Real estate agencies are in AUSTRAC’s sights as AML/CTF enforcement ramps up, with operators risking costly breaches as confusion over compliance and complex property transactions persists. Here is where agencies are going wrong.
Introduced in July 2026, the Tranche 2 reforms require real estate professionals to register with the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) and conduct additional identification checks.
Five months into the new requirements, only 40,000 of the 80,000 professionals are now officially registered, prompting the regulator to step up enforcement against those yet to comply.
AML Partners managing director John Nguyen said agencies failing to enrol have been at risk, with the regulator issuing fines of up to $21,840 and infringement notices against businesses that failed to meet the mandatory registration requirements.
“You can’t really hide from it if you’re buying or selling property. It’s free, and it takes about 20 minutes. There’s no reason you shouldn’t enrol.”
“I think a lot of people are surprised by AUSTRAC’s action. But they have been warning us that this is coming.”
Additionally, the regulator will be watching closely how real estate agents approach their AML/CTF obligations, with AUSTRAC CEO Brendan Thomas warning that more fines will be issued.
“Real estate shouldn’t be a safe place for criminals to move dirty money. We need to work together to shut them out. If you’re required to enrol with AUSTRAC, do it now.
“If you don’t, you’re not only breaking the law; you risk leaving your business and the sector exposed to criminal exploitation. And if businesses continue to ignore their obligations, AUSTRAC will take action,” Thomas told REB.
Here is what agencies get wrong about AML/CTF:
Misunderstanding the obligations
Despite having over a year to prepare for the new regulations, Nguyen said some real estate businesses didn't understand whether they needed to have an AML process in place.
He said that if a professional offered a designated service that played a role in the transaction or selection of a property, they had an obligation to conduct their own AML compliance.
“It’s irrelevant whether you have a licence, or if you identify as a buyer’s agent, you’re helping them choose property A versus property B; you actually need to do your AML.”
He said smaller businesses that felt too small to be targeted by the regulator were wrong.
Additionally, Nguyen said marketing agents and house-and-land package operators may not realise they also have AML/CTF obligations.
He said that just because they were not licensed real estate agents or didn’t hold trust funds, they were not free from obligation.
Similarly, he said those paid in commission for buyer referrals were also required to comply.
“AUSTRAC doesn’t care about any of that.”
“Whether you’ve got a licence or not is a different matter. AUSTRAC is concerned with anti-money laundering.”
Assuming that an ID check is enough
Under the AML/CTF regulations, Nguyen said professionals needed to understand that performing an identity check went beyond scanning IDs, and that it must stand up to audit scrutiny.
He said an audit would examine the completeness and accuracy of AML compliance and ensure all necessary parties had been properly screened, including identifying any politically exposed persons (PEPs).
“Essentially, it’s called enhanced customer due diligence. The whole point of getting the ID is so you can identify whether they’re a politician.”
“It’s whenever a client becomes a high-risk customer, and there is a whole range of factors that would make somebody fall into that category.”
In addition to identifying PEPs, Nguyen said that a business needed to ensure it was performing adverse media searches.
Misunderstanding company and trust structure
Nguyen said proper compliance involves taking a deeper look at the business as a whole, going beyond just the business's directors and extending to everyone involved in the transaction.
“I think the most common faults would probably be the complex entities.”
“You need to go deeper.”
He said ownership arrangements could make the AML process more difficult, requiring professionals to dig deep into the company structure.
According to Nguyen, this enhanced obligation could make some of these transactions financially non-viable for small businesses or operators.
“Some of them said it would take them half a day to unravel some of these trust structures, and obviously that doesn’t make sense for them from a financial point of view.”
Assuming other professionals were responsible
According to Nguyen, agencies needed to understand the risks of relying on other businesses to conduct their compliance checks.
Just because another business said it had conducted its own checks, Nguyen said agencies shouldn’t just tick the box and keep going with the transaction.
“With reliance agreements, you’re still liable for the AML checks. If something goes wrong, you’re still liable for all the fines.”
While relying on other parties to do their checks could be risky, Nguyen said agencies could leverage an AML provider to minimise the risk of being caught out.
Appointing inexperienced staff to handle AML
He said the tactic could be a bigger difference-maker for smaller, boutique agencies, who may have to employ extra staff or add work to an existing team member.
“Maybe you’re getting your admin person to do it, and maybe they’re using a DIY provider, and then you hit a complex case.”
“Instead of having a salaried person sitting in the office employed specifically to do AML, it could just be a service fee,” Nguyen said.
Listen to the full episode here.
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?Make Real Estate Business a preferred news source on Google.
