In the ten weeks leading up to the entry into force of the new Belgian Criminal Code (hereinafter, “NCC”) on 1 September 2026, we will publish a series of weekly articles addressing key developments relevant to corporate criminal law. This fifth contribution focuses on several amendments to the money laundering framework.
1. Extension of the scope of the primary money laundering offence
Under the new Criminal Code, money laundering remains criminalised through three distinct offences (Art. 502 NCC). However, the scope of the primary money laundering offence is expanded.
In particular, the rule whereby the perpetrator of, or participant in, the predicate offence could not be held liable for money laundering under the primary offence is abolished. The perpetrator of the predicate offence may now also be prosecuted for the primary money laundering offence (i.e. the acquisition, receipt, possession, retention or other handling of the proceeds of a predicate offence). An exception applies where the predicate offence was committed abroad and is not punishable in that jurisdiction.
This amendment brings Belgium into line with several other legal systems that already criminalise the laundering of illicit proceeds derived from one’s own criminal conduct and strengthens the ability to combat criminal organisations that reintegrate illegal proceeds into the lawful economy.
2. The criticised exemption clause remains in place
In implementation of Directive (EU) 2018/1673, the legislator already introduced several amendments to the money laundering offences in 2024. Influenced by EU law, these included, inter alia, stricter penalties for perpetrators and accomplices.
In addition, and also in implementation of Directive (EU) 2018/1673, the legislator abolished the so-called fiscal exemption clause. Prior to its abolition, only “serious tax fraud, whether or not organised” could, in certain cases, constitute a predicate offence for money laundering. Under the revised regime, ordinary tax fraud is now generally recognised as a predicate offence.
However, the legislator retained a limited exemption for entities subject to the preventive anti-money laundering legislation. Under the revised regime, such entities may still benefit from an exemption from criminal liability for the primary and third money laundering offences, provided that the case concerns ordinary (or simple) tax fraud and that they can demonstrate compliance with the applicable legal and regulatory framework for combating tax fraud, including the obligations arising under the Law of 18 September 2017 (Art. 505, para. 3 CC).
This revised exemption clause has been strongly criticised due to its complexity and internal inconsistency. In particular, it raises the question of how an entity can comply with preventive anti-money laundering obligations while simultaneously committing an intentional money laundering offence.
The legislator has nevertheless not addressed this criticism. The provision is reproduced unchanged in Article 504 NCC.
3. Introduction of aggravating factors
In addition to the amendments to the primary money laundering offence, the new Criminal Code does not introduce fundamental changes to the money laundering framework. It does, however, introduce several aggravating factors that courts must take into account when determining the appropriate sentence (Art. 28 NCC).
For example, courts must consider whether the money laundering offence is linked to organised crime or involves a regulated entity, such as a bank, insurer or financial intermediary (Art. 503 NCC).