Introduction
Recent amendments to the Federal Law for the Prevention and Identification of Operations with Illicitly-Obtained Funds (Ley Antilavado) aim to combat money laundering through enhanced controls. However, the way it has been designed and implemented has created uncertainty and concern among real estate professionals, who now face a stricter framework with increased responsibilities and unclear institutional support.
Small Brokers, Big Uncertainties
One of the most contentious aspects is the potential requirement for automated risk management systems, similar to those used by financial institutions. Although the law does not mandate that all subjects must use sophisticated platforms, in practice, many brokers—especially those handling few transactions annually—are unsure if they are obligated to implement them.
- Lack of secondary regulations has caused confusion regarding real thresholds, obligated profiles, and the proper way to comply without incurring penalties.
- The reform also mandates retaining identification files for 10 years, even in uncompleted transactions.
- “Previously, it was five years; now, starting July, it’s 10 years that information must be kept,” explained the consultant.
The reform also makes annual training and audits obligatory. “The training already mentions it must be mandatory, and separately, annual audits are required. Previously, only the financial system was obligated; other activities were optional,” explained Rodríguez Ambriz.
The Secretariat of Finance has transition periods from the decreto’s publication to issue general rules defining, among other things, when an external audit applies, who should use automated systems, and how training should be conducted.
Brokers’ Response to New Regulatory Burden
From the real estate sector’s perspective, the strategy to cope with this new regulatory load will be setting operational limits. “Knowing the real estate sector well, brokers will likely advise clients: ‘I can accept up to a certain point, why? To avoid filing reports and handle the rest through the financial system,’” pointed out the fiscal consultant.
According to Granillo, the risk lies in the reform penalizing those who already comply more than those who don’t. “Instead of encouraging formalization, the reform could deepen real estate informality by punishing those who are currently regulated,” he stated.
Key Questions and Answers
- What are the main concerns of real estate professionals regarding the recent Ley Antilavado reforms? Real estate professionals, especially smaller brokers, are uncertain about new requirements such as automated risk management systems and extended retention periods for identification files. They also lack clear guidance on secondary regulations, thresholds, obligated profiles, and proper compliance methods.
- What are the new obligations imposed by the reform? The reform mandates annual training and audits, extended retention of identification files (now 10 years instead of 5), and potentially the use of automated risk management systems.
- How are real estate professionals responding to these new regulations? Many brokers plan to set operational limits and advise clients on transactions that can be handled through the financial system to avoid increased compliance burdens.
- What are the potential consequences of these reforms for the real estate sector? There is a risk that the reform may disproportionately affect those already compliant, potentially deepening real estate informality instead of encouraging formalization.
