Diverging Paths: MONEYVAL’s 2025 Review Puts North Macedonia’s AML Progress in Focus While Romania Lags

As MONEYVAL releases its 2025 mutual evaluation follow-up reports, the anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CFT) systems of North Macedonia and Romania have come under renewed scrutiny.

The two countries find themselves at different stages of compliance development, but both understand the strategic significance of these reviews. For North Macedonia, the stakes are tightly linked to its EU accession ambitions. Romania, already an EU member since 2007, faces the imperative of demonstrating continued alignment with evolving European AML standards to safeguard its credibility and financial sector.

MONEYVAL—the Council of Europe’s expert monitoring body—plays a pivotal role in shaping AML policy across the region. The 2025 reviews provide a revealing snapshot of each country’s current status and momentum in addressing the FATF’s 40 recommendations, the international benchmark for AML/CFT effectiveness.

North Macedonia’s Measured Progress on the Road to EU Integration

North Macedonia’s recent follow-up report is viewed with cautious optimism. The country has taken significant legislative steps to better align its financial crime framework with global norms. Since its last evaluation in 2023, North Macedonia has implemented regulatory reforms that have improved transparency around wire transfers and beneficial ownership—two areas long regarded as critical weak points in regional AML defenses.

The reforms have extended to bolstering internal control obligations within financial institutions, particularly for cross-border branches and subsidiaries. Another area of progress includes clarified legal provisions concerning the transparency of trusts and similar legal structures, which have historically served as vehicles for obscuring ownership and laundering illicit funds.

As a result, the country has achieved improved ratings: 31 out of the 40 FATF recommendations are now rated either “compliant” or “largely compliant.” Still, the country is far from the finish line. According to the latest review, the country’s compliance with Recommendation 26—dealing with the supervision of financial institutions—remains only “partially compliant.”

This partial compliance signals persistent deficiencies in the practical application of AML controls. These gaps are found in enforcement capacity, resource deployment, and the consistent application of regulatory standards. The MONEYVAL report points out that “while legislative measures have improved, the real-world effectiveness of supervision remains limited.”

Still, North Macedonia’s forward momentum is not just technical but reputational. By upgrading its compliance levels, the country sends a signal to both international investors and EU institutions that it is serious about financial integrity. However, MONEYVAL cautions that “criminal networks continue to exploit supervisory gaps,” highlighting the risk of regulatory complacency. North Macedonia is expected to report further progress to MONEYVAL within the next 12 months.

Romania’s Stagnation: Compliance Without Effectiveness

While North Macedonia edges forward, Romania’s 2025 review paints a more troubling picture. Despite operating within the EU regulatory space and having long-established AML laws, Romania has made only modest improvements since its previous assessments. Its challenges are deeply rooted in enforcement shortfalls and slow adaptation to new risk areas.

One of the most critical findings relates to Romania’s handling of targeted financial sanctions, particularly those tied to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

MONEYVAL identified technical compliance issues and weak execution capacity in freezing assets linked to UN Security Council Resolutions. These gaps are not just regulatory footnotes—they represent vulnerabilities in the country’s ability to respond to geopolitical and terrorist financing threats.

The review also raises concerns about Romania’s handling of the digital economy. The country has not yet fully implemented FATF standards related to virtual assets and virtual asset service providers (VASPs), despite growing global concern about crypto-based laundering. The MONEYVAL report notes that “the regulatory regime lags behind international benchmarks,” exposing Romania to emerging money laundering typologies involving digital assets.

Compounding these issues is a deficit in Romania’s ability to collect and analyze relevant AML/CFT data. Comprehensive, reliable statistics are crucial to inform risk-based supervision and evaluate systemic vulnerabilities. As MONEYVAL puts it, “current data collection practices do not support strategic planning or impact measurement.”

Romania is now compliant with only 7 FATF recommendations, while another 18 are rated “largely compliant.” Alarmingly, 15 recommendations remain “partially compliant,” signaling persistent structural inefficiencies. Due to these shortcomings, Romania will remain under MONEYVAL’s enhanced follow-up process and is required to provide an updated compliance report in 2026.

Head-to-Head: Comparing AML Trajectories in North Macedonia and Romania

When evaluated side by side, the differences in the two countries’ AML journeys become evident. North Macedonia has demonstrated faster progress, particularly in improving technical compliance in areas like wire transfers, beneficial ownership, and internal financial controls. For instance, three key recommendations were upgraded from “partially compliant” to “largely compliant” since the 2023 evaluation. This momentum stems from both legal reforms and increasing capacity among public and private institutions.

By contrast, Romania’s forward movement is minimal. Its ratings remain static in critical areas such as financial sanctions and crypto asset regulation. “Romania must bridge the gap between legislative intent and practical enforcement,” the report emphasizes. The lack of improvement suggests institutional inertia and a failure to adequately respond to new financial crime threats.

Still, both countries face their own Achilles’ heels. North Macedonia continues to fall short in effectively supervising financial institutions, leaving open regulatory blind spots that could be exploited by money launderers. Meanwhile, Romania’s weakness in adapting to virtual asset risks and implementing targeted sanctions puts it out of step with global AML priorities.

This disparity highlights a common lesson in international compliance: writing laws is only the beginning. As MONEYVAL reiterates, “technical compliance is not a substitute for effective, on-the-ground application.”

What This Means for Financial Institutions and Policymakers

The implications of the 2025 reviews go far beyond the pages of technical documentation. For banks and financial institutions operating in either country, the message is clear: expectations are rising, and enforcement is tightening.

In North Macedonia, institutions can anticipate increased scrutiny on their compliance frameworks, particularly in relation to wire transfers and group-level controls. Regulators are expected to press for a demonstrable link between policy and practice, ensuring recent legislative gains are embedded into business operations.

Romanian financial actors, especially those dealing with virtual assets or international clients, will need to strengthen internal AML/CFT systems amid ongoing legal and regulatory uncertainty. Enhanced follow-up status suggests deeper regulatory engagement and a higher likelihood of future sanctions or inspections.

For policymakers in both states, the lesson is unmistakable. Beyond new legislation, investment is needed in supervisory infrastructure, staff training, technology, and cross-border cooperation. “Without the capacity to implement and enforce, legal frameworks become paper shields,” MONEYVAL warns.

In the broader European context, the contrasting experiences of Romania and North Macedonia serve as case studies in the complexity of AML reform. They underscore the importance of sustained political will, institutional resilience, and the ability to respond to a fast-changing threat landscape.

Conclusion: Compliance as a Moving Target

As MONEYVAL’s 2025 assessments show, North Macedonia and Romania are moving on diverging tracks. North Macedonia’s legislative upgrades offer hope for future effectiveness, though enforcement must improve. Romania, despite its EU membership and longstanding legal framework, continues to lag in key areas that pose real risks to financial security and international trust.

Both countries are learning that AML compliance is not static. As financial crime evolves—with digital assets, cross-border shell structures, and geopolitical risks gaining prominence—so too must national regulatory systems. Continued progress will depend on the ability of each nation not just to follow the rules, but to enforce them meaningfully.

The stakes could not be higher. At issue are not just MONEYVAL ratings, but the integrity of the financial system, the safety of public institutions, and the confidence of international partners. For North Macedonia and Romania, the road ahead will demand diligence, transparency, and above all, accountability. 

By fLEXI tEAM