The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has removed South Africa from its grey list, marking a significant achievement in anti-money laundering efforts. This decision follows extensive coordination between government bodies and the private sector. However, some in the financial sector question the ongoing burdens of transaction monitoring.
South Africa's removal from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list on October 27, 2025, represents a key milestone in the country's fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. The FATF decision came after substantial work involving government ministries, agencies, institutions, regulators, and the private sector. Notably, the process faced no major political divisions, with all political formations supporting the effort to exit the list, facilitated by the limited involvement of elites in related issues.
This accomplishment is viewed as evidence of governmental reform capabilities. It follows the end of load shedding as the first proof and dramatic improvements at the South African Revenue Service (SARS) as the second. The author highlights these as signs that pressure on officials can drive continued progress, though they do not yet translate to widespread life improvements for millions, particularly in areas still facing power challenges.
Personal experiences underscore broader administrative gains; obtaining a driver's license, once arduous during the pandemic, now involves simple online booking and quick confirmation, with the process reportedly taking about half an hour.
Not all reactions are celebratory. Professor Brian Benfield has criticized the transaction monitoring regime as overly burdensome, requiring entities to retain data on transactions above R100,000. He cites the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, estimating that 2.5% to 5% of global GDP is laundered annually, arguing the system has failed. Counterarguments suggest that without such monitoring, laundering rates would be higher, despite added costs to transactions and the economy. Criminals shifting to cash could increase internal conflicts among them.
Looking ahead, cryptocurrencies, particularly stablecoins tied to the dollar but lacking independent audits, pose risks by enabling anonymous, rapid money movement, potentially undermining monitoring efforts. The balance between oversight, costs, and control remains tense, with hopes for sustained governmental improvements.