Canada Ranks Behind China and Russia in Real Estate Ownership Opacity and Anti-Money Laundering Practices

NEW INDEX REVEALS ALARMING OPACITY AND MONEY LAUNDERING VULNERABILITIES IN GLOBAL REAL ESTATE MARKETS, INCLUDING CANADA

Transparency International and the Anti-Corruption Data Collective rank property markets on their frameworks’ strength to prevent and detect dirty money in real estate

Link to the report: https://t.co/fRx5bvUJ2z

26 March, 2025

Berlin -- In most of the world’s leading economies and major financial centres, criminals, the corrupt and their enablers can exploit a series of loopholes to stash dirty money in real estate while likely avoiding detection. Property markets are vulnerable to abuse because real estate can be held anonymously and avoid meaningful third-party control in many places. Moreover, law enforcement and public watchdogs are limited in their ability to detect suspicious cases because data is inaccessible or not comprehensive enough. These are the conclusions of the first edition of the Opacity in Real Estate Ownership (OREO) Index, by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective (ACDC) and Transparency International, published today.

The OREO Index assesses and ranks 24 jurisdictions, including 18 G20 member nations plus guest countries Spain and Norway, as well as Hong Kong, Panama, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The index scores them on two metrics: the scope and availability of real estate data; and the strength of anti-money laundering legal frameworks for the real estate sector.

The index reveals that no country achieves a perfect mark, with 10 jurisdictions scoring below five out of possible 10 points.

The best performer on the index is South Africa, where the government collects broad data on real estate transactions and thoroughly regulates the sector for money laundering. However, even here, gaps remain, including a burdensome process for accessing real estate data, which is also not available to foreign citizens, putting the brakes on follow-the-money investigations. Some of the anti-money laundering rules are fairly recent and were adopted following South Africa’s designation to the Financial Action Task Force’s so-called grey list of countries with strategic deficiencies in their frameworks. The practical implementation and effectiveness of these measures remains to be seen.

Australia, South Korea and the United States are among the worst performing countries, largely due to their lack of anti-money laundering regulation for professionals involved in real estate transactions. Australia has recently passed historic legislation extending anti-money laundering obligations to real estate professionals, but these will come into force only in July 2026.

Lack of adequate third-party control

Concerningly, the assessment revealed that property purchases can be made without the involvement of a third party – such as a real estate agent or a notary – in Australia, China, England & Wales, Japan, Türkiye and the UAE. This means that real estate transactions can occur without being screened for anti-money laundering risks. Making things worse, Russia and the UAE also allow real estate transactions to be made in cash, instead of through a bank which could ensure at least some scrutiny.

While most jurisdictions have regulated professional service providers who can be involved in property transactions, real estate developers who can directly sell properties don’t have to screen their clients and report suspicious activity to the authorities in many of the countries.

Anonymous ownership and locked up data

The OREO Index reveals that the corrupt can continue to buy, hold and sell real estate anonymously in most assessed countries. The main way this can happen is by owning property through companies, which rarely have to disclose their real owners when registering properties. Some of the countries which have required companies incorporated domestically to disclose their real owners, usually through separate registers, continue to allow real estate investments by foreign companies to remain secretive. Following the adoption of new rules in the European Union, this glaring loophole will soon have to be closed in France and Spain.

The study also makes the case for easy access to open data on real estate transactions, as well as reference datasets including beneficial ownership, corporate and land registries, is essential for allowing authorities and public-interest researchers to detect cases of money laundering and monitor the effectiveness of policies. At present, however, the jurisdictions assessed are falling far short of the ideal standard.

Maira Martini, Chief Executive Officer of Transparency International, said:

“We have known for a long time that real estate is a magnet for dirty money. And yet, the OREO Index shows that countries, including those that have recently reformed their systems, still have major gaps in their systems. It is no wonder that real estate markets are bursting with dirty cash, making cities around the world unaffordable.

“While progress has been slow, the OREO Index also shows that international anti-money laundering standards can have an impact. We urge standard-setter bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force and global fora such as the G20 to develop new policies and guidelines to help countries address remaining loopholes.”

Trevor Loke, Executive Director of Transparency International Canada, said:

“Canada’s dismal ranking should set off alarm bells. Falling behind autocratic regimes like Russia and China on anti-money laundering in real estate is unacceptable. Weak rules and loopholes have made our property market a magnet for dirty money, driving up housing costs and locking Canadians out of our own communities.

“As Canada prepares to host the G7 this June, we have a critical opportunity to lead by example. By tightening our own anti-money laundering laws and pushing our global peers to do the same, we can take meaningful steps to shut the door on financial crime and restore integrity to real estate markets at home and abroad.”

David Szakonyi, Co-founder and Director of ACDC, said:

“England & Wales and France score the highest on the data pillar of the OREO Index. It is no coincidence that these are also the places where academics and civil society have been able to conduct in-depth data analyses, generating insights for policymakers and leads for journalists and authorities to pinpoint homes bought with illicit wealth. Public-interest data needs to be in the public domain, everywhere.”

The organisations recommend that all jurisdictions use the OREO Index assessment methodology as a guide to protect their real estate markets from the proceeds of crime and corruption.

Notes to editors

• The report assessed the following jurisdictions: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, England & Wales, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Panama, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and the United States.
• The OREO Index assessment framework is available online for researchers around the world to replicate the study and assess other jurisdictions.
• ACDC and Transparency International have previously cross-analysed company ownership and real estate data in France, revealing the extent of persistent anonymity in the country’s property market.

Media Contact

Trevor Loke

Executive Director, Transparency International Canada

trevor.loke@transparencycanada.ca

Transparency International: U.S. pausing of foreign bribery enforcement will harm economies and governance worldwide

Statement by Transparency International, with the support of Transparency International Canada

version française à suivre

Yesterday, President Trump issued an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to pause all enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) until she issues new guidelines.

Clipping the wings of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) enforcement of the FCPA delivers a major blow to the fight against foreign bribery worldwide. It risks undermining decades of progress in tackling cross-border corruption and puts international stability at risk. This pause will work to the advantage of unscrupulous business actors around the world who until now feared U.S. criminal pursuits.

The FCPA was passed in 1977 to address widespread foreign bribery by multinationals that were discovered in the wake of the Watergate scandal. It was the first law of its kind in the world, and prohibits U.S. companies, individuals, and foreign entities with a U.S. connection from bribing foreign public officials.

The FCPA was internationalised in 1997 with the adoption of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention which now has 46 parties. By halting enforcement, the U.S. administration is jeopardising the country’s commitments under the Convention, as well as under the UN Convention against Corruption.

The U.S. has long been respected as a global leader in foreign bribery enforcement. For close to two decades, enforcement by the DOJ has established a deterrent for domestic and foreign companies alike, resulting in billions of dollars in fines. Putting the brakes on its enforcement efforts will reverse years of progress in promoting fair competition among the private sector in their relations with public institutions globally.

The FCPA plays a critical role in holding companies to account, ensuring that they face consequences for their corrupt acts and a sense of justice for victims. In a recent FCPA case, a multinational mining company was found to have paid bribes to officials in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria to secure lucrative business deals. As the company was U.S.-listed, authorities were able to take action for violating the FCPA. The case underscored the profound human cost of corruption, as the company's actions not only undermined fair competition but also led to environmental harm and exploitation of local workers in some of the world’s poorest regions.

In the absence of U.S. leadership, other major exporting countries party to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention must step up to the plate and increase their enforcement.

François Valérian, Chair of Transparency International, said:

“U.S. enforcement of the FCPA has long been a gold standard in the fight against corruption. Weakening it will empower wrongdoers and send a dangerous signal that bribery is back on the table. Foreign bribery is by no means, as suggested by last night’s decision, a routine business practice. This is a betrayal of U.S. leadership in global anti-corruption efforts and a gift to those who profit from bribery and illicit financial flows. This dangerous course needs to be immediately reversed.”

---

Hier le 10 février, le président Trump a signé un décret ordonnant à la procureure générale Pam Bondi de suspendre toute application de la loi sur les pratiques de corruption à l'étranger (FCPA) jusqu'à ce qu'elle publie de nouvelles lignes directrices.

Le décret stipule que l'application de la FCPA a fait l'objet d'abus et "entrave les objectifs de la politique étrangère des États-Unis", qui sont "inextricablement liés à la compétitivité des entreprises américaines". Il affirme également que la sécurité nationale des États-Unis dépend de l'obtention par les États-Unis et les entreprises américaines d'"avantages commerciaux stratégiques".

Cette décision fait suite au mémorandum envoyé la semaine dernière par le procureur général aux employés du ministère américain de la justice (DOJ), leur demandant de donner la priorité aux enquêtes relatives à la "corruption étrangère qui facilite les opérations criminelles des cartels et des organisations criminelles transnationales".

Couper les ailes à l'application de la FCPA par le DOJ , c’est porter un coup majeur à la lutte contre la corruption transnationale dans le monde entier. C’est risquer de saper des décennies de progrès dans la lutte contre la corruption transfrontalière, et mettre en péril la stabilité internationale. Cette suspension profitera aux acteurs économiques peu scrupuleux du monde entier qui craignaient jusqu'à présent les poursuites pénales américaines.

La loi FCPA fut adoptée en 1977 pour lutter contre la corruption généralisée des multinationales, découverte à la suite du scandale du Watergate. Il s'agissait alors de la première loi de ce type au monde, interdisant aux entreprises américaines, aux particuliers et aux entités étrangères ayant un lien avec les États-Unis, de corrompre des agents publics étrangers.

La FCPA a été internationalisée en 1997 avec l'adoption de la convention anti-corruption de l'OCDE, qui compte aujourd'hui 46 parties signataires. En interrompant l'application de la loi, l'administration américaine met en péril les engagements pris par le pays dans le cadre de cette convention, ainsi que dans le cadre de la convention des Nations unies contre la corruption.

Les États-Unis sont depuis longtemps respectés en tant que leader mondial en matière de lutte contre la corruption transnationale. Depuis près de vingt ans, l'application de la loi par le ministère de la justice américain a eu un effet dissuasif sur les entreprises nationales et étrangères et s'est traduite par des milliards de dollars d'amendes. Freiner ses efforts d'application reviendrait à annuler des années de progrès dans la promotion de la concurrence loyale à l’intérieur du secteur privé dans ses relations avec les institutions publiques dans le monde entier.

En l'absence de leadership américain, les autres grands pays exportateurs signataires de la convention anti-corruption de l'OCDE doivent prendre les devants et renforcer l'application de leurs propres lois.

François Valérian, président de Transparency International, a déclaré :

"L'application de la loi FCPA par les États-Unis est depuis longtemps une référence en matière de lutte contre la corruption. L'affaiblir donnera plus de pouvoir aux entités et personnes corrompues, et enverra le signal dangereux que la corruption est de nouveau licite. La corruption à l'étranger n'est en aucun cas, comme le suggère la décision d'hier soir, une pratique commerciale courante. Il y a là un reniement d'une forme d'exemplarité américaine dans les efforts mondiaux de lutte contre la corruption, et un cadeau à ceux qui profitent de la corruption et des flux financiers illicites. Cette politique dangereuse doit être immédiatement inversée".

Canada Slides to Lowest-Ever Ranking in Corruption Perception Index / Le Canada descend au plus bas niveau de son histoire en matière de perception de la corruption

English version

version française

Annual Report 2023-2024

Call for Nominations: 2024 Canadian Integrity Award

Call for Nominations: Canadian Integrity Award 2024

As part of Transparency International Canada’s mission to promote transparency and combat corruption, we are pleased to announce the call for nominations for the 2024 Canadian Integrity Award (CIA). This award will be presented to an individual or organization that has demonstrated an exemplary commitment to promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity in Canada.

Event Details The award will be presented at the Toronto Day of Dialogue on Thursday, November 28, 2024. This special event will bring together leaders and stakeholders to discuss key anti-corruption issues in Canada, particularly in the public, private, and non-profit sectors.

Award Criteria We welcome nominations of individuals or organizations who have actively advanced transparency and accountability within Canada. Eligible candidates may have made contributions through research, reporting, advocacy, policy changes, legislative work, or upholding the rule of law. Nominees should demonstrate a measurable and impactful contribution to addressing current anti-corruption challenges in Canada, such as promoting transparency in governance, combating fraud, or reinforcing ethical leadership in key sectors. TI Canada defines corruption as the abuse of public or private power for personal gain, and award nominees should have been instrumental in establishing or strengthening mechanisms that combat, expose, or prevent corruption. Nominees must meet the following criteria: • Canadian residents or organizations whose actions have had a significant impact in Canada. • Contributions must have been made in the last five years, or span a lifetime body of work. • Nominees cannot be current TI Canada employees, Board Members, or contractors.

Award Selection The award will be selected by the Executive Director, advised by a select committee of TI Canada members. While the evaluation process will involve both objective and subjective criteria, nominees will not be selected based on a score alone, but through a comprehensive review of their impact and alignment with the core values of TI Canada.

Presentation of the Award The winner will be announced in early November, and arrangements will be made for an in-person or virtual award presentation at the Day of Dialogue in Toronto.

Nominee Evaluation Criteria

1. Eligibility Criteria • Impact in Canada: Has the nominee’s work, whether over their lifetime or in the last five years, made a significant impact on transparency and accountability in Canada? • Timeframe: If the nominee's work spans their lifetime, has a significant portion of that impact occurred within the last five years? • No Conflict of Interest: Ensure the nominee is not a current TI Canada employee, Board Member, or contractor.
2. Contribution to Transparency and Accountability • Key Initiatives: Has the nominee (individual or organization) led important initiatives that promote transparency and fight corruption? • Types of Actions: Evaluate contributions such as research, reporting, advocacy, policy reform, or legislative change. • Results: Has the nominee’s work resulted in concrete and measurable changes in laws, policies, or practices that promote transparency and accountability? For example, these outcomes might include legislative reforms, significant policy shifts, or improved governance practices in a sector.
3. Evidence of Impact • Proven Influence: Is there clear evidence (reports, media coverage, etc.) of the nominee’s work and its impact? • Scope of Impact: Did the nominee’s work influence a sector, organization, community, or region in Canada? • Long-Term Change: Has the nominee’s contribution resulted in sustained improvements in transparency or accountability over time? Concrete evidence, such as legislative achievements, policy reforms, or significant organizational change, is particularly valuable in supporting the nomination.
4. Alignment with TI Canada’s Values • Integrity and Ethics: Has the nominee consistently demonstrated integrity and ethical leadership in their work? • Transparency: Is the nominee known for promoting openness in governance or other sectors? • Accountability: Has the nominee held individuals, organizations, or governments accountable for their actions?
5. Leadership and Advocacy • Leadership: Has the nominee (individual or organization) taken a leading role in driving transparency and anti-corruption efforts? • Advocacy: Has the nominee effectively advocated for change and influenced public or policy discussions on corruption?
6. Public Perception and Integrity • Public Recognition: Is the nominee (individual or organization) respected by peers, institutions, or the public for their contributions? • Reputation for Integrity: Are there no past issues that might conflict with TI Canada’s mission or values? This criterion will consider public and peer recognition of the nominee’s work, ensuring their reputation aligns with TI Canada’s standards. Submission Instructions for Canadian Integrity Award 2024 Nominations Please follow these simple guidelines when submitting your nomination: • Format: Submissions should be no more than 3 pages in total and submitted in PDF format. • Content: There is no required structure for the nomination, but please ensure that the submission clearly answers the criteria. Nominators are encouraged to include robust evidence of the nominee’s contributions, such as links to reports, news articles, or testimonials, to support the impact of their work. • Supporting Evidence: Hyperlinks to relevant news articles, reports, or additional evidence are encouraged within the PDF. • Submission Deadline: Sunday, October 20, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. EST.

For further inquiries or to submit your nomination, please contact us at ti-can@transparencycanada.ca. For more information, please visit: https://transparencycanada.ca/canadian-integrity-award

Final Reminder: Do not miss the opportunity to honor an individual or organization leading the way in anti-corruption and integrity! Submit your nomination by October 20, 2024, and join us in celebrating those who have made a significant impact on transparency and accountability in Canada.

Save the Date: Day of Dialogue

Save the Date: Day of Dialogue 2024 in Toronto

Transparency International Canada is thrilled to announce that our annual Day of Dialogue will be returning to Toronto on November 28, 2024. This event is a cornerstone of our mission to promote transparency, accountability, and integrity across all sectors in Canada.

The Day of Dialogue brings together leaders from government, business, civil society, and academia to discuss the most pressing issues related to corruption and transparency. It’s a unique opportunity for stakeholders to share insights, explore innovative solutions, and build the networks necessary to drive systemic change.

What to Expect:

• Insightful Keynotes: Hear from top experts and thought leaders in the field of anti-corruption and governance.

• Engaging Panels: Participate in discussions that address current challenges and opportunities in fostering transparency and integrity in Canada.

• Networking Opportunities: Connect with Canada’s leading thinkers, practioners, and influencers in the anti-corruption and integrity movement at our first networking reception following the formal program.

Mark your calendars for November 28, 2024, and plan to join us in Toronto for a day of meaningful dialogue and collaboration. We look forward to seeing you there!

Stay tuned for more details about speakers, sessions, and registration information. Together, we can build a more transparent and accountable Canada.

UK Election Offers Lessons for Canada

Our recent dialogue with Transparency International UK was a fantastic way to spend a summer Friday—engaging, thought-provoking, and filled with insights that will undoubtedly shape our work moving forward. It’s always inspiring to connect with our counterparts across the pond, especially when the conversation touches on the critical issues we both face in the fight against corruption.

We we're blessed to be joined by TI UK Chief Executive, Daniel Bruce. Daniel's background with his team, leading an intensive advocacy and outreach strategy for government is a north star for us as we approach a federal election in Canada. Daniel provided an insightful overview of how TI UK engaged from before the 2019 election, through the last term, into the campaign, and now the early days of a new government.

Those who joined us asked insightful questions about similarities between our respective countries and democratic systems.

One of the highlights was our discussion on reforming the upper chambers of parliament—the House of Lords in the UK and the Senate in Canada. We delved into how these institutions can be reformed to ensure they are more transparent and accountable, which is crucial in maintaining public trust. These reforms are not just about modernizing old systems; they’re about making sure these bodies work for the people, free from undue influence, including foreign interference.

The conversation naturally turned to the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly around procurement. The pandemic exposed some significant vulnerabilities in how quickly things can go wrong when transparency takes a back seat. Both Canada and the UK faced challenges, and our discussion highlighted the need for stronger oversight and clear, transparent procedures, especially in times of crisis.

Another critical topic was the role of institutions in supporting illicit money flows. It’s a tough battle, but one that both our countries are committed to fighting. The strength of financial institutions to our respective economies presents challenges to overcoming this reality. Tightening regulations and improving enforcement were key points of discussion, and it’s clear that both Canada and the UK have much to learn from each other in this area.

So, what does this all mean for TI Canada? Here are a few takeaways:

Stay Engaged: We need to be consistently active on the issues that matter. It’s not enough to react; we must be proactive in driving the conversation around transparency and accountability.

Champion Inclusivity: Our approach must remain multi-partisan and non-partisan. By working across the political spectrum, we can build a broader base of support and push for the changes that benefit everyone.

Elevate Solutions: Finding and promoting champions—both individuals and ideas—will help us amplify our impact. Whether it’s through partnerships, public campaigns, or policy advocacy, we need to keep pushing the solutions that can make a real difference.

Foster International Collaboration: The challenges we face aren’t confined to our borders. Continued collaboration with international partners like TI UK will only strengthen our efforts and help us learn from each other’s successes and challenges.

Thank you for those who joined us. This was my first dialogue since joining as Executive Director in June, and it wouldn't have been possible without you, our supporters, our members, and of course, the team at TI UK.

This dialogue was more than just an exchange of ideas—it was a reminder of why we do what we do. It reaffirmed our commitment to transparency, integrity, and accountability, and it gave us new tools to continue this important work. I’m excited for what’s next and confident that, together, we can make a real impact in the fight against corruption.