The anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) system in the Polish legal system is based on the Act of 1 March 2018 on Counteracting Money Laundering and Counteracting the Financing of Terrorism (hereinafter referred to as the AML Act). This regulation imposes a broad set of obligations on obligated institutions (e.g., banks, brokerage houses, notaries, real estate agents), including the obligation to report suspicious transactions to the General Inspector of Financial Information (GIIF).
Failure to comply with this obligation results not only in administrative sanctions but also in criminal liability. The central provision is Article 156 of the AML Act, which penalizes failure to report.
Article 156 paragraph 1 of the AML Act provides:
"Whoever, acting on behalf or in the interest of an obligated institution, fails to comply with the obligation to notify the General Inspector of Financial Information about circumstances that may indicate a suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing, shall be subject to the penalty of imprisonment from 3 months to 5 years."
This provision establishes an individual offence, the subject of which is a person performing duties within the meaning of the Act on behalf of the obligated institution.
Pursuant to Article 6 of the AML Act, obligated institutions appoint senior management responsible for performing the duties specified in the Act. Senior management refers to a member of the management board, director, or employee of an obligated institution who has knowledge of the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with the obligated institution's activities and makes decisions affecting these risks.
Pursuant to Article 7 of the AML Act, in the case of an obligated institution with a management board or other management body, a person responsible for implementing the obligations specified in the Act is designated from among the members of that body.
Pursuant to Article 8 of the AML/CFT Act, obligated institutions shall designate an employee holding a managerial position responsible for ensuring compliance of the activities of the obligated institution and its employees and other persons performing activities on behalf of the obligated institution with the provisions on counteracting money laundering and terrorist financing. The designated employee is also responsible for submitting, on behalf of the obligated institution, the notifications referred to in Article 74 paragraph 1, Article 86 paragraph 1, Article 89 paragraph 1, and Article 90.
This is a reference to the obligations imposed on institutions bound by specific provisions of the Act, namely:
Article 74 paragraph 1 of the Act on the Protection of Personal Data – obligation to notify the GIIF of circumstances that may indicate a suspicion of committing a money laundering or terrorist financing offence;
Article 86 paragraph 1 of the Act on Money Laundering and Financial Supervision: obligation to notify the General Inspectorate of Financial Information if there is a reasonable suspicion that a specific transaction or specific property values may be related to money laundering or terrorism financing;
Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Tax Law: obligation to notify the competent prosecutor of a justified suspicion that the assets originate from an offence other than money laundering or terrorism financing or from a tax offence;
Article 90 paragraph 1 of the Act on Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing: obligation to notify the GIIF of a suspicious transaction that may be related to money laundering or terrorism financing.
The offence consists in failing to provide information about a suspicious transaction .
- The mere passivity – the lack of reporting to the GIIF – constitutes a prohibited act.
- It is not required that actual money laundering or terrorism financing has occurred.
In practice, liability under Article 156 of the AML Act may apply to both members of a legal entity's management bodies and its other representatives – including proxies or attorneys – provided they have been formally authorized to act on behalf of or for the benefit of the obligated institution. Therefore, clear and unambiguous authorization is necessary, which cannot be presumed. When an obligated institution is represented by several individuals, the scope of their authority and liability must be determined on a case-by-case basis, e.g., in the power of attorney, appointment letter, resolution of the body, or management board regulations.
The criminal liability provided for in Article 156 of the AML Act aims to strengthen the effectiveness of the system for combating money laundering and terrorist financing. Its essence lies in the personalization of sanctions – specific individuals acting on behalf of the obligated institution are responsible for fulfilling their obligations. From a practical perspective, this requires not only formal procedures but also their actual implementation, documentation, and oversight.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
The law is current as of October 15, 2025.
Author:
Series editor:
