Liechtenstein's Due Diligence Act (Sorgfaltspflichtgesetz, SPG) — the backbone of the country's AML regime since it implemented the fourth and fifth EU directives — is being repealed. It will be replaced by two instruments: the directly applicable EU AML Regulation, and a new national Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) transposing the sixth directive. The consultation report on the AMLA was adopted on 3 March 2026, and the practical target date for both is 10 July 2027.
For a Liechtenstein bank, trustee or fiduciary, that is not a renaming exercise. A regulation applies directly rather than through national law, which removes the interpretive layer firms are used to working with — and several concrete obligations tighten at the same time.
1. Who is in scope, and who supervises
The Financial Market Authority (FMA) is the competent authority for licensing and for supervising compliance with due diligence obligations. Obliged entities under the SPG include banks, asset managers, insurers, and — distinctively for Liechtenstein — professional trustees, trust companies and foundation administrators, licensed under the Trustee Act (Treuhändergesetz, TrHG).
That fiduciary sector is why Liechtenstein compliance has a different centre of gravity from Switzerland's or Germany's. The obliged entity is frequently sitting inside the ownership structure it must document, not outside looking in.
2. What the SPG requires today
The current regime will feel familiar to anyone working under a European AML framework: identify and verify the contracting party, establish the beneficial owner, apply enhanced due diligence to higher-risk relationships and politically exposed persons, monitor the relationship on an ongoing basis, and report suspicion to the Financial Intelligence Unit.
For trusts and foundations, establishing the beneficial owner means identifying the settlor, the trustee, the protector, the beneficiaries, and any person exercising effective control — not one name, but a map. We cover the mechanics of that in KYC for trusts, foundations and complex ownership structures.
Liechtenstein also maintains a beneficial ownership register, established under the SPG and aligned to EU directive standards through the EEA Agreement.
3. Why the EEA route matters
Liechtenstein is an EEA member, not an EU member. EU AML law does not apply automatically: it is incorporated through the EEA Agreement and then reflected in national law. Historically that produced a lag between an EU deadline and the Liechtenstein one.
The expectation this time is different. Although the AMLA formally depends on the EEA Joint Committee adopting the sixth directive, practical experience points to both instruments being implemented together by July 2027, regardless of the formal timing. Planning on the assumption of a comfortable EEA delay is the main strategic error available here.
4. What actually changes in practice
The headline items for an obliged entity:
| Change | Today | From 2027 |
|---|---|---|
| Review cycle for high-risk clients | Every one to two years | Annually |
| Occasional transaction threshold | Higher | CHF 10,000 |
| Cash payment threshold | Higher | CHF 3,000 |
| Crypto transfers | Partial coverage | All transfers require due-diligence screening |
| Beneficial ownership data | Name-level identification | Expanded — place of birth, identity document numbers, control structures |
The scope of who is obliged also widens, to include crowdfunding service providers, dealers in precious metals and gemstones, investment migration advisors, football agents, and cultural goods dealers above a CHF 10,000 threshold.
Read the first and last rows together and the direction is unmistakable. An annual review cycle on high-risk clients, against a richer beneficial-ownership dataset, is not a modest increase in workload — it multiplies the number of data points that must be current at any given moment. Firms running periodic reviews on spreadsheets will feel this first. It is the same pressure we describe in perpetual KYC, arriving on a fixed date.
