Australian AML/CTF · Explainer

What should an AML decision record explain?

Connect the facts, review steps, outcome and reason so a later reader can follow the decision.

General information only, not legal, compliance, or other professional advice. Does not confirm compliance.

Start with: When does an AML program become a working process?

Explain the path to the outcome

An AML decision record should connect evidence, assessment, outcome and reason. A status label alone cannot show how the decision was made.

For initial and ongoing CDD, section 111 expressly includes records of relevant analysis, risk assessment and decision making.

Source: Federal Register of Legislation: 111(2)-(3).

Make the decision explainableIssue Evidence Assessment Action
  1. Issue

    What prompted the review?

  2. Evidence

    What information was considered?

  3. Assessment

    How did the reviewer interpret it?

  4. Action

    What happened, and why?

Make the decision explainable

Suggested record structure; facts, judgements and later updates should remain distinguishable.

Follow the process from top to bottom.

Separate facts and judgements

A practical note can identify the issue, evidence, assessment and action. Separate a customer’s explanation from a fact supported by independent evidence.

State the limits of the evidence. Do not turn uncertainty into an allegation.

Date later information separately. Preserve the original decision and the information available when it was made.

Source: Federal Register of Legislation: 111(2)-(3).

Invented example: activity with an explanation

In a fictional case, activity differs from the customer information on file. The reviewer obtains more evidence and decides on a response.

The record explains what prompted the review, what was considered and why the response followed.

Any unresolved question has a next action and a responsible person. This example does not determine whether a suspicious matter report is required.

Source: Federal Register of Legislation: 111(2)-(3).

Keep decisions usable and controlled

Use a controlled record location and link the supporting evidence. Restrict access to people who need the information for their work.

Retain the original decision and any later review result. Examine applicable disclosure restrictions before sharing the record.

A complete form can record an incorrect decision. The evidence and reasoning still need review.

Source: Federal Register of Legislation: 111(2)-(3).

Avoid retrospective certainty

A later reviewer may know facts that were unavailable at the time. Keep that distinction clear.

Assess the earlier reasoning against the information then available. Record how new evidence changes the next action.

Source: Federal Register of Legislation: 111(2)-(3).

Sources and scope

Sources checked on 13 September 2026. This page is not continuously updated. Check the linked legislation and AUSTRAC guidance for current requirements.

How we prepare articles

This page does not cover: Reporting thresholds and deadlines; Legal restrictions on disclosure.

Common AML/CTF terms