https://newswire.co.nz/2026/06/asb-record-money-laundering-penalty/
ASB has been ordered to pay a record 6.73 million dollar penalty after admitting its systems for catching money laundering and terrorism financing were inadequate for about six years, the largest fine of its kind ever imposed by a New Zealand court.
The High Court handed down the penalty on 10 June after the Reserve Bank, which supervises banks under the country’s anti money laundering rules, filed civil proceedings late last year. ASB and the Reserve Bank had already agreed to jointly recommend the figure to the court, and the bank admitted liability for all seven causes of action brought against it. The court accepted the recommendation, setting a new high water mark for this type of enforcement action in New Zealand.
According to the Reserve Bank, the failures stretched back to at least December 2019 and touched almost every part of the bank’s compliance machinery. ASB admitted it did not always conduct adequate ongoing customer due diligence, did not carry out enhanced checks on higher risk customers when it should have, failed to report suspicious activity within the required timeframes, ran an anti money laundering programme that did not meet the standard set in law, and in some cases did not end business relationships when the rules required it to. Its transaction monitoring, the automated screening that is supposed to flag unusual movements of money, was a particular weak point.
Advertisement
One of the more striking details to emerge is that the bank reported the wrong location for roughly 50,000 cash transactions, undermining the value of information that flows from banks to the authorities. That reporting matters because it feeds the intelligence agencies and police who try to trace dirty money, and gaps in it leave investigators working with an incomplete picture.
Acting assistant governor for financial stability Angus McGregor said the case underlined why the controls exist in the first place. “Transaction monitoring is a key pillar to detect money laundering and terrorism financing,” he said, pointing to the role banks play as a front line against financial crime. The Reserve Bank has repeatedly made the point that the law has been on the books for well over a decade, so large institutions have had ample time to build systems that work.
ASB, which is owned by Australia’s Commonwealth Bank, did not contest the findings. Chief executive Vittoria Shortt said the bank accepted the court’s decision and the penalty. “In particular, we accept responsibility for shortcomings in our transaction monitoring and customer due diligence systems and processes,” she said, adding that the bank had been too slow to fix the problem. “We accept we didn’t act fast enough to resolve the issue and I apologise for that.” The bank has said it cooperated fully with the investigation and has been overhauling the systems involved.
The size of the penalty stands out against earlier cases. The previous high was a 3.85 million dollar penalty agreed between the Reserve Bank and TSB in 2021, a figure a judge later trimmed by 355,000 dollars. ASB’s fine is comfortably the largest a New Zealand court has imposed under the regime, and it lands at a time when regulators around the world are taking a harder line on banks that treat compliance as a box ticking exercise rather than a genuine defence against crime.
Advertisement
New Zealand’s anti money laundering and countering financing of terrorism law puts a heavy onus on banks, insurers, lawyers, accountants and other financial businesses. They are required to verify who their customers are, understand the nature of the business those customers are doing, watch for transactions that do not fit the expected pattern, and report anything suspicious to the Financial Intelligence Unit run by police. The idea is that the institutions handling the money are best placed to spot when it is being moved to disguise its origins or to fund harm, and that catching it early is far cheaper than chasing it after the fact.
For ASB the financial cost of the penalty is modest set against a bank that earns hundreds of millions of dollars in profit each year. The reputational cost, and the warning it sends to the rest of the sector, is the more significant part. Compliance specialists were quick to read the result as a signal that the regulator is willing to seek much larger sums than it has in the past, and that the days of relatively soft penalties for systemic failures may be over.
The case also raises an awkward question for an industry that has spent heavily on compliance staff and technology in recent years. If a bank the size of ASB, with the resources of a major Australian parent behind it, can let its monitoring drift out of compliance for six years, smaller institutions with thinner budgets have reason to look hard at their own systems. The Reserve Bank, for its part, has made clear it intends to keep testing whether the money being spent is actually translating into controls that work.
