Checklist · AML/CTF — the practice as a reporting entity
Independent evaluation of the practice AML/CTF program
A checklist for an independent evaluation of a legal practice AML/CTF program: who may evaluate it, what they must be given, who receives the written report, and how adverse findings are answered.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- Australia
- AI use
- Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the authority it cites, for Australia.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when the practice is arranging or answering an independent evaluation of its AML/CTF program. It is not the ML/TF risk assessment record, and it is not the starter-kit adoption guide.
Used for these tasks
Each task page says how far AI may help with the task and what the lawyer must review.
How AI may be used
AI may list documents already on the AML file and dates of earlier evaluations; the lawyer decides whether the evaluator is independent and how an adverse finding is answered.
AI may
- List the risk assessment, the policies, and earlier evaluation reports that are already saved on the file
- Enter the date the written report was received and the date it was sent to the governing body
AI must not
- Must not decide that an evaluator is independent or suitable
- Must not treat disagreement with a finding as a reason to skip the review the page requires
- Must not invent a qualification the page says is not mandatory
The lawyer checks
- The policies state how independence and suitability are decided, and the evaluator is not the compliance officer or a member of the compliance team
- The written report goes to the governing body and to the senior manager who approves the program
- Any update to the risk assessment or the policies is documented within 14 days after the update is made
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Read the full text
The full text is available after you log in. It is free. When you log in you can:
- read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
- copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
- add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
- let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.
The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.
More in AML/CTF — the practice as a reporting entity
- AML/CTF program for small legal practices: AUSTRAC legal profession starter kit adoption guide
- AUSTRAC enrolment form for a reporting entity
- ML/TF risk assessment record for a legal practice
- Designated services capture map and enrolment decision record (AML/CTF Act s 6(5B), table 6)
- Enhanced customer due diligence decision record
- First independent evaluation deadline for the practice
- AUSTRAC suspicious matter report
- Customer due diligence file index before the service starts
- Initial customer due diligence checklist for law practice designated services
- AUSTRAC legal professional privilege form for a report
- Legal profession AML/CTF program review triggers
- AI and automated tools in the AML/CTF program: control standard
- Deadline to notify AUSTRAC of the AML/CTF compliance officer
- AUSTRAC legal professional privilege form for a notice
- Tipping-off holding script for staff and the approved client note
- AML/CTF record retention schedule for the practice
- Suspicious matter escalation, reporting and legal professional privilege procedure
- Client letter: why we need to verify your identity (AML/CTF obligations)
All precedents for AML/CTF — the practice as a reporting entity · Tasks and AI use in this area