Guinea-Bissau — Country Risk Report

Guinea-Bissau (Africa • West Africa). Risk report as of the 19 Jun 2026 FATF plenary.

High country risk, with elevated corruption risk. Guinea-Bissau's country risk score is 6.8/10, placing it in the high-risk band. The principal driver is weak corruption, alongside rule of law and institutions risk. Guinea-Bissau is not currently FATF grey- or black-listed. Guinea-Bissau is not subject to comprehensive country-wide sanctions. Firms should apply additional scrutiny where exposure involves state-linked entities, restricted sectors, sensitive technology, dual-use goods or politically exposed counterparties.

Recommended treatment

Enhanced due diligence.

At a glance

• FATF status: Not currently listed (one indicator only; it does not set the overall country risk rating by itself)
• Comprehensive country sanctions: none identified. Targeted sanctions exposure: programmes in place, screen applicable lists
• Government effectiveness and rule of law: 6.4/10
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 21/100, rank #161 of 182
• Enforcement data: not yet assessed (no RegActions coverage)

Country Risk Score: 6.8/10 (High)

Higher score means higher country risk (global average 4.6). Full information available. Strong data coverage. Enforcement activity and CPI are shown for context but do not change the score.

All three parts of the score are available.

How this score was calculated

• Financial crime controls: 8.6/10 — 50% of this score
• Government effectiveness and rule of law: 6.4/10 — 30% of this score
• International sanctions: 3.1/10 — 20% of this score

Principal risk drivers

• Targeted sanctions exposure
• Corruption (WGI) — 7.9/10
• Rule of law & institutions — 6.8/10
• Voice & accountability — 5.7/10

Mitigating factors

• Not currently on the FATF grey or black list.
• No comprehensive country-wide sanctions programme.
• Comparatively stronger political stability (4.5/10).
• Risk is concentrated in specific counterparties, sectors and transactions rather than applying uniformly.

Business impact

• Customer onboarding (High): Additional ownership and control verification may be required.
• Payments and transactions (High): Review transaction purpose, counterparties and geographic routing.
• Trade and export activity (High): Screen goods, end users and potential dual-use exposure.
• Corporate clients (High): Assess state ownership, government links and political exposure.
• Ongoing monitoring (High): Apply alerts for ownership changes, sanctions and geopolitical developments.

Recommended controls

• Verify ultimate beneficial ownership using more than one reliable source.
• Identify state ownership, government influence and politically exposed persons.
• Screen entities, directors and beneficial owners against applicable sanctions lists.
• Apply enhanced review to technology, defence, telecommunications, financial services and dual-use activity.
• Document transaction purpose and source of funds where cross-border structures are complex.
• Escalate unresolved ownership opacity or adverse information to Compliance.

Enhanced due diligence triggers

• State ownership / control
• PEP involvement
• Sensitive / restricted sectors
• Opaque ownership
• Adverse media
• Dual-use goods & technology
• High-risk intermediary routing

FATF status: Not currently listed

Guinea-Bissau is not on the FATF grey or black list as of the 19 Jun 2026 plenary.

Sanctions: Targeted

• EU — targeted: Restrictive measures in view of the situation in Guinea-Bissau (source)
• UK — targeted: Republic of Guinea-Bissau sanctions (source)
• UN — targeted: 2048 Guinea-Bissau sanctions (source)

Source details

International sanctions by issuing body

• UN: Yes (Targeted)
• EU: Yes (Targeted)
• UK: Yes (Targeted)
• US: No

No means the complete UN, UK, EU and US review found no direct country-level programme. People or organisations may still appear on sanctions lists.

Government effectiveness and rule of law (World Bank 2024, percentile)

• Government Effectiveness: 25/100
• Regulatory Quality: 36/100
• Rule of Law: 36/100

Regulators and legal framework

FATF network

FATF network via GIABA.

• Inter Governmental Action Group against Money Laundering in West Africa

Last mutual evaluation: 2022 · report

National regulators

Regulator profiles not yet available on RegActions.

FIU: Not an Egmont Group member

Framework signals

• FATF listing: Not currently listed
• International sanctions: targeted exposure
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 21/100, rank #161 of 182
• Rule of law (WGI): 6.8/10 risk

Sector exposure

• Banking & payments (Elevated): Weak rule-of-law governance (WGI 6.8/10 risk)
• Trade & export controls (Elevated): Targeted sanctions require screening of listed counterparties
• Crypto & virtual assets (Low): No FATF listing, accountability governance within normal range
• Real estate & luxury assets (High): Severe corruption exposure (CPI 21/100) drives laundering risk
• State-linked & procurement (High): High state-capture risk (corruption WGI 7.9/10)

Derived from sanctions tier, FATF listing, World Bank WGI governance and CPI; no per-sector dataset is asserted.

Guinea-Bissau: analysis

Guinea-Bissau's profile is determined entirely by governance weaknesses. Corruption is the dominant driver, followed by rule of law and institutions, both well above the risk thresholds that matter for AML controls. Voice and accountability (elevated) and political stability (moderate) contribute more modestly. Guinea-Bissau is not on the FATF grey or black list and carries no sanctions exposure. The CPI reading places it, corroborating the governance picture. No enforcement actions are tracked in the dataset.

Outlook

Without structural improvements to anti-corruption frameworks and judicial independence, the governance risk trajectory is likely to remain elevated. Guinea-Bissau sits in the lower third of the World Bank governance indicators. Firms should note the absence of FATF listing does not diminish the underlying governance-driven risk, which the next FATF plenary cycle in October 2026 may reassess.

Key watchpoints

• Monitor any FATF mutual evaluation outcomes or grey-list additions at the October 2026 plenary.
• Track changes in CPI ranking as a leading indicator of corruption-control deterioration or improvement.
• Assess the AML supervisory capacity of local financial intelligence and regulatory bodies before establishing or maintaining correspondent relationships.
• Apply enhanced due diligence to transactions and beneficial ownership structures involving Guinea-Bissau-connected counterparties.

Assessment currency

• FATF status: Not listed (as of 19 Jun 2026)
• Sanctions exposure: Targeted programmes in place (as of Jul 2026)
• Governance (WGI): Latest dataset incorporated (as of 2024)
• Corruption (CPI): 21/100 (as of 2025)
• RegActions assessment: Reviewed (as of 19 Jun 2026)

Public evidence layer

FATF action: none. No FATF call-for-action or increased-monitoring status was identified at the latest plenary. This does not establish low risk.

Contextual signals (not scored)

• FATF network membership: FATF regional network: GIABA (present, as of 2026-07)
• EU non-cooperative tax jurisdictions: Not listed in Annex I (absent, as of 2026-02-17)
• Egmont Group FIU: No Egmont member FIU identified (absent, as of 2026-07-17)
• Beneficial-ownership register: No live register identified in the source (unavailable, as of 2026-07-17)
• Transparency International CPI: 21/100, rank 161 (present, as of 2025)

Evidence freshness

• FATF monitored-jurisdiction status: current; data 2026-06-19
• FATF mutual evaluation and follow-up ratings: current; data 2026-07-31; follow-up 2022-05; base assessment 2022-05
• World Bank governance indicators: current; data 2024
• UN, UK, EU and US sanctions regimes: current; data 2026-08-16

Contextual signals are public evidence only and do not change the immutable v2 score.

Download evidence PDF · CSV · JSON

Regional peer scores

• Central African Republic: 7.8/10 (Very high)
• Democratic Republic of the Congo: 7.6/10 (Very high)
• Somalia: 7.3/10 (Very high)
• South Sudan: 7.3/10 (Very high)
• Sudan: 7.1/10 (Very high)
• Eritrea: 6.9/10 (High)

Source: FATF black & grey lists · World Bank WGI (CC BY 4.0 — World Bank WGI) · TI CPI (CC BY-ND 4.0 — Transparency International, display only)