknesses in scenario tuning, alert backlogs, and escalation protocols, with regulators scrutinizing whether monitoring systems effectively detect higher-risk activity.
Practical impact:
- Conduct independent validation of transaction monitoring models
- Assess alert-to-SAR conversion ratios and investigation timeliness
- Strengthen governance oversight of monitoring performance metrics
2. Regulation — Integrating crypto risk into enterprise AML frameworks
Regulators reiterated that digital asset exposure must be embedded within enterprise-wide AML and sanctions risk assessments, rather than managed as an isolated product risk.
Practical impact:
- Update enterprise risk assessments to incorporate crypto typologies
- Ensure sanctions screening extends to wallet addresses and blockchain analytics inputs
- Align crypto onboarding and monitoring controls with broader CDD standards
Data Points
- Supervisory communications reiterated parity expectations between VASPs and traditional financial institutions for AML and sanctions compliance.
- Enforcement actions continued to cite transaction monitoring and SAR deficiencies as recurring themes.
Watchlist
- Additional enforcement targeting monitoring model effectiveness
- Further regulatory clarification on crypto travel rule implementation
- Cross-border supervisory coordination on digital asset compliance standards
- Continued alignment of AML governance expectations across banking and non-bank sectors
Sources
This briefing consolidates publicly available information from global regulators, supervisory authorities, sanctions bodies, financial intelligence units, and recognised news outlets covering the week of 7–13 February 2026.