Less than three years since the approval of the 4th Directive on anti-money laundering and the financing of terrorism, we have revised it and approved the 5th Directive in an effort to tackle the threat of terrorism and the disclosures of the Panama Papers.

The 5th Directive represents the reinforcement of mechanisms of control and transparency, thanks to the persistence of the European Parliament which, through negotiations that lasted eight months, managed to persuade the majority of the Member States to accept a great part of the demands.

It was the European Parliament who guaranteed the public access to the register of the effective beneficiaries of enterprises in the EU, which aimed at terminating the lack of transparency of shell companies, used to escape taxes and as a means of money laundering.

We shed light on the trusts although public access to their beneficiaries is still restricted, due to the Council's imposition, to those who may claim a legitimate interest.

We guaranteed more scrutiny and supervision towards liberal professionals and service renders that, as we know, are instrumental in tax evasion and money laundering, and should not be left to auto-regulation that regulates nothing.

We included more market operators among those that must exercise due diligence in regards to their clients, such as art dealers and tax consultants.
We restricted the use of anonymous pre-paid cards.

In order to facilitate transnational investigations, we created better mechanisms for cooperation among authorities.

We created a list of public functions that designate which Public Exposed People in the EU are subject to stronger due diligence.

All candidates to "golden visas" and other similar schemes in the Member States must be subjected to a stronger scrutiny.

But it is important to also reveal what we have not achieved because of the refusal from the Member States, such as the creation of an European Financial Information Unit, the inclusion in the central registers of beneficiaries of enterprises based outside the EU but who have significant business dealings in the EU. Due to the Council's responsibility, where governments seat, we have not reached a result that might have global impact on financial transparency. In these negotiations, too many times we were left with the feeling that some of our governments do not really wish to fight money laundering, rather they wish to facilitate it because they are entrapped by vested interests.

The approval of this directive is thus a step in the right direction, however, much is left to be done, - some of the "tax havens" and deregulatory schemes that facilitate money laundering by criminal organisations, corrupt and corrupting people from all over the world are based here - and how well based they are in the EU, thanks to the financial void and decades long deregulation. There is a lot left to be done, especially against the entrapment of some Member States by sinister and criminal interests.