Federal Banking Agencies Propose AML/CFT Program Rule Overhaul
Summary
The OCC, FDIC, and NCUA jointly issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on April 23, 2026 to modernize AML/CFT compliance program requirements for banks and credit unions, aligning their rules with FinCEN's parallel amendments under the Bank Secrecy Act and AML Act of 2020. The proposal defines an "effective" risk-based program as one properly established and implemented "in all material respects," formally incorporating customer due diligence, independent testing, and U.S.-based AML/CFT officer requirements. Comments on the proposal are due by June 9, 2026.
“The AML/CFT program must be in writing and made available upon request.”
About this source
JD Supra is the legal industry's open library where US and UK law firms publish client alerts, regulatory analysis, and case commentaries. The Finance & Banking section aggregates everything published by partners at firms covering bank supervision, payments, capital markets, fintech, securitization, AML, and consumer finance. Around 400 alerts a month from across the bar. Watch this if you want primary-source law-firm thinking on the latest CFPB rule, OCC bulletin, FCA consultation, or Basel update, before it shows up in trade press. The signal-to-noise ratio is genuinely good because firms only publish when they have something to say to their own clients. GovPing pulls each alert with the firm name, author, and topic.
What changed
The proposed rule would substantially update AML/CFT program requirements for OCC-supervised banks, FDIC-insured institutions, and NCUA-regulated credit unions, introducing a formal definition of program "effectiveness" tied to risk-based design and material implementation. Key changes include codifying ongoing customer due diligence, mandating functionally independent AML/CFT testing, requiring the AML/CFT officer to be U.S.-based and accessible to FinCEN and the relevant agency, and allowing board-equivalent approval rather than requiring full board approval. The proposal also distinguishes between design failures and implementation failures for enforcement purposes, with isolated or technical implementation deficiencies generally reserved for significant or systemic cases.
Financial institutions supervised by these agencies should review current program documentation against the proposed framework, assess whether risk assessment processes incorporate FinCEN's AML/CFT Priorities, verify governance structures including AML/CFT officer location and authority, and prepare comments to influence the final rule. Non-bank financial institutions within scope may experience heightened regulatory expectations even if already subject to AML/CFT obligations.
Archived snapshot
Apr 24, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
April 23, 2026
Federal Banking Agencies Propose Overhaul of AML/CFT Program Rules to Reflect Recent FinCEN Reforms
Ethan Ostroff Troutman Pepper Locke + Follow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X ;) Embed
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) jointly issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to modernize anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) compliance program requirements. The proposed rule is intended to align their rules with FinCEN’s parallel amendments under the Bank Secrecy Act and the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (discussed here). FinCEN’s proposal lays out the big-picture requirements for AML/CFT programs under the Bank Secrecy Act, while the federal banking agencies’ proposal takes those rules and aligns them to their own supervisory and examination frameworks so they can actually oversee and enforce the requirements for financial institutions. Comments are due no later than June 9, 2026.
Defining an “Effective” Risk-Based AML/CFT Program
A central feature of the proposal is an explicit definition of what constitutes an “effective” AML/CFT program. A program would be considered effective if it is properly established in accordance with specified minimum components and then maintained by being implemented “in all material respects” on an ongoing basis. The rule emphasizes a risk-based approach that formally directs more attention and resources to higher-risk customers and activities and less to lower-risk areas, consistent with the institution’s risk profile. The banking agencies are clear that perfection is not the standard. Rather, the focus is on reasonable design and material implementation.
Core Program Components and New Emphases
The proposal retains the traditional elements of an AML program, but it sharpens and clarifies them. Financial institutions would be required to adopt written, risk-based internal policies, procedures, and controls that are reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the BSA and its implementing regulations. Those controls must be grounded in documented risk assessment processes that evaluate products, services, customers, distribution channels, and geographies, and that review and, where appropriate, incorporate FinCEN’s AML/CFT Priorities. Risk assessments must be updated when the institution knows or has reason to know that its risk profile has significantly changed.
The proposal expressly incorporates ongoing customer due diligence (CDD) into the prudential regulators’ rules, harmonizing them with FinCEN’s existing CDD requirements. Independent AML/CFT testing remains a requirement, and must be performed by parties who are functionally independent of the AML/CFT function they review. The AML/CFT officer must have sufficient authority, resources, and independence, and, reflecting new statutory language, must be located in the U.S. and be accessible to both FinCEN and the relevant agency. The rule also codifies the expectation of an ongoing employee training program suited to the institution’s risk profile and personnel responsibilities.
The AML/CFT program must be in writing and made available upon request. Unlike the current rules, which focus on board approval, the proposal would allow approval by the board, an equivalent governing body, or appropriate senior management, while preserving the expectation that boards continue to exercise meaningful oversight of AML/CFT risk.
Supervision, Enforcement, and FinCEN’s Expanded Role
The proposed rule also seeks to modernize supervision and enforcement. It draws a clearer distinction between failures to establish a compliant AML/CFT program (a design problem) and failures to implement an established program (an operational problem). Once a program has been properly established, enforcement or significant supervisory actions based solely on implementation deficiencies would generally be reserved for “significant or systemic” failures, not isolated or technical issues.
To promote consistency and a risk-focused approach, the rule would require the banking agencies to notify FinCEN before initiating AML/CFT enforcement actions or significant AML/CFT supervisory actions and to provide FinCEN with relevant underlying information. FinCEN would have an opportunity to review the matter and provide input, and institutions would be expressly permitted to share certain non‑public supervisory information with FinCEN in this context, subject to safeguards intended to preserve applicable privileges.
Key Takeaways and Next Steps
While the proposed rule does not broaden the category of institutions required to maintain AML/CFT programs, it seeks to add clarity to the applicable program obligations across different institution types. Consequently, certain non-bank financial institutions may experience heightened regulatory expectations. For banks and credit unions supervised by the OCC, FDIC, or NCUA, this proposal largely builds on existing expectations but raises the bar on documentation, governance, and demonstrable risk-based allocation of resources. Financial institutions should review how their current programs distinguish between design and implementation, how they document and update risk assessments, and whether governance structures, including the location and authority of the AML/CFT officer, align with the proposed framework.
Financial institutions may consider submitting comments, including by responding to the specific questions posed by the banking regulators to seize this opportunity to seek additional clarity and to shape how the new AML/CFT framework is actually implemented.
;) ;) Report
Related Posts
Latest Posts
- Nebraska Amends Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act
- CCPA Cybersecurity Audit: Part 4 – Whose Name Is on the Line: Risks, Enforcement, and Responsibility
- House Bill Would Create New Federal Regime for Nonbank Payment Firms
- California Intervenor Reforms Move to Final Review as CDI Submits Proposition 103 Rulemaking See more »
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
Attorney Advertising.
©
Troutman Pepper Locke
Written by:
Troutman Pepper Locke Contact + Follow Ethan Ostroff + Follow more less
PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA
- ✔ Increased readership
- ✔ Actionable analytics
- ✔ Ongoing writing guidance Join more than 70,000 authors publishing their insights on JD Supra
Published In:
AML/CFT + Follow Anti-Money Laundering + Follow Bank Secrecy Act + Follow BSA/AML + Follow FDIC + Follow Financial Crimes + Follow Financial Institutions + Follow Financial Regulatory Reform + Follow FinCEN + Follow Money Laundering + Follow NCUA + Follow NPRM + Follow OCC + Follow Proposed Rules + Follow Regulatory Requirements + Follow Risk Assessment + Follow Terrorist Financing Regulations + Follow Administrative Agency + Follow Finance & Banking + Follow more less
Troutman Pepper Locke on:
"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Sign Up Log in ** By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.* - hide - hide
Mentioned entities
Related changes
Get daily alerts for JD Supra Finance & Banking
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from JD Supra.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when JD Supra Finance & Banking publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.