New Zealand — Country Risk Report

New Zealand (Asia Pacific • Oceania). Risk report as of the 19 Jun 2026 FATF plenary.

Moderate country risk, with AML/CFT effectiveness gaps. New Zealand's country risk score is 3.0/10, placing it in the moderate-risk band. The principal score driver is AML/CFT effectiveness, contributing 1.9 of 3.0 points. Separately, the treatment overlays show that New Zealand is not currently FATF grey- or black-listed, and that New Zealand is not subject to comprehensive country-wide sanctions and has no direct country-level programme identified. Firms should apply additional scrutiny where exposure involves state-linked entities, restricted sectors, sensitive technology, dual-use goods or politically exposed counterparties.

Recommended treatment

Standard due diligence for most relationships, with enhanced checks where defined risk triggers are present.

At a glance

• FATF status: Not currently listed (one indicator only; it does not set the overall country risk rating by itself)
• No direct country-level sanctions programme identified; sanctions remain a legal treatment overlay and applicable lists must still be screened.
• Governance and institutions: 1.4/10
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 81/100, rank #4 of 182
• Enforcement: 1 live regulator feed; current totals are loaded from the live evidence API

Country Risk Score: 3.0/10 (Moderate)

Higher score means higher country risk (global average 5.5). Full information available. Composite score. Some evidence is older. Enforcement activity and CPI are context only; FATF listing and sanctions are regulatory overlays except the labelled FATF listing status used where no mutual evaluation exists.

All three underlying risk pillars are available. All three underlying risk pillars are available and weighted using the published formula. Weight sensitivity 2.9–3.1/10.

How this score was calculated

• AML/CFT effectiveness: 4.2/10 — 45% of this score
• Technical compliance: 3.1/10 — 20% of this score
• Governance and institutions: 1.4/10 — 35% of this score

Sanctions treatment: No direct programme identified. FATF treatment: none.

Principal risk drivers

• AML/CFT effectiveness: 4.2/10 × 45% = 1.9 points
• Technical compliance: 3.1/10 × 20% = 0.6 points
• Governance and institutions: 1.4/10 × 35% = 0.5 points

Mitigating factors

• Not currently on the FATF grey or black list.
• No comprehensive country-wide sanctions programme.
• Comparatively stronger corruption (1.3/10).
• Risk is concentrated in specific counterparties, sectors and transactions rather than applying uniformly.

Business impact

• Customer onboarding (Enhanced): Verify ultimate beneficial ownership and control from more than one source.
• Payments and transactions (Elevated): Review transaction purpose, counterparties and the full payment routing.
• Trade and export activity (Elevated): Screen goods, end users and potential dual-use exposure.
• Corporate clients (Standard): Assess state ownership, government links and political exposure.
• Ongoing monitoring (Elevated): Alert on ownership changes, new designations and status changes.

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

New Zealand is not on the FATF grey or black list as of the 19 Jun 2026 plenary.

Source details

International sanctions by issuing body

• UN: No
• EU: No
• UK: No
• 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: 87/100
• Regulatory Quality: 84/100
• Rule of Law: 86/100

Enforcement activity

RegActions has 1 live regulator feed mapped to New Zealand. Current action totals are loaded from the live evidence API rather than the static registry.

• FMANZ — Financial Markets Authority (live feed, 2015-2026)

The composite RegActions Country Risk Score does not use enforcement volume.

Regulators and legal framework

FATF network

FATF member.

• Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering

Last mutual evaluation: 2021 · report

National regulators

• FMANZ — Financial Markets Authority (live feed, 2015-2026)

FIU: Egmont Group member (FIU-NZ)

Framework signals

• FATF listing: Not currently listed
• International sanctions: no direct country programme identified (legal treatment overlay remains applicable)
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 81/100, rank #4 of 182
• Rule of law (WGI): 1.4/10 risk

Regulatory ecosystem and enforcement visibility

This evidence map is separate from Country Risk v3. It describes official mandates, publication access and RegActions coverage; it does not judge regulatory strength or add points to country risk.

Transparency Index: not scored · Evidence disposition: local-authority-evidence · Mapped official authorities: 4.

Evidence level: Level 1: Identity confirmed. The ladder uses the authority evidenceLevel schema directly and does not infer a level from a URL, site access or RegActions feed count.

1. 1. Identity confirmed — The authority and its mandate are evidenced by official directory provenance.
2. 2. Regulatory activity visible — A qualified authority-owned route has provisional dated activity in the first-page scan.
3. 3. Enforcement visible — A qualified authority-owned enforcement route has provisional dated activity in the first-page scan.
4. 4. Score eligible — Shown only when the authority evidence schema explicitly records score-eligible; no authority currently does.

Enforcement visibility: No authority is classified enforcement-visible or score-eligible in the authority evidence schema. Enforcement visibility remains unknown or limited to identity/activity evidence; this is not evidence of no enforcement.

Authorities and mandate evidence

• Financial Markets Authority — Level 1: Identity confirmed · Official site challenge-protected

  Mandates: Securities · Access status: Official site challenge-protected · Research/publication snapshot checked: 2026-08-20

  Official authority site

  Provisional first-page scan signal

  Signal: unknown · Observed month count: unknown · Latest observed month: unknown.

  Source access was limited during this research check, so activity remains unknown. This is not evidence of inactivity.

  Scan contract and precision

  automated-first-page-date-scan · 2024-01 to 2026-08 · as of 2026-08-20 · month precision · first-page-only-unvalidated. This is not a validated engagement frequency.

  No publication candidate is qualified. Regulatory activity and enforcement visibility remain unknown.

  Activity and enforcement visibility remain unknown; this access limitation does not establish that the authority has no enforcement activity.

• New Zealand Police Financial Intelligence Unit (NZ-Police FIU) — Level 1: Identity confirmed · Official site reachable

  Mandates: Financial intelligence · Access status: Official site reachable · Research/publication snapshot checked: 2026-08-20

  Official authority site

  Provisional first-page scan signal

  Signal: unknown · Observed month count: 0 · Latest observed month: unknown.

  No qualified authority-owned dated route supports an activity signal. This is not evidence of inactivity; blocked, external-context, low-frequency and unvalidated sources remain unknown.

  Scan contract and precision

  automated-first-page-date-scan · 2024-01 to 2026-08 · as of 2026-08-20 · month precision · first-page-only-unvalidated. This is not a validated engagement frequency.

  Publication candidates and qualification

  • Unqualified publication candidate: Trespass

    Research candidate only; it is not promoted to an official enforcement or regulatory-update route.

    Route type: news_or_notice · Source scope: authority-owned · Qualification: manual-review-required · Provisional scan signal: no-dated-first-page-signal · Observed months: 0 · Latest observed month: unknown

• Reserve Bank of New Zealand — Level 1: Identity confirmed · Official site access blocked

  Mandates: Central bank, Prudential supervision, Insurance · Access status: Official site access blocked · Research/publication snapshot checked: 2026-08-20

  Official authority site

  Provisional first-page scan signal

  Signal: unknown · Observed month count: unknown · Latest observed month: unknown.

  Source access was limited during this research check, so activity remains unknown. This is not evidence of inactivity.

  Scan contract and precision

  automated-first-page-date-scan · 2024-01 to 2026-08 · as of 2026-08-20 · month precision · first-page-only-unvalidated. This is not a validated engagement frequency.

  No publication candidate is qualified. Regulatory activity and enforcement visibility remain unknown.

  Activity and enforcement visibility remain unknown; this access limitation does not establish that the authority has no enforcement activity.

• The Financial Markets Authority - Te Mana Tatai Hokohoko — Level 1: Identity confirmed · No public official website identified

  Mandates: Insurance · Access status: No public official website identified · Research/publication snapshot checked: 2026-08-20

  Provisional first-page scan signal

  Signal: unknown · Observed month count: 0 · Latest observed month: unknown.

  No qualified authority-owned dated route supports an activity signal. This is not evidence of inactivity; blocked, external-context, low-frequency and unvalidated sources remain unknown.

  Scan contract and precision

  automated-first-page-date-scan · 2024-01 to 2026-08 · as of 2026-08-20 · month precision · first-page-only-unvalidated. This is not a validated engagement frequency.

  No publication candidate is qualified. Regulatory activity and enforcement visibility remain unknown.

Download regulatory ecosystem PDF · CSV · JSON

Sector exposure

• Banking & payments (Low): No FATF overlay and governance pillar within normal range
• Trade & export controls (Low): No direct sanctions or FATF call-for-action overlay identified
• Crypto & virtual assets (Low): No FATF overlay and effectiveness pillar within normal range
• Real estate & luxury assets (High): BO subscore 6.6/10; CPI context 81/100
• State-linked & procurement (Low): Current risk pillars show no elevated procurement signal

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

New Zealand: analysis

New Zealand's profile is determined entirely by a robust governance picture. Corruption (strong) is the strongest domain, followed by political stability (strong), voice and accountability (strong) and rule of law and institutions (strong). No FATF or sanctions overlay applies. The CPI reading places New Zealand amongst the world's most transparent and well-governed countries. It sits in the upper decile of the World Bank governance indicators and consistently outperforms regional and global peers.

Outlook

New Zealand's risk profile is stable and among the most favourable globally. The sustained enforcement record of the Financial Markets Authority indicates that supervisory standards are actively maintained. No foreseeable structural changes are expected to alter the country's governance position materially. Firms should monitor any emerging AML/CFT legislative developments, although the baseline risk remains very low.

Key watchpoints

• Any changes to AML/CFT legislation or supervisory scope by the Financial Markets Authority.
• Enforcement trends and whether the pace of regulatory actions increases or decreases.
• New Zealand's continued absence from the FATF grey list.
• Macroeconomic or political developments that could affect institutional stability, though risks are assessed as low.

Assessment currency

• FATF status: Not listed (as of 19 Jun 2026)
• Sanctions exposure: None identified (as of Jul 2026)
• Governance (WGI): Latest dataset incorporated (as of 2024)
• Corruption (CPI): 81/100 (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: Direct FATF member (present, as of 2026-07)
• EU non-cooperative tax jurisdictions: Not listed in Annex I (absent, as of 2026-02-17)
• Egmont Group FIU: FIU-NZ (present, as of 2026-07-17)
• Beneficial-ownership register: No live register identified in the source (unavailable, as of 2026-08-23)
• Transparency International CPI: 81/100, rank 4 (present, as of 2025)

Evidence freshness

• FATF monitored-jurisdiction status: current; data 2026-06-19
• FATF mutual evaluation and follow-up ratings: current; data 2026-08-24; follow-up 2024-07; base assessment 2021-04
• World Bank governance indicators: current; data 2024
• UN, UK, EU and US sanctions regimes: current; data 2026-08-30

Contextual signals are public evidence only and do not change the current country-risk score.

Download evidence PDF · CSV · JSON

Contextual risk evidence (not scored)

These eight evidence families provide context only. They do not change the v3.1 headline score. Unavailable means no reviewed, country-comparable evidence is currently ingested; it does not mean the risk is absent.

• Organised crime: Not available. No reviewed country-level organised-crime dataset is currently checked in; no risk value is inferred. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.
• Fraud and cybercrime: Not available. No reviewed country-level fraud or cybercrime dataset is currently checked in; no risk value is inferred. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.
• Terrorism and proliferation financing: Not available. No reviewed country-comparable terrorism/proliferation threat dataset is currently checked in; FATF listing status remains a separate overlay. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.
• Trafficking: Not available. No reviewed country-level trafficking dataset is currently checked in; no risk value is inferred. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.
• Financial secrecy and offshore exposure: Not available. No reviewed, licence-clean financial-secrecy index is currently checked in; jurisdiction type alone is not used as a proxy. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.
• Tax cooperation: Not listed in EU Annex I. Annex I is a political/legal tax-cooperation list, not a general AML, corruption, or country-risk score. Source
• Political stability and conflict: 86/100 WGI percentile. WGI is an institutional perception indicator, not a conflict event feed or a prediction of future violence. Source
• Beneficial ownership: Not available. The Open Ownership map is a live-register snapshot and absence means no register was identified in that snapshot, not that no register exists. Candidate sources are research leads only; they have not been ingested as evidence.

Regional peer scores

• North Korea: 8.6/10 (Very high)
• Myanmar: 7.8/10 (Very high)
• Afghanistan: 7.7/10 (Very high)
• Laos: 7.3/10 (Very high)
• Pakistan: 7.1/10 (Very high)
• Tonga: 7.1/10 (Very 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)