FATF black and grey lists explained
The FATF black list and grey list are the two public groupings of jurisdictions that FATF assesses as having strategic anti-money-laundering, counter-terrorist-financing or proliferation-financing deficiencies. The black list is formally titled High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action; the grey list is formally titled Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring. Current membership of both lists, as reflected in the HM Treasury advisory notice updated 22 June 2026, is set out below.
What the two lists mean
FATF is the inter-governmental body that sets global standards on tackling money laundering and terrorist financing and monitors how jurisdictions implement them. Where FATF assesses a jurisdiction as having serious strategic deficiencies, it places that jurisdiction on one of two public lists. The black list covers jurisdictions with the most serious deficiencies, where enhanced due diligence, or in some cases countermeasures, apply. The grey list covers jurisdictions that have committed to an action plan to fix identified deficiencies and are under increased monitoring while they do so.
List membership is a jurisdiction-level AML and counter-financing assessment outcome. It is separate from sanctions screening designations issued by national or multilateral sanctions authorities, even where the same jurisdiction appears in both regimes.
Current black list: High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action
Per the HM Treasury advisory notice update of 22 June 2026, the jurisdictions named as High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action are the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran and Myanmar.
Current grey list: Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring
Per the same HM Treasury notice, the jurisdictions named as Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring are Angola, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Monaco, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Vietnam and Yemen.
How the lists are updated
FATF issues both lists three times a year, at the close of its February, June and October Plenary meetings. The HM Treasury advisory notice is updated to reflect each new FATF publication; the version current at the time of writing reflects the FATF statements of 19 June 2026, updated by HM Treasury on 22 June 2026.
UK regulatory effect
Under Regulation 33(1)(b) of the UK Money Laundering Regulations, firms must apply enhanced customer due diligence and enhanced ongoing monitoring to business relationships and relevant transactions with persons established in a "high-risk third country" as defined by the Regulations. From 30 June 2026, amending regulations narrow the automatic enhanced-due-diligence trigger for listed jurisdictions to those named on the Call for Action list, while firms must still treat FATF mutual evaluations as a geographical risk factor and apply enhanced measures wherever they identify elevated money-laundering or terrorist-financing risk.
The HM Treasury notice also flags that some jurisdictions named on the two lists are separately subject to UK financial sanctions regimes, which require firms to take additional measures beyond the AML enhanced-diligence requirement. List membership and sanctions designation are assessed and maintained separately, and a jurisdiction can appear in one regime without appearing in the other.
Institutional use beside CDD and sanctions
FATF list status feeds into national AML rules that implement the FATF standards. Bank desks apply customer due diligence and know your customer (KYC), including ultimate beneficial owner (UBO) analysis, under those rules. List-driven enhanced measures sit beside, and are not identical to, sanctions programmes or adverse media screening.
For credit files, the operational facts are the formal list title, the date of the advisory notice update, whether a jurisdiction sits on the Call for Action list or the Increased Monitoring list, and the separation between FATF list status and sanctions law.