Case study

Building a Common Approach to Suspicious Transaction Reporting

Co-Founder and PartnerMatthew Neill

Our client, a public-sector organisation coordinating across EU multiple countries, needed to prepare the groundwork for consistent Suspicious Transaction Reporting to enable cross-border sharing of data ahead of significant regulatory changes.

Each jurisdiction had developed its own approach based on its own national needs, creating conflicting assumptions about data, terminology and reporting expectations. National reporting units were operating under different legal frameworks, and data fields were inconsistent across different regions. Cross-border supervision was being hindered by incompatible reporting formats.

Our client brought BeyondFS on to inform and facilitate discussions across stakeholders to reach agreement on how to move forward.

Industry segment
Public Sector
Function
Financial Crime Data
Core capabilities
Stakeholder Management, Financial Crime Reporting

Key outcomes delivered

A shared and realistic baseline: Reaching alignment across ~20 national reporting units on current STR data, definitions and reporting practices.

Clear agreement among stakeholders: On scope, priorities and immediate next steps for harmonisation.

Renewed engagement: From key countries after recognising gaps in their own assumptions and progress.

Review

different date formats identified across 10 countries

Coverage

FIUs represented

Commitment

day workshop

Approach

Establishing a shared baseline

BeyondFS was asked to establish a shared baseline and create the conditions for participating countries to work towards common reporting standards. We began by reviewing reporting practices across jurisdictions to identify commonalities, gaps and inconsistencies in STR data fields and definitions. Our analysis highlighted areas of divergence and alignment, and we used strong examples to build support among national reporting units.

We then developed a presentation pack that summarised the findings, structured the discussion and set out the decisions required. Working alongside another Independent Expert, we designed and delivered a two-day roundtable with representatives from the co-ordinating body and more than 20 national units to form a shared view of the current state.

Drawing on our experience with multinational organisations, we managed the dynamics across a diverse group of investigators, enforcement teams, legal specialists and technical experts, keeping discussions accessible and constructive across languages and cultures.

Outcome

A defined path forward

Participants left with a clear understanding of the real baseline, recognising both where progress had been made and where divergence needed attention. The roundtable secured strong engagement from national units and gave the coordinating body confidence to move into the next phase. Our handling of political dynamics, cultural differences and multi-stakeholder complexity was noted as a strength.

Our successful delivery led to an invitation to support the next stage, helping to agree common definitions for priority data fields and shape the wider programme of change.