Suriname — Country Risk Report

Suriname (Americas • South America). Risk report as of the 19 Jun 2026 FATF plenary.

High country risk, with elevated corruption risk. Suriname's country risk score is 5.6/10, placing it in the high-risk band. The principal driver is weak corruption, alongside rule of law and institutions risk. Suriname is not currently FATF grey- or black-listed. Suriname 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 for defined risk triggers.

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: possible, screen applicable persons, entities and sectors
• Government effectiveness and rule of law: 4.9/10
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 38/100, rank #96 of 182
• Enforcement data: not yet assessed (no RegActions coverage)

Country Risk Score: 5.6/10 (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: 8.3/10 — 50% of this score
• Government effectiveness and rule of law: 4.9/10 — 30% of this score
• International sanctions: 0.0/10 — 20% of this score

International sanctions contributes 0.0 because the complete UN, UK, EU and US review found no direct country-level sanctions programme. People or organisations connected to the country may still appear on sanctions lists.

Principal risk drivers

• Corruption (WGI) — 6.0/10
• Rule of law & institutions — 5.5/10

Mitigating factors

• Not currently on the FATF grey or black list.
• No comprehensive country-wide sanctions programme.
• Comparatively stronger political stability (2.6/10).
• 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

Suriname 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: 43/100
• Regulatory Quality: 40/100
• Rule of Law: 53/100

Regulators and legal framework

FATF network

FATF network via CFATF.

• Caribbean Financial Action Task Force

Last mutual evaluation: 2023 · report

National regulators

Regulator profiles not yet available on RegActions.

FIU: Egmont Group member (FIU Suriname)

Framework signals

• FATF listing: Not currently listed
• International sanctions: no listed programme identified
• Corruption (CPI 2025): 38/100, rank #96 of 182
• Rule of law (WGI): 5.5/10 risk

Sector exposure

• Banking & payments (Low): No FATF listing, rule-of-law governance within normal range
• Trade & export controls (Low): No sanctions programme or FATF black-list constraint identified
• Crypto & virtual assets (Low): No FATF listing, accountability governance within normal range
• Real estate & luxury assets (Elevated): Elevated corruption exposure (CPI 38/100)
• State-linked & procurement (Elevated): State-capture exposure (corruption WGI 6.0/10)

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

Suriname: analysis

Suriname's profile is driven by corruption (WGI) and rule of law, while political stability (strong) and voice and accountability (moderate) add less pressure. The CPI reading is relatively more favourable than the WGI corruption signal suggests, providing a partially mitigating context. No FATF listing or sanctions apply. Suriname sits near the global midpoint on the World Bank governance indicators.

Outlook

Suriname's risk trajectory is linked to fiscal stabilisation and the development of legal and supervisory capacity. The relatively contained political-stability risk is a positive factor. Firms should watch for any FATF engagement as Suriname's AML framework matures, and for changes in rule-of-law metrics as judicial capacity evolves.

Key watchpoints

• Rule-of-law capacity and the effectiveness of financial supervisory institutions.
• Corruption trends, including any movement in WGI scores or CPI ranking.
• FATF engagement and the potential for future enhanced monitoring.
• Macroeconomic developments that could affect governance stability.

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): 38/100 (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: CFATF (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 Suriname (present, as of 2026-07-17)
• Beneficial-ownership register: No live register identified in the source (unavailable, as of 2026-07-17)
• Transparency International CPI: 38/100, rank 96 (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 2025-12; base assessment 2023-01
• 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

• Cuba: 8.0/10 (Very high)
• Venezuela: 7.8/10 (Very high)
• Haiti: 7.6/10 (Very high)
• Bolivia: 6.0/10 (High)
• Nicaragua: 5.6/10 (High)
• Saint Lucia: 4.7/10 (Moderate)

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)