€214k AML Fine Reveals Serious Gaps In Alipay Europe Controls

This image is AI-generated.

Alipay Europe has become the focus of regulatory attention after Luxembourg’s financial supervisor published a sanctioning decision on 2 September 2025. The announcement revealed that the electronic money institution had been fined €214 000 back in May 2025 for serious breaches of anti-money laundering obligations. The time gap between the decision and its publication highlights how enforcement actions often unfold in stages: first the investigation and sanction, then the formal communication to the market.

This publication immediately drew interest across the payments and compliance sectors. Although the penalty amount may appear modest compared to fines imposed on global banks, the decision is significant for two reasons. First, it targets one of the largest digital payment ecosystems in the world, signalling that regulators will scrutinise fintechs as rigorously as traditional banks. Second, it exposes the sheer breadth of weaknesses uncovered at Alipay Europe, covering monitoring, reporting, due diligence, sanctions handling, outsourcing, and account blocking processes.

Failures In Transaction Monitoring And Suspicious Activity Reporting

The inspection that led to the fine took place between June 2023 and January 2024. During this period, supervisors found that Alipay’s systems flagged at least six cases involving suspicious patterns linked to counterfeit goods. Despite clear indicators, no suspicious transaction reports were filed with the national financial intelligence unit. In three of those cases, accounts were simply closed, cutting off further activity without escalating suspicions as required.

This omission directly contravened legal duties to report promptly when grounds for suspicion arise. Regulators treat such failings as particularly grave because they prevent authorities from tracing criminal proceeds or identifying networks behind illicit trade. The inspection further noted that alerts were often left unresolved for weeks, undermining the institution’s ability to act swiftly. Even where suspicious indicators surfaced, operational bottlenecks delayed responses, leaving the door open for illicit funds to circulate.

Weaknesses In Sanctions Screening And Account Blocking Processes

The case also revealed shortcomings in sanctions compliance, one of the most sensitive areas in financial regulation. Some alerts linked to international sanctions were processed too slowly, reducing the firm’s ability to apply restrictions immediately. In practice, this created a dangerous lag: had a sanctioned individual attempted to use the platform, their funds might have slipped through before controls took effect.

Problems extended to the account blocking framework. Even after certain accounts were flagged for suspicion of money laundering or incomplete KYC checks, significant transactions were still processed. Moreover, once accounts were blocked, follow-up reviews were either delayed or missing altogether. This weakened a critical safeguard designed to prevent suspicious accounts from being used as conduits for crime.

Customer Due Diligence Gaps And Fake Documentation Risks

One of the most striking weaknesses involved customer due diligence. Inspectors discovered missing identification documents for both clients and beneficial owners. In some cases, customer identities were never verified at all, leaving the institution blind to who was truly using its services.

Because Alipay Europe operated entirely through remote onboarding, the risk was even greater. Without physical interaction, institutions are expected to deploy compensating controls, such as enhanced document verification or biometric checks. Instead, the firm acknowledged it was receiving a large number of fake identity documents but had not installed additional safeguards. This meant individuals could register with falsified credentials, undermining the integrity of the customer base and heightening exposure to money laundering.

Outsourcing Oversight And Governance Failures

Beyond the operational level, the case revealed governance deficiencies in outsourced activities. The outsourcing contract with a third-party provider did not include detailed descriptions of AML responsibilities, making it impossible to verify whether obligations were properly fulfilled.

The compliance monitoring plan was equally insufficient. It lacked concrete controls, measurable indicators, and testing mechanisms. In practice, the second line of defence was not exercising effective oversight of third-party compliance work, leaving gaps in accountability. Regulators emphasised that outsourcing is not a transfer of responsibility, and institutions remain fully liable for failures in delegated tasks. For Alipay Europe, this governance shortfall compounded the other weaknesses observed.

A Warning For The Payments Industry

The Alipay Europe sanction shows how regulators are ramping up pressure on digital payment institutions. The timing of the announcement—several months after the fine was imposed—underlines how supervisory processes can culminate in sudden public exposure long after the initial decision. For the institution, reputational damage may prove more costly than the €214 000 itself.

The case highlights lessons for the wider industry. Transaction monitoring must be timely, suspicious activity must always be reported, sanctions alerts require immediate action, customer identities must be verified beyond doubt, and outsourced functions must be governed with precision. Failure to meet these standards invites not only financial penalties but also loss of trust from partners and regulators alike.

For compliance officers across Europe, the message is clear: regulators will act, they will publish, and they will hold fintechs accountable on the same terms as global banks. With the European Union Anti-Money Laundering Authority preparing to centralise supervision in the coming years, the Alipay Europe decision foreshadows a stricter, more harmonised enforcement landscape.

Source: CSSF

Some of FinCrime Central’s articles may have been enriched or edited with the help of AI tools. It may contain unintentional errors.

Want to promote your brand, or need some help selecting the right solution or the right advisory firm? Email us at info@fincrimecentral.com; we probably have the right contact for you.