Exemptions in the AMLR for gambling and football clubs

We continue our blog series on the EU’s AMLR with a methodical review of the Regulation’s articles and their practical consequences for obliged entities. In the first part, The EU’s AMLR: definition, purpose and obliged entities in the anti-money laundering framework, we outlined the Regulation’s content, definitions and obliged entities, providing essential context for understanding the core principles underpinning the AMLR.

This post focuses on the exemption provisions in Articles 4 and 5, and how these should be understood in relation to risk. Morling Consulting’s expertise supports organisations in interpreting the exemption provisions, conducting qualified risk assessments and ensuring that internal procedures meet the Regulation’s requirements for a risk based approach. For organisations seeking to operationalise this in practice, we also offer AML advisory for risk management with a focus on governance, documentation and control.

The function of exemptions in the AMLR and the risk based approach

The AMLR establishes a harmonised, directly applicable regime in which risk management plays a central role. In turn, this allows Member States to exempt certain obliged entities, in whole or in part, from requirements under the AMLR. However, any exempted activity must present a low money laundering risk and a low risk of terrorist financing.

The exemption provisions in Articles 4 and 5 form part of this proportionality assessment. They enable adjustments for actors whose risk level is objectively low, whilst still requiring identification, documentation and control of risks within those activities. These are not general carve-outs: exemptions require evidence based assessment, analysis and ongoing monitoring. In practice, Articles 4 and 5 illustrate how EU law clarifies that flexibility is conditional on substantiated risk levels and on adequate control mechanisms being in place.

Article 4 AMLR — Gambling services: exemptions and requirements for risk assessment

Article 4 addresses the possibility for Member States to exempt certain providers of gambling services, in whole or in part, from aspects of the Regulation. It is explicit that exemptions may be granted only where there is substantiation that the activity presents low risk. This is not a judgement based on assumptions; it requires analysis of actual risk factors. Gambling activities that demonstrate low money laundering risk may, on grounds of proportionality assessment, be wholly or partially exempted from the Regulation.

The rule sets two important limits. First, casinos can never be exempted. Second, exemptions cannot be granted to operators whose principal activity consists of online gambling or betting on sport. There is, however, a carve-out for these gambling services where the online gambling services are run by the state or are subject to state regulation.

In risk assessments under Articles 4 and 5, Member States must take into account the European Commission’s Union-wide risk assessment under Article 7 of Directive (EU) 2024/1640. The EU has considered potential cross-border effects of national exemptions and has therefore promoted application of a risk based approach across the Union. Article 7 of Directive 2024/1640 provides for a Union-level assessment: the European Commission must assess risks of money laundering and terrorist financing, as well as risks that targeted financial sanctions are circumvented or not implemented at all. The assessment must also consider any impact on the internal market. Member States should follow Commission recommendations on appropriate measures to address the risks identified. Where Member States do not apply the commission recommendations, they must notify the Commission and provide a reasoned analysis explaining the deviation. Overall, this supports consistent outcomes and reduces the risk of unequal conditions within the Union.

Article 5 AMLR — Certain professional football clubs as exemptions

Article 5 follows the same basic structure as Article 4, but applies to professional football clubs. As with Article 4, exemptions may be granted only where the club presents a documented low risk. It is for Member States to exempt clubs from AMLR requirements. Here too, Member States must consider the European Commission’s risk assessments under Article 7 of Directive 2024/1640, helping ensure that clubs across the Union are assessed in a broadly comparable way, notwithstanding significant differences in national football systems and financial structures.

Clubs playing in the top division face a greater risk of misuse for money laundering compared with lower-league clubs. This reflects potential opacity in ownership structures, cross-border flows and higher transaction values. Professional football clubs in the top division may therefore only benefit from an exemption where the club presents low risk and has had a turnover below EUR 5,000,000 during the two preceding calendar years.

Clubs in lower divisions may be exempted only where they are associated with a substantiated low risk of money laundering, predicate offences to money laundering or terrorist financing. The purpose of these differentiated judgements is to ring-fence clubs that lack the transaction volumes and international flows that typically increase risk, thereby ensuring smaller clubs do not bear a disproportionate compliance burden.

Under Article 5, Member States’ risk assessments should focus on two main areas. The first is threats, vulnerabilities and specific risk factors in the club’s operations. This may include payments and transactions linked to player transfers, sponsorship agreements and matchday income. The second area is the size and cross-border nature of transactions, for example player transfers between clubs in different countries.

Risk based approach to national exemptions and proportionality assessment

The risk based approach underpinning the AMLR means that national exemptions implemented under Articles 4 and 5 must align with the actual risk identified in the relevant sector or activity. When a Member State decides to exempt gambling services or football clubs, in whole or in part, this must be based on a documented, evidence based assessment showing that the residual risks can be managed with less onerous requirements. Where the risk level is assessed as medium or high, there is no scope for exemption, because the Regulation permits exemptions only where the risk is low.

In practice, a defensible proportionality assessment should combine sectoral money laundering risk analysis, internal controls testing and attention to commission recommendations. This ensures exemptions remain targeted, time-appropriate and anchored in verifiable evidence.

Continue reading about the next step in the regulatory framework: Exemptions for financial activities, prior notification and internal controls under the AMLR.