ECSH34015 - Outcomes: Decision and Evidence Log (DEL)
Source: gov.uk (2025-04-28)


The DEL has been created to fulfil the obligations under regulation 46(2)(d) of The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR 2017). This regulation sets out that a supervisor is required to keep a record in writing of the actions it has taken in the course of its supervision and of its reasons not to act in a particular case.

The DEL is a living document which records decisions made within a case, the facts and evidence to support any breaches identified, and the rationale for imposing sanctions or your decision not to take action in particular circumstances. It records the original facts and evidence in relation to a decision, as well as a record of changes to the decision/rationale as further information is received and the case progresses. It should provide an overview of the current position of the case at any given time.

All of the DEL templates can be found in the Knowledge Library and include links and help text to aid completion.

(This content has been withheld because of exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act 2000)

(This content has been withheld because of exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act 2000)

(This content has been withheld because of exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act 2000)

The completed DEL must be signed off by your manager to confirm their agreement to the proposed outcome of the case. You must provide the DEL when seeking additional support or approval.

It must be submitted with your evidence to the Governance Panel where sanctions meet the terms of reference.

The DEL records:
- Case details.
- A summary of the case.
- How risk areas have been addressed.
- Regulatory breaches, including the specific regulation, the facts relating to the breach, the evidence to support it, and action the business must take (where appropriate).
- The rationale for decisions made throughout the case, including any course of action/sanctions considered but not imposed, and the strengths and weaknesses of the case.
- Outcomes and sanctions imposed to address non-compliance.
- Any additional information needed in relation to the case.
Table of regulatory breaches

You must record all breaches of relevant requirements you identify. The breach must be shown within Schedule 6, MLR 2017 before you can consider imposing a sanction.

There is a table to complete which sets out:
- The specific regulation breached.
- Facts of the breach.
- Evidence to support the facts.
- Actions to be taken by the business to correct the breach.
A "how to guide” is contained within the DEL with additional guidance on how to complete the table/s of regulatory breaches.

Rationale

You must clearly set out your rationale for deciding the outcome of the case and appropriate sanctions – see ECSH81075. (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh81075)

You can use the decision-making tool in ECSH34010 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh34010) to record the factors you have considered in relation to your decision.

You must include how you have considered all of the sanctions available, the relevant factors within regulation 83 MLR 2017 and, where applicable, regulation 76, as follows. Additional guidance on carrying out a regulation 83 review can be found here (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh85625).

It is important to note that if there is more than one breach, then specify which breach you are referring to under each of the above considerations.

You should demonstrate that you have taken into account all of the regulation 83 considerations, even if they have not impacted on your decision.

Criminal convictions, under regulation 83(1A) MLR 2017

Before imposing a sanction, you must check whether the individual has any criminal convictions that may be relevant to your determination and refer to this in the rationale. Follow relevant SWI for the sanction being imposed.

You must also ensure that the sanction/penalty, including the value of the penalty, is appropriate – see ECSH85650 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh85650). If you have adjusted a penalty (up or down) following these considerations then specify this within the DEL, along with your reasons for the decision.

Outcome/Decision – What is the outcome on the case?

You should consider the following guidance for the outcomes listed below.

Regulation 76, MR 2017 – applicable to financial penalty and censuring statement

What was the behaviour that led to the breach and who was responsible? Can you demonstrate that an officer of the business was knowingly concerned? For example, what evidence is there that they were aware of the obligation and the breach and failed to prevent it? How is this evidenced? If the sanction applied to an individual what was the person’s role in the company and what responsibilities did they have in relation to MLR 2017 compliance?

Are you satisfied that the business has taken all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to ensure that the requirement would be complied with? (Consider this for each breach). If you are satisfied, you must not impose a penalty. If you are not satisfied, you must explain the reason why you came to this conclusion.

If the decision is to impose a financial penalty, set out clearly why the penalty amount meets with the requirements of Regulation 76(8). This requires you to explain why you consider the penalty amount to be appropriate, in other words, why is it considered effective, proportionate, and dissuasive?

You must set out not only why a penalty is “appropriate” but also how the penalty amount is appropriate to the circumstances – see ECSH85650. (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh85650)

Regulation 78 MLR 2017 - Applicable to prohibitions on management

If you are imposing a prohibition on management, explain why you consider another person who was at the material time an officer of the business was knowingly concerned in the breach. Also set out the following, supported by reasons for the decisions and why you consider it appropriate:
- the details and extent of the prohibition and whether it is a prohibition in one sector or across multiple sectors?
- whether the prohibition is permanent or temporary. If the prohibition is temporary confirm the duration of the prohibition
For more guidance, see ECSH83000 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh83000).

Determination that the business, an individual within the business or an agent of the business is not fit and proper (F&P) - applicable to money service businesses (MSBs) and trust or company service providers (TCSPs) only

Please consider and explain if the F&P decision is appropriate to the Business, an individual within the Business, or both.

The F&P DEL records the outcomes for each consideration under regulation 58 MLR 2017:

Regulation 58(3) MLR 2017 – Has x has been convicted of a criminal offence listed in schedule 3 of the Regulations

Regulation 58(4)(a) MLR 2017- Has the Business consistently failed to comply with the requirements of the Regulations

Regulation 58(4)(b) MLR 2017– What is the level of risk of the Business being used for money laundering or terrorist financing (“ML/TF/PF”); and

Regulation 58(4)(c) MLR 2017– Has x, as a beneficial owner, officer, or manager (BOOM) of the Business, adequate skills and experience and acted and may be expected to act with probity.

You can find all the guidance you need regarding the F&P test within ECSH45000 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh45000) .

Suspension or cancellation of registration

You must set out whether the decision is to cancel or suspend registration (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh48000), which of the below regulations you have relied upon and the reasons for the decision. In the case of suspension, set out the duration of the suspension supported by reasons and what is the expected outcome at the end of the suspension? If cancelling the registration, why is this more appropriate than suspension? For example, if the decision is cancellation how is the public interest test met (why is it in the public interest?)

Regulation 60(1) MLR 2017, by reference to regulation 60(2) MLR 2017- applicable to MSBs and TCSPs only

In order to cancel or suspend registration under this regulation you must be satisfied that the business or any agent or BOOM in relation to that business is not a fit and proper person. See ECSH83580 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh83580).

In order to cancel or suspend registration under this regulation you must explain why it appears to you that either:
- Any of paragraphs (a) to (e) of regulation 59(1) MLR 2017 apply; or
- The person has failed to comply with any requirement of a notice given under regulation 66 MLR 2017.
If you are relying on regulation 59(1) MLR 2017, specify which of the following paragraphs of that regulation you rely upon and the reasons why.

If suspending a registration, please explain what is expected during the period of suspension such as what measures the business are expected to take to correct the breaches and likelihood of this being effective.

Where a decision is made to cancel or suspend registration under this heading you must set out clearly that the MSB is either providing or purporting to provide a payment service. If the decision is based on the business purporting to provide a payment service, set out your reasons for this conclusion. Also set out the evidence you have that the MSB is not included in the register of payment service providers maintained by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under regulation 4(1) of the Payment Service Regulations 2017.

If a decision is made for immediate suspension or cancellation of registration, set out why you consider the public interest test is met (such as, why is it required in the interests of the public?).

Advice Letter

What are the weaknesses in operational process that expose the Business to risk of future regulatory breaches and why? Why are these not considered to be regulatory breaches at this time? You must explain your decision making in the rational section of the DEL. See ECSH81500. (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh81500)

Warning Letter

A warning letter (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh82000) should be issued only if there have been minor regulatory breaches and the risk of ML/TF/PF within the Business is low. Please set out in the rationale why you consider that the Business exposure to ML/TF/PF risks are low and why you consider that this measure is aligned with regulation 76 MLR 2017 in that it will be proportionate, effective, and dissuasive.

Additional Points to consider in all cases

Are there any other sanctions that have been considered and not imposed? Please explain your decision.

If you suspect that money laundering may be taking place, HMRC is obligated to submit a suspicious activity report (SAR) to the National Crime Agency (NCA). Refer to ECSH34225 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh34225)for further guidance.

If you come across information that represents a risk of tax evasion or an undeclared tax avoidance scheme, the officer should submit an Intelligence Report (IR). Refer to ECSH34205 (https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/economic-crime-supervision-handbook/ecsh34205) for further guidance.

All decisions must comply with the public law principles and must be fair, rational, and proportionate. This needs to be at the forefront of your mind when making your decision and should be covered within the DEL.

To help you, there are videos of workshops provided by HMRC Legal Group (Aris Counsel part 1 & 2) on the Learning Zone