Who must comply?
- Financial intelligence units (issuing typologies and feedback)
- Sectoral supervisors (issuing sectoral guidance)
- DNFBP supervisors and SRBs
- Industry associations relaying guidance to members
Key requirements
- 1
Issue guidelines for AML/CFT compliance
Competent authorities must issue clear, accessible guidelines explaining how financial institutions and DNFBPs should comply with AML/CFT obligations — including specific guidance for high-risk situations and emerging threats.
- 2
Provide feedback on STRs and other reports
Authorities must provide feedback to reporting entities on the quality and usefulness of STRs and other reports — both at individual and aggregate levels — to improve detection and reduce false positives.
- 3
Publish typologies and red flags
The FIU and supervisors should publish typologies, case studies and red-flag indicators tailored to specific sectors and risks — such as TF typologies, real-estate ML schemes, virtual-asset typologies, etc.
- 4
Sector-specific guidance
Different sectors face different risks; guidance must be sector-specific — banks need different content than dealers in precious metals, casinos or VASPs.
- 5
Two-way dialogue
Effective implementation requires two-way dialogue: authorities listen to obliged entities about practical challenges, and obliged entities receive concrete guidance back. Public-private partnerships are increasingly central.
Practical example
Example: SAT's 2026 Programa de Orientación
Mexico's SAT runs the Programa de Orientación 2026, a series of public sessions for vulnerable activities — covering real estate (Fr. V and V Bis), credit cards/prepaid/cheques de viajero/virtual assets (Fr. II, III, XVI), notaries (Fr. XII) and others. Each session walks through thresholds, obligations and common errors. The UIF publishes typology guides (e.g., the 2026 guide on country risk and TF) with specific red flags. The CNBV issues circular letters with sectoral guidance for SOFOMes and banks. This is exactly the spirit of Recommendation 34.
How Mexico implements it
Country-specific section in Spanish — Mexican regulatory references (LFPIORPI, CNBV, SAT, UIF).
México emite guía a través de varias autoridades coordinadas:
SAT — Programa de Orientación
El SAT publica guías sectoriales y conduce el Programa de Orientación con transmisiones públicas por YouTube. Las sesiones 2026 ya cubrieron inmobiliario, tarjetas y activos virtuales.
Programa Orientación SAT — Tarjetas y Activos VirtualesUIF — Tipologías y guías de riesgo
La UIF publica guías de tipologías (corrupción, FT, tráfico de personas, etc.) y la guía anual sobre países de riesgo y financiamiento al terrorismo.
Guía UIF Países de Riesgo y FT 2026CNBV — Circulares y oficios
La CNBV emite criterios sobre interpretación de DCG, oficios sobre nuevas tipologías y notas técnicas durante visitas de inspección. La retroalimentación sobre calidad de reportes ROR/ROI/ROIP es individual.
Convenio UIF-CNBV — Guía coordinada
El convenio 2026 explícitamente prevé la emisión de guías conjuntas y la armonización de criterios entre supervisor (CNBV) e inteligencia (UIF) — reduciendo la fragmentación que dificultaba a los obligados saber qué reportar.
Milestones
-
2003
Original Recommendation 25 on guidance and feedback
-
2012
Renumbered as Recommendation 34
-
2025
October 2025 update emphasises public-private dialogue
Related Recommendations
Other Recommendations in Group F — Powers of Competent Authorities
Official citation
FATF (2012-2025), International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation, Recommendation 34, FATF, Paris, France. Last updated October 2025.
Read the official text on fatf-gafi.org