Mentioned in This Article
1. UK crypto regulation under the FATF spotlight
UK crypto regulation will face its first international stress test before the country's full regime is even in force, a taskforce convened by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) warned in a report published on November 13. The group called crypto laundering a material risk and said Britain must convince Financial Action Task Force assessors visiting in June 2027 that it can enforce effectively.
The timing creates an awkward gap. The UK's mandatory crypto regime does not take effect until October 25, 2027, months after the assessors arrive. That means the country will be judged largely on how it handles crypto-related money laundering with the tools it already has, rather than on the full framework it has spent years designing.
The report is intended as a preview of the issues likely to dominate the evaluation, and it lays out where the taskforce believes the UK is strong, where it is exposed, and what assessors are most likely to probe.
2. What is the FATF mutual evaluation?
A FATF mutual evaluation is a peer review in which the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force tests whether a country's anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing rules actually work in practice, not just on paper. FATF sets the global standards in this area, and its evaluations carry significant weight with banks, regulators and foreign governments.
The process combines a review of laws and regulations with an on-site visit, during which assessors meet officials, supervisors, law enforcement agencies and private-sector firms. The central question is effectiveness: whether authorities identify risks, supervise the relevant businesses, investigate cases and recover criminal proceeds in proportion to the threats they face.
For the UK, the on-site visit is scheduled for June 2027. The final report is expected to be agreed at FATF's plenary meeting in February 2028. A weak result can affect how other countries and financial institutions view the risk of doing business with a jurisdiction, which is why governments prepare for these reviews for years.
RUSI, a London-based defense and security think tank, assembled a taskforce of experts from the private sector, law enforcement and civil society to anticipate how the review will unfold. The group met in September, and its discussions are reported without attributing views to individual members.
3. Why crypto is a first for the UK review
This will be the first UK mutual evaluation in which FATF considers crypto, and the taskforce described the sector as a material risk for the country.
Several data points support that assessment. The City of London Police estimate that 66% of investment fraud in the UK involves crypto. The UK's own 2025 National Risk Assessment rated money laundering through crypto as high risk, an upgrade from the medium rating it carried in 2020.
That upgrade matters for the evaluation. FATF assessors typically compare a country's own understanding of its risks with the actions it takes in response. Having formally recognized crypto laundering as a high risk, the UK will be expected to show supervisory and enforcement activity that matches that rating.
4. How UK crypto rules have developed
Britain first brought crypto firms under its money-laundering regulations in 2020, requiring them to register and comply with anti-money-laundering obligations. That regime focused primarily on customer due diligence and reporting rather than on the full range of conduct and prudential rules that apply to traditional financial firms.
A broader statutory framework followed this year. Legislation passed in February created a dedicated crypto regime. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the UK's financial markets regulator, then set out the activities that will require authorization in April and finalized its rulebook in June.
The mandatory regime takes effect on October 25, 2027. Until then, firms and supervisors are in a transition period, which is precisely when the FATF assessors will be on the ground.
The taskforce doubted that the UK could demonstrate adequate implementation by the time of the June visit. It said Britain has moved more cautiously than Hong Kong, the European Union and Singapore, all of which have advanced their own crypto frameworks.
5. Over-the-counter brokers draw attention
Taskforce members unanimously expected assessors to examine over-the-counter crypto brokers, which arrange trades directly between parties rather than through a public exchange order book.
The National Crime Agency estimated in its 2025 assessment that such brokers could launder hundreds of millions of dollars a year. OTC desks can serve legitimate clients who want to move large amounts without disturbing market prices, but the same features can make them attractive to criminal networks seeking to convert illicit funds with limited scrutiny.
Because the risk has been identified by the UK's own law enforcement, assessors are likely to ask how supervisors are monitoring these businesses and what enforcement actions have resulted.
The question is sharpened by the transition period. Until the new regime begins in October 2027, oversight of crypto businesses rests on the narrower money-laundering registration rules introduced in 2020. Assessors will want to see whether those existing powers are being used to their full extent against brokers that fall within them, and how authorities are dealing with operators that sit outside any registration at all.
6. Does UK crypto enforcement match the risk?
The taskforce's answer is that the UK has shown it can deliver major results, but not consistently enough. FATF is expected to test whether outcomes are proportionate to the scale of the threat rather than whether a single headline case succeeded.
The group pointed to the Metropolitan Police's seizure of £5.5 billion, about $7.3 billion, in crypto as an encouraging example. That case was linked to a Chinese professional money launderer sentenced in 2025. One member nonetheless said such successes have not been repeated often enough and that the UK has barely scratched the surface of the problem.
A structural issue compounds the challenge. The UK regime resembles the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets framework, known as MiCA, and centers on identifiable firms that can be authorized and supervised. The taskforce warned that this design could leave the highest-risk activity outside the FCA's reach, with police left to trace assets moving through channels that no regulated firm controls.
Tether's USDT stablecoin was singled out. A July 2025 threat assessment from the Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation said the token had been extensively exploited by Russian-speaking money-laundering networks. Members doubted that law enforcement has the capability and resources to keep pace with that kind of activity.
Stablecoins pose a particular challenge for a firm-based model. Tokens pegged to the US dollar can move between self-hosted wallets around the clock and across borders, without passing through any UK-authorized business. Supervisors can impose obligations on exchanges and custodians operating in Britain, but once funds leave those gateways, tracking them falls to investigators using blockchain analysis, court orders and international requests for assistance.
That shifts the burden of proof in the evaluation. Assessors will not only ask whether the FCA has written sensible rules for regulated firms. They are also likely to ask whether police and prosecutors can follow the money when criminals avoid those firms altogether, and whether the number of investigations, seizures and convictions reflects the high-risk rating the UK has given itself.
7. Strengths in international cooperation
Not all of the findings were critical. The taskforce praised the UK's international cooperation on crypto crime, citing Operation Destabilise, which targeted Russian-speaking networks that converted street cash into crypto.
Cross-border cooperation is a significant component of FATF evaluations, since money laundering frequently crosses jurisdictions and depends on authorities sharing information and coordinating action. Strong performance in this area could help offset weaknesses elsewhere.
The group did, however, flag two likely vulnerabilities: the resourcing of the UK Financial Intelligence Unit, which receives and analyzes suspicious activity reports, and the broader capacity of law enforcement to investigate economic crime.
8. Wider FATF pressure on crypto standards
The UK is not the only jurisdiction struggling to apply FATF's crypto standards. In July, FATF said nearly 93% of the jurisdictions it surveyed had not yet applied its standards to decentralized finance platforms that fall within scope.
That figure shows how difficult it is for regulators to extend rules written for intermediaries to software-based systems that may lack a clear operator. It also suggests that the UK's challenges are part of a global pattern rather than a uniquely British failing, although assessors will judge the UK on its own record.
RUSI has published related research in recent months. It has argued that banning crypto privacy tools would be counterproductive, and in August it reported that North Korea is increasingly laundering stolen crypto through criminal networks.
9. What happens next
The RUSI taskforce is scheduled to meet again this month to examine trends emerging from recent FATF evaluations of other countries, which could offer further clues about what assessors will prioritize.
The key dates for the UK are now set. FATF assessors arrive in June 2027, the mandatory crypto regime begins on October 25, 2027, and the final evaluation report is due for agreement at the February 2028 plenary.
Between now and the on-site visit, the pressure on UK authorities will be to show measurable progress: more consistent enforcement against crypto laundering, closer oversight of OTC brokers and adequate resources for the Financial Intelligence Unit and economic crime investigators. Whether that can be achieved while the new framework is still bedding in is the question the taskforce has placed at the center of the review.