Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,030 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

SingaporeMoney laundering and terrorist financing Clear all filters
3cases from 1 jurisdiction
€19.2mTotal of monetary amounts
€18.3mLargest single case: Credit Suisse Singapore Branch, United Overseas Bank Limited, UBS AG Singapore Branch u. a. (9 Finanzinstitute)
€642,871Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

by amountby number of cases

Where?

by authority
  1. Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) 3 cases 100 % · €19.2m

What for?

by topic
  1. Customer due diligence 2 cases 67 % · €19m
  2. Suspicious activity reports 1 case 33 % · €201,708

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Financial services and insurance 3 cases 100 % · €19.2m

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q4 20230–
Q1 20240–
Q2 20240–
Q3 20240–
Q4 20240–
Q1 20250–
Q2 20251€642,871
Q3 20251€18.3m
Q4 20250–
Q1 20260–
Q2 20261€201,708
Q3 20260–
Q4 20260–

3 cases

Newest firstHighest amounts
25 May 2026 Padang Trust Singapore Pte. Ltd.MAS: SGD 300,000 against Padang Trust over failures in suspicious transaction reporting SingaporeSuspicious activity reports €201,708

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS, Singapore's central bank and financial regulator) allegedly imposed a composition penalty of SGD 300,000 on the licensed trust company Padang Trust Singapore Pte. Ltd. because it failed to inquire into unusual transactions with no apparent economic or lawful purpose and did not file suspicious transaction reports promptly. According to MAS, the causes were inadequate controls, including a lack of scrutiny of unusual transactions and low staff awareness of money laundering and terrorist financing risks and red flags; the company paid the penalty, took remedial action and appointed an independent reviewer to confirm that the measures are effective. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

Failing to question unusual transactions and delaying suspicious transaction reports breaches core anti-money laundering duties – staff must know the typical red flags.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising unusual transactions and filing suspicious transaction reports without delay

Authority / court
Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Suspicious activity reports
Legal basis
MAS Notice TCA-N03; s 27B(2) Monetary Authority of Singapore Act (Cap. 186); Composition nach s 176(1A) MAS Act 1970
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
25 May 2026

Original amount 300,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 May 2026.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

4 Jul 2025 Credit Suisse Singapore Branch, United Overseas Bank Limited, UBS AG Singapore Branch u. a. (9 Finanzinstitute)MAS: SGD 27.45m against nine financial institutions after major money laundering case SingaporeCustomer due diligence €18.3m

Following inspections of institutions linked to persons of interest (POIs) in the major money laundering case of August 2023, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS, Singapore's central bank and financial regulator) allegedly imposed composition penalties totalling SGD 27.45 million because existing AML/CFT policies had been implemented poorly or inconsistently – in customer risk assessment, corroboration of source of wealth, transaction monitoring and follow-up after suspicious transaction reports. Breakdown: Credit Suisse Singapore Branch SGD 5.8m, United Overseas Bank SGD 5.6m, UBS AG Singapore Branch SGD 3m, UOB Kay Hian SGD 2.85m, Citibank N.A. Singapore and Citibank Singapore Limited together SGD 2.6m, Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd. Singapore Branch SGD 2.4m, Blue Ocean Invest SGD 2.4m, Trident Trust Company (Singapore) SGD 1.8m and LGT Bank (Singapore) SGD 1m. The penalty for Credit Suisse also reflects breaches between November 2017 and October 2023 relating to accounts of certain US customers. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

Anti-money laundering policies only protect an institution if relationship managers actually question inconsistencies in the source of wealth and systematically follow up alerts from transaction monitoring.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising and escalating red flags in source of wealth and transaction patterns (relationship managers as the first line of defence)

Authority / court
Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
MAS Notices 626, 1014, SFA04-N02 und TCA-N03; s 27B(2) Monetary Authority of Singapore Act 1970 bzw. s 16(4) Financial Services and Markets Act 2022; Composition nach s 176(1A) MAS Act 1970 bzw. s 177(1) FSMA 2022
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
4 Jul 2025

Original amount 27,450,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Jul 2025.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

27 Jun 2025 Remsea Pte Ltd, Arcade Plaza Traders Pte Ltd, J-Dee Remittance Services Pte Ltd u. a. (5 Zahlungsinstitute)MAS: 960,000 SGD against five remittance providers for AML failings SingaporeCustomer due diligence €642,871

In examinations of five licensed payment institutions providing cross-border money transfers, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS, Singapore's central bank and financial regulator) found failings in customer due diligence, such as missing residential addresses, no inquiry into beneficial owners, no screening of customers against money laundering risk information sources, unverified authority of persons acting for customers and missing originator or beneficiary information on cross-border wire transfers. On 27 June 2025 it allegedly imposed composition penalties totalling 960,000 SGD: Remsea 280,000, Arcade Plaza Traders 260,000, J-Dee Remittance Services 170,000, Mobile Community Tech 140,000 and OxPay SG 110,000 SGD. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

Payment institutions offering cross-border transfers must check customers, representatives and beneficial owners and attach complete originator and beneficiary data to every cross-border transfer.

Relevance to training and awareness

Customer due diligence and complete information on cross-border transfers

Authority / court
Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
Legal basis
MAS Notice PSN01; s 27B(2) Monetary Authority of Singapore Act bzw. s 16(4) Financial Services and Markets Act 2022; Composition nach s 176(1A) MAS Act 1970 bzw. s 177(1) FSMA 2022
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
27 Jun 2025

Original amount 960,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jun 2025.

Sources

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial