ABN Amro Bank N.V.

CompanyLast read from source 23 Oct 2026

No sanctions listingDebarred by 1 authorityOwnership not readOfficers not readNL

Sanctions

Listings in force · 3 debarments apart

People

Recorded

Related companies

Direct links

Countries

Connections

Events

Last 3 years

Sources

3 records

Findings by area

Sanctions— Checked, nothing foundNo sanctions listing in force.
Debarment & exclusionRecords foundNo sanctions listing. Debarred by 1 authority: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM). A debarment excludes a company from public contracts or financing and freezes nothing, so it is scored from a lower base than a sanction (35 against 55). Confirmed present in a source snapshot within the last 90 days.
Ownership & control— Not scoredNot scored. No ownership, control or officer records are on file for this company, which is an absence of evidence rather than an absence of risk.
People— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.
Identity & registration— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.
Jurisdiction— Not scoredNot scored. The jurisdiction lists this system reads are: EU list of high-risk third countries (AMLD Art. 9). Each names specific countries, so absence from them is not a clearance of Netherlands. Separately, 13 of the sanctions authorities this system reads have designated companies registered in Netherlands — a count of this corpus, not a rating of the jurisdiction.
Court records— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.

Sanctions

No active sanctions listing from any of the authorities this system reads.

Debarments · not sanctions

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)Debarred
Since 6 Jul 2017 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)Debarred
Since 28 Aug 2014 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)Debarred
Since 20 Oct 2015 · ESMA Sanctions Register

Ownership & control

No corporate ownership records on file for this company. Ownership is recorded only where a register or a designating authority publishes it, and coverage is thin for companies outside the jurisdictions with open beneficial-ownership registers.

Key people

No people recorded against this company. Officer and ownership data comes from national business registers, and the registers this system reads cover a different set of countries from the sanctions lists — so a sanctioned company frequently has none.

On the record

Legal name: ABN Amro Bank N.V.
Also known as: ABN Amro Bank N.V.
Jurisdiction: NL
First recorded here: 12 Sept 2026

Recent changes

Debarment listed: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — MiFID
25 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Debarment listed: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — MiFID
25 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Debarment lifted: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — Debarment
12 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Debarment listed: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — MiFID
12 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Debarment listed: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — Debarment
12 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register
Alias recorded: ABN Amro Bank N.V.
12 Sept 2026 · ESMA Sanctions Register

Sanctions in force0

No sanctions listing in force on file.

Debarments3 in force

A debarment excludes the company from public contracts or from a development bank's financing, or warns that it is not authorised. It freezes nothing and is not a sanction, so none is counted above.

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Debarred

Programme: MiFID
Since: 6 Jul 2017
Stated grounds: https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2017/sep/boetes-abn-amro-abn-amro-clearing AFM beboet ABN AMRO Bank N.V. en ABN AMRO Clearing Bank N.V. voor niet tijdig melden transacties 20 september 2017 Maatregel De boete is onherroepelijk De Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) heeft op 6 juli 2017 twee bestuurlijke boetes opgelegd van €400.000 en €500.000, aan respectievelijk ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO) en ABN AMRO Clearing Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO Clearing). De boetes zijn opgelegd omdat de banken transacties niet tijdig aan de AFM hebben gemeld. Dat is een overtreding van artikel 4:90e, derde lid van de Wet op het financieel toezicht. Dit artikel verplicht beleggingsondernemingen die transacties verrichten in beursgenoteerde financiële instrumenten, om de gegevens over deze transacties te melden aan de AFM. Dit moet zo spoedig mogelijk gebeuren, maar uiterlijk aan het einde van de volgende werkdag. De AFM gebruikt de gerapporteerde transacties om marktmisbruik op te sporen en op die manier de eerlijke en efficiënte werking van kapitaalmarkten te bevorderen, zodat beleggers hierop kunnen vertrouwen. Overtredingen ABN AMRO heeft in de periode van 2 februari 2010 tot en met 1 juli 2015 gegevens over 86.796 transacties, uitgevoerd via verschillende afdelingen van ABN AMRO en op verschillende handelsplatformen, niet tijdig aan de AFM gemeld. De AFM rekent ABN AMRO deze overtreding aan vanaf 1 januari 2013. ABN AMRO had toen haar transactierapportage op orde moeten hebben met behulp van aanwijzingen die de AFM heeft gegeven in een audit die zij eind 2010 bij de bank heeft uitgevoerd. Daarin constateerde de AFM dat het bij ABN AMRO ontbrak aan een totaaloverzicht van rapportages door de verschillende afdelingen. De AFM raadde ABN AMRO dringend aan om haar transactierapportage beter in kaart te brengen. Eind 2013 besloot ABN AMRO tot een interne review, waarmee in 2014 het hele rapportageproces in beeld is gebracht. De resultaten van deze review, waaronder de ontdekking van de overtreding, vormden aanleiding voor het aanbrengen van verdere verbeteringen. ABN AMRO Clearing heeft in de periode van 13 september 2014 tot en met 11 april 2016 gegevens over 11.911 transacties, grotendeels uitgevoerd op de Stuttgart Exchange, niet tijdig aan de AFM gemeld. ABN AMRO Clearing kreeg eerder van de AFM een normoverdragende brief wegens niet tijdige rapportage van andere transacties. Boetebedragen De basisboete voor overtreding van de transactierapportage-verplichting is €500.000. Voor ABN AMRO heeft de AFM de boete verlaagd naar €400.000 omdat ABN AMRO de overtreding zelf ontdekt heeft en aan de AFM heeft gemeld. De door ABN AMRO aangebrachte verbeteringen in haar transactierapportage moeten er bovendien voor zorgen dat een volledige rapportage in de toekomst is gegarandeerd. Voor ABN AMRO Clearing vindt de AFM een boete ter hoogte van het basisbedrag passend. ABN AMRO en ABN AMRO Clearing hebben geen bezwaar ingesteld tegen de boetebesluiten, die hiermee definitief zijn geworden. [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes a fine on ABN AMRO Bank N.V. and ABN AMRO Clearing Bank N.V. for failing to notify transactions in time 20 September 2017 Measure Fine On 6 July 2017, the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) imposed 2 administrative fines of €400,000 and €500,000 on ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO) and ABN AMRO Clearing Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO Clearing), respectively. The fines were imposed because the banks failed to notify transactions to the AFM in time. This constitutes a violation of Section 4:90e(3) of the Financial Supervision Act. This Section obliges investment firms that perform transactions in listed financial instruments to notify the AFM of the details of these transactions. This should be done as quickly as possible, but at the latest at the end of the next working day. The AFM uses the transactions that have been notified to identify market abuse and thus promote the fair and efficient operation of the capital markets, so that investors can have confidence in these markets. Violations In the period from 2 February 2010 up to and including 1 July 2015, ABN AMRO failed to notify the AFM in time of the details of 86,796 transactions carried out via various ABN AMRO departments and via various trading platforms. The AFM attributes this violation to ABN AMRO as from 1 January 2013. At that time, ABN AMRO should have had its transaction reporting in order with the aid of the instructions issued by the AFM during an audit it carried out at the bank at the end of 2010. The AFM concluded in these instructions that ABN AMRO lacked an overall summary of the reports from the various departments. The AFM urgently advised ABN AMRO to create a better overview of its transaction reporting. At the end of 2013 ABN AMRO decided to perform an internal review, which identified the entire reporting process in 2014. The results of this review, including the discovery of the violation, formed the reason for making further improvements. During the period from 13 September 2014 up to and including 11 April 2016, ABN AMRO Clearing failed to notify the AFM in time concerning 11,911 transactions, which were mainly conducted on the Stuttgart Exchange. ABN AMRO Clearing previously received a constructive letter on compliance with standards in connection with late reporting of other transactions. Fine amounts The basic fine for violation of the obligation to report transactions is €500,000. The AFM reduced the fine for ABN AMRO to €400,000, because ABN AMRO discovered the violation itself and notified it to the AFM. Moreover, given the improvements ABN AMRO implemented in its transaction reporting a full report should be guaranteed in the future. The AFM considers a fine in accordance with the basic amount appropriate for ABN AMRO Clearing. ABN AMRO and ABN AMRO Clearing have not lodged an objection to the decision to impose a fine, which have therefore become final.
Source: ESMA Sanctions Register
Last confirmed: 23 Oct 2026
Document: Open the original ↗

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Debarred

Programme: MiFID
Since: 28 Aug 2014
Stated grounds: https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2014/nov/boete-abn-amro [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes fines on ABN AMRO for insufficient data retention by Fortis regarding service to Vestia 19 November 2014 Sanction Fines imposed On August 28, 2014, the Authority of Financial Markets (AFM) imposed a administrative fine of € 3 million on ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO). Mid-2010 Fortis Bank (Netherlands) N.V. (Fortis) has entered ABN AMRO. Fortis has provided services to Vestia housing corporations regarding the termination of interest rate derivative transactions. There is insufficient data on these services to enable AFM to monitor. With this, ABN AMRO - as a successor to Fortis - violated Article 35, paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct Supervision of Financial Undertakings (BGfo). After the Vestia housing corporation was severely affected by its portfolio of interest rate derivatives at the end of 2011, the AFM conducted research into banks and intermediaries that played a part in establishing derivative transactions with Vestia, including Fortis. It appeared that Fortis had entered into a large number of derivative transactions with Vestia over the years. Vestia's investment portfolio at one point was € 1.97 billion. The AFM has requested information from ABN AMRO to determine which activities Fortis had performed in relation to Vestia and to what extent they had complied with applicable laws and regulations. ABN AMRO appeared to have little data available about Fortis's transactions, partly because the telephone conversations between Fortis and Vestia's account manager were not included. It became clear, however, that Fortis had not acted as a contractual counterparty on behalf of Vestia for its own account (carrying out investment activities), but also provided investment services to Vestia as a client. In both the provision of investment services and the carrying out of the investment activities, sufficient data must be kept to allow monitoring by the AFM. To this end, it is first of all necessary to be able to deduce from the data what the transaction has been the exact nature of the work. If investment services are granted, there are a large number of care obligations on the investment company. When performing investment activities, the duty to care is a lot smaller. Certainly at banks, where there are usually different services and activities under one roof, it is up to these entities to avoid confusion about the nature of the work done. ABN AMRO was unable to provide the AFM with clarity about the services Fortis had provided to Vestia by transaction. As a result, it is not possible for the AFM to assess to what extent Fortis has complied with applicable laws and regulations in its service to Vestia. The fine relates to the failure to keep sufficient information by Fortis during the period from September 3, 2009 to March 17, 2010. In deciding to fine ABN AMRO as Fortis's successor for this violation, the AFM agreed that ABN AMRO E-mailbox of the main contact within Fortis for Vestia has not been retained. This violation imposes a fine with a basic amount of € 2 million. The basic amount may be increased or decreased if the severity and / or duration of the violation or degree of plausibility arise. In this case, the AFM sees the opportunity to increase the basic amount by 25% on the basis of the gravity of the infringement and by 25% on account of the plea. In addition, interest rates have been concluded for large amounts, largely financed by public funds, and that Fortis, through its business equipment, had clearly increased the risk of breaches such as these.
Source: ESMA Sanctions Register
Last confirmed: 23 Oct 2026
Document: Open the original ↗

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Debarred

Programme: MiFID
Since: 20 Oct 2015
Stated grounds: Boete ABN AMRO voor onvoldoende bijhouden gegevens over werkzaamheden rentederivaten mkb 23 oktober 2015 Maatregel De boete is onherroepelijk De Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) heeft op 20 oktober 2015 een bestuurlijke boete van €2.000.000 opgelegd aan ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO). ABN AMRO heeft aan ondernemers in het midden- en kleinbedrijf (mkb) diensten met betrekking tot rentederivaten verleend. ABN AMRO heeft echter onvoldoende gegevens over die dienstverlening bijgehouden. Daardoor kan de AFM niet onderzoeken of de werkzaamheden aansluiten bij de wensen van de klant en haar toezicht niet goed uitoefenen De AFM heeft in 2013 onderzoek gedaan naar de dienstverlening inzake rentederivaten door banken aan mkb-ondernemingen (die als niet professionele belegger waren gekwalificeerd). Bij ABN AMRO heeft de AFM vijf cliëntdossiers opgevraagd van mkb-ondernemingen. In vier van die dossiers heeft ABN AMRO onvoldoende gegevens bijgehouden over haar dienstverlening, wat een overtreding betekent van artikel 35, eerste lid, van het Besluit Gedragstoezicht financiële ondernemingen (BGfo). De periode waarin de overtreding plaatsvond was 21 oktober 2010 tot 10 januari 2013. Onvoldoende gegevens bijgehouden De AFM heeft vast kunnen stellen dat ABN AMRO bij het afsluiten van de rentederivaten niet uitsluitend voor eigen rekening heeft gehandeld, maar een beleggingsdienst aan de ondernemers heeft verleend. Verder heeft de AFM geconstateerd dat ABN AMRO de betrokken ondernemers hoogstwaarschijnlijk ook heeft geadviseerd. In de dossiers zijn daar meerdere indicaties voor aanwezig. De bank heeft echter onvoldoende gegevens bijgehouden, waardoor de AFM niet met zekerheid kan vaststellen dat ABN AMRO bij de feitelijke uitvoering van haar werkzaamheden in deze dossiers daadwerkelijk heeft geadviseerd over de rentederivaten. Doordat de vastlegging door ABN AMRO in de onderzochte rentederivatendossiers tekort is geschoten, is het onmogelijk voor de AFM om te beoordelen in hoeverre ABN AMRO de wet- en regelgeving heeft nageleefd. Vastlegging belangrijk voor goed toezicht De wet schrijft voor dat bij het verlenen van beleggingsdiensten en het verrichten van beleggingsactiviteiten voldoende gegevens moeten worden bijgehouden om toezicht door de AFM mogelijk te maken. Het is allereerst noodzakelijk dat uit een dossier blijkt wat per transactie de exacte aard van de werkzaamheden is geweest. Als beleggingsdiensten worden verleend (zoals het uitvoeren van orders voor rekening van de cliënt en adviseren) rust er een groot aantal zorgplichten op de beleggingsonderneming. Bij beleggingsactiviteiten (waarbij sprake is van twee gelijkwaardige partijen) rust een aanmerkelijk lagere zorgplicht op de beleggingsonderneming. Zeker bij banken, waar doorgaans verschillende diensten en activiteiten onder één dak plaatsvinden, is het belangrijk om onduidelijkheid over de aard van de werkzaamheden te voorkomen. Daardoor is ook duidelijk aan welke zorgplichten de bank moet voldoen. Niet alleen voor het toezicht is vastlegging belangrijk, ook voor de instelling en de klant is het van belang dat het dossier compleet is. Ook zij moeten kunnen reconstrueren hoe de werkzaamheden tot stand zijn gekomen. Herbeoordelingen door banken van rentederivatendossiers Handhaving door de AFM is gericht op de bank, daarmee verandert de positie van de klant niet direct. Op aandringen van de AFM voeren banken daarom een individuele herbeoordeling uit van alle uitstaande rentederivaten bij mkb-ondernemingen. Het gaat om de banken die betrokken waren bij het onderzoek van de AFM naar de dienstverlening op het gebied van rentederivaten aan mkb-ondernemingen uit 2013. Als klantdossiers onvolledig zijn, moeten gesprekken worden gevoerd met de betrokken cliënten. De klanten kunnen dan waar mogelijk relevante ontbrekende informatie aanvullen. Een onvolledig dossier betekent niet meteen dat een klant schade heeft geleden, aangezien het rentederivaat een geschikt product kan zijn. Als er echter wel sprake is van schade voor de klant en de bank kan op basis van het dossier niet vaststellen of dat te wijten is aan de bank of de klant, dan verwacht de AFM dat een passende oplossing aan de klant wordt geboden. De banken hebben toegezegd cliënten voor het einde van dit jaar waar nodig een passende oplossing aan te bieden. De AFM houdt toezicht op dit proces en op de uitkomsten daarvan. https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2015/okt/boete-abn-amro [original (Dutch)] Administrative fine for ABN AMRO for insufficient records of activities related to SME interest rate derivatives 23 October 2015 Measure Fine On 20 October 2015, the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) imposed an administrative fine of €2,000,000 on ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (ABN AMRO). ABN AMRO provided services to small and medium-sized enterprises (SME's) relating to interest rate derivatives. ABN AMRO failed to keep sufficient records concerning those services. As a result, the AFM is unable to investigate whether the activities are in line with the client's wishes and it is unable to conduct its supervision properly. In 2013, the AFM investigated the services related to interest rate derivatives provided by banks to SME's, which were not qualified as professional investors. The AFM requested ABN AMRO to provide five SME client files. ABN AMRO failed to keep sufficient records of its services in four of those files, which constitutes a violation of Section 35, first subsection, of the Decree on Conduct of Business Supervision of Financial Undertakings under the Wft (BGfo). The violation was committed in the period from 21 October 2010 to 10 January 2013. Insufficient records kept The AFM has been able to establish that ABN AMRO did not act exclusively for its own account when concluding interest rate derivatives, but that it provided an investment service to entrepreneurs. The AFM has also concluded that it is highly likely that ABN AMRO also issued advice to the relevant entrepreneurs. The files provided several indications that this was the case. However, the bank failed to keep sufficient records, which means that the AFM is unable to determine with certainty whether ABN AMRO actually issued advice concerning interest rate derivatives when it actually performed the activities stated in these files. The fact that ABN AMRO failed to keep sufficient records in the interest rate derivatives files that were investigated means that it is impossible for the AFM to determine to what extent ABN AMRO complied with legislation and regulations. Keeping records is important for proper supervision The law provides that sufficient records must be kept when providing investment services and when performing investment activities in order to make the AFM's supervision possible. Firstly, it is necessary that a file shows the exact nature of the activities involved for each transaction. Investment firms are subject to several duties of care when providing investment services, such as carrying out orders for the account of the client and issuing advice. Investment firms are subject to a duty of care that is significantly less strict when performing investment activities, because this involves two equal parties. It is especially important for banks, where various services and activities are generally performed under the same roof, to prevent uncertainty concerning the nature of the work involved. This also makes it clear with which duties of care a bank has to comply. Records are not only important for the purpose of supervision; a complete file is also important for the institution and the clients. They must also be able to reconstruct how the work was performed. Reassessment of interest rate derivative files by the banks Enforcement by the AFM is aimed at the banks and it does not directly alter the position of the clients. That is why the banks are performing a reassessment of all outstanding SME interest rate derivatives at the insistence of the AFM. It concerns banks that were involved in the AFM investigation into the services in the field of interest rate derivatives for SME's from 2013. A meeting with the relevant client has to be conducted if the client file proves to be incomplete. This will allow clients where possible to provide the information that is lacking. An incomplete file does not necessarily mean that a client has sustained a loss, because the interest rate derivative may be a suitable product. However, the AFM expects that the client is offered an appropriate solution if there is a loss for the client and the bank is unable to determine on the basis of the file whether such is attributable to the bank or the client. The banks have committed that they will offer clients an appropriate solution where possible before the end of this year. The AFM supervises this process and its outcome.
Source: ESMA Sanctions Register
Last confirmed: 23 Oct 2026
Document: Open the original ↗

3 earlier debarments on file, since ended or lifted: Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM).

Earlier readings3

25 Sept 2026LOW · 45methodology v5

Sanctions and debarments: 40 · Ownership risk: not scored · Jurisdiction: not scored · Evidence coverage: 60 · Adverse media: not scored

12 Sept 2026MEDIUM · 65methodology v4

Sanctions exposure: 60 · Ownership risk: not scored · Jurisdiction: not scored · Evidence coverage: 80 · Adverse media: not scored

12 Sept 2026MEDIUM · 65methodology v4

Sanctions exposure: 60 · Ownership risk: not scored · Jurisdiction: not scored · Evidence coverage: 80 · Adverse media: not scored

Each reading is kept with the methodology version that produced it. A later reading is not a correction of an earlier one — it is a different question asked of more sources.

Every fact, its record and its source

10 claims on file

Fact
abn amro bank
Legal name
Evidence
sn5068
Read 25 Sept 2026 · asserted by 3 records
Source
ESMA Sanctions Register
Primary source ↗
Fact
NL
Jurisdiction
Evidence
sn5068
Read 25 Sept 2026 · asserted by 3 records
Source
ESMA Sanctions Register
Primary source ↗
Fact
Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — MiFID
Designation
Evidence
sn5068
Read 25 Sept 2026 · in force from 6 Jul 2017 · asserted by 3 records
Source
ESMA Sanctions Register
Primary source ↗
Fact
Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) — Debarment
Designation
Evidence
sn5067
Read 12 Sept 2026 · in force from 20 Oct 2015
Source
ESMA Sanctions Register
Primary source ↗

What was checked

Sanctions

34 sources read · 1 with records

ESMA Sanctions Registerrecords found23 Oct 2026
World Bank Listing of Ineligible Firms and Individualsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
Brazil MTE employer register (lista suja)read in full, nothing on this company30 Sept 2026
New Zealand Russia Sanctions Registerread in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
IDB Sanctioned Firms and Individualsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
Australia DFAT Consolidated Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
Japan MOF Sanctions Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
US UFLPA Entity Listread in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
UK OFSI Consolidated Listread in full, nothing on this company8 Oct 2026· newest record 3 Jun 2026
OFAC Consolidated (non-SDN)read in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 14 Sept 2026
US CBP forced-labour orders (WRO & Findings)read in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
France AMF blacklist of unauthorised actorsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
EU Consolidated Sanctions Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 15 Oct 2026
Poland MSWiA sanctions listread in full, nothing on this company21 Oct 2026
UK Sanctions List (FCDO)read in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 16 Oct 2026
Latvia FID frozen assets registerread in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
Brazil CEIS (national procurement exclusions)read in full, nothing on this company21 Oct 2026
Canada Consolidated Autonomous Sanctions Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
Taiwan SHTC export entity listread in full, nothing on this company21 Oct 2026
Swiss FINMA warning listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
EBRD Ineligible Entitiesread in full, nothing on this company22 Oct 2026
Türkiye MASAK asset freezesread in full, nothing on this company22 Oct 2026
SAM.gov Exclusions (US federal)read in full, nothing on this company24 Oct 2026
Brazil TCU (firms declared inidôneas)read in full, nothing on this company22 Oct 2026
Slovenia KPK business restrictionsread in full, nothing on this company15 Oct 2026
Moldova procurement ban listread in full, nothing on this company29 Sept 2026
Norges Bank (fund exclusions and observation)read in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
Malaysia SC investor alert listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
UN Security Council Consolidated Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 17 Oct 2026
US Consolidated Screening Listread in full, nothing on this company5 Oct 2026
Switzerland SECO Sanctions Listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 15 Oct 2026
OFAC SDNread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026· list dated 15 Oct 2026
France Registre national des gelsread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
Malaysia BNM financial consumer alert listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026

Debarment

16 sources read

US UFLPA Entity Listread in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
SAM.gov Exclusions (US federal)read in full, nothing on this company24 Oct 2026
EBRD Ineligible Entitiesread in full, nothing on this company22 Oct 2026
Brazil MTE employer register (lista suja)read in full, nothing on this company21 Oct 2026
Malaysia BNM financial consumer alert listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
Moldova procurement ban listread in full, nothing on this company29 Sept 2026
IDB Sanctioned Firms and Individualsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
France AMF blacklist of unauthorised actorsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
Norges Bank (fund exclusions and observation)read in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
Malaysia SC investor alert listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
World Bank Listing of Ineligible Firms and Individualsread in full, nothing on this company23 Oct 2026
US CBP forced-labour orders (WRO & Findings)read in full, nothing on this company20 Oct 2026
Brazil CEIS (national procurement exclusions)read in full, nothing on this company21 Oct 2026
Slovenia KPK business restrictionsread in full, nothing on this company15 Oct 2026
Swiss FINMA warning listread in full, nothing on this company19 Oct 2026
Brazil TCU (firms declared inidôneas)read in full, nothing on this company22 Oct 2026

Jurisdictions that bear on this company

NLregistered here

No company register for this jurisdiction has been connected to this system, and none has been examined.

Where this record comes from1

ESMA Sanctions Register3 records · last read 23 Oct 2026Open source ↗

Records from these sources are matched into one company only on a shared identifier, or by a human reviewer — never on name similarity alone. How this works. Not legal or compliance advice: check the originals before acting on anything here.

How to read an empty answer

TRUE: A source states it. Rendered as a fact, with the source attached.
FALSE: A source explicitly denies it. Rare, and never inferred from silence.
UNKNOWN: Checked, nothing found. Rendered as an em dash, never as 0 or "no".
NOT_ASSESSED: Never checked — nothing was read here. Excluded from coverage, and not counted as clean.

Where each field comes from

Legal nameABN Amro Bank N.V.ESMA Sanctions Register · read 2026-10-23 | ESMA Sanctions Register · read 2026-10-23 | ESMA Sanctions Register · read 2026-10-23

Addressnot on file

Citynot on file

Industrynot on file

Statusnot on file

Websitenot on file

CountryNLtoo short to trace

7 records on this company — identifiers, aliases, officers, listings, figures — each carry the source that wrote them and are shown beside their own entries. The fields above are different: the entities table has no source column, so what is shown is every source whose stored payload contains the value verbatim. That is strong evidence, not proof of which write landed it, and where nothing contains the value the row says so instead of naming a plausible source.

Names on file1

ABN Amro Bank N.V.ESMA Sanctions Register

Recent timeline

23 Oct 2026Last read from source

Exposure

45/ 100Low risk

Sanctions and debarments: 40× 0.50
What is unread: 60× 0.15

Exposure, not risk: how much attention this record warrants. 3 of 7 areas were never assessed, and that raises the figure rather than being left out. Not a judgement of the company.

Evidence coverage

4of 7 areas carry evidence

1 with records found. Counted from sources actually read for this company, not from the catalogue this product owns — and kept apart from exposure, so the gap is never averaged away.

Sources at a glance

Primary sources: 1
Names on file: 2
Identifiers: — none
Last read: 23 Oct 2026

Readings on file (3)

25 Sept 202645 / 100 · lowmethodology v5

12 Sept 202665 / 100 · mediummethodology v4

A frozen reading answers what was said then, and what had been checked by then.

Why some fields are empty

Access paths, register connections and source coverage decide what can be read. An empty field is a coverage statement, not a value.

ABN Amro Bank N.V.

Findings by area

Sanctions

Ownership & control

Key people

On the record

Recent changes

Ownership test

Ownership & control

People0

Sanctions in force0

Debarments3 in force

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

Connections

Same registered address

Recorded history

In the news

Earlier readings3

Every fact, its record and its source

What was checked

Sanctions

Debarment

Jurisdictions that bear on this company

Where this record comes from1

How to read an empty answer

Where each field comes from

Names on file1

Recent timeline