FRANKFURT SCHOOL

BLOG

The last impact of the Sanctions Enforcement Act II (SanktDG II)
Executive Education / 16 January 2026
  • Share

  • 2716

  • Print
ist Bankbetriebswirt und Certified Compliance Professional
Sebastian Blitz ist Bankbetriebswirt und Certified Compliance Professional und in der Bankenwelt seit über acht Jahren in der Geldwäscheprävention tätig. Er kennt verschiedene Häuser und ist aktuell seit gut drei Jahren für die Evangelische Bank eG aktiv. Weiter ist er seit drei Jahren beim Finanz Colloquium Heidelberg (FCH) als Autor und Dozent tätig. Zuletzt war er auch für die GenoAkademie bei der Herbsttagung 2025 im Einsatz.

To Author's Page

More Blog Posts
Update Zahlungsverkehr: Regulierungen, Herausforderungen und Trends 2026
Wealth is Moving On-Chain - Ready for the Future of Finance?
ICT risks caused by third parties – ideas for the identification and mitigation of risks

Since 1 January 2026, the Regulations from the new Section 23b of the German Money Laundering Act (GwG) apply.

Reporting of discrepancies in the allocation of real estate data

A new reporting obligation was introduced under Section 23b of the GwG in Article 4 of SanktDG II, dated 19 December 2022, which came into force on 1 January 2026 in accordance with Section 26, paragraph 3 of SanktDG II. This is due to the linking of real estate data from the land registers with the transparency register. Section 23b of the GwG now stipulates a reporting obligation in the event of discrepancies between the real estate data entered in the transparency register and the information and findings available to the obligated parties. This is a pure reporting obligation, as it is based on the wording of Section 23a GwG, which represents a reporting procedure, thereby resulting in a discrepancy report II.

The legislator deliberately decided against an earlier date for it to come into force. This is because it will take some time for a sufficiently reliable database to be made available in the transparency register. There is a risk that reports of discrepancies will be submitted prematurely. This would create unnecessary work for those subject to the obligation and for the authority maintaining the register. Ergo, the data on real estate in the transparency register should be in a qualified state in the foreseeable future.

The newly inserted Section 19a of the GwG regulated the inclusion of key real estate data in the transparency register, provided that the real estate can be attributed to registered legal entities or if the information is required to be documented in the transparency register pursuant to Section 19a, Nos. 1–6, of the GwG with regard to associations, pursuant to § 20, para. 1 GwG, which are entered as beneficiaries of real estate in Section I of the land register and must be documented in the transparency register. This information includes:

  • The responsible district court
  • The land registry district
  • The number of the land register folio
  • All plots of land entered in the inventory page (Bestandsverzeichnis) of the land register folio, each with its property boundaries, parcel and plot
  • Type and scope of the entitlement
  • Start and end of the entitlement

This demonstrates the legal ownership of the property. In accordance with the equally new Section 19b(1) GwG, the land registry authorities were obliged to transfer the available data to the registering authority. From 1 July 2023, the data must be transferred immediately, and the transparency register had the task of linking the data with the already available information.

From 1 January 2026, the new Section 23b of the GwG stipulates that obligated parties must report any discrepancies they find between the information on real estate in the transparency register and the information on real estate available to them. This information must relate to real estate owned by the institution’s client and be based on reliable knowledge. The institution is under no obligation to verify the real estate data; only the data collected by the obligated party is relevant.

If a report is made in accordance with Section 23b(1) of the Money Laundering Act (GwG), the registering authority must investigate it without delay. To this end, the registering authority may request information and the documents necessary for clarification from the person who made the report and the relevant association, in accordance with Section 20 GwG. Alternatively, the authority may inspect the land registry of the properties in question. Investigating the report under Section 23b(1) GwG constitutes a legitimate interest under Section 12(1) GBO. According to Section 23b(4) GwG, the registering authority must correct the registration or allocation of real estate if they conclude that the reported discrepancy is accurate.

Final remark

Section 23b of the GwG introduces a provision to ensure the accuracy and monitoring of data records in the transparency register. The reporting obligation applies when the information on real estate, as recorded in accordance with Sections 19a and 19b of the GwG, which is accessible in the transparency register, contradicts the information on real estate available to them. Such a discrepancy indicates that either the data in the transparency register or the information provided by the reporting entity is incorrect.

Finally, with regard to the scope of application, it should be noted that the property must be located in Germany. Further information will be provided in the updated FAQs from the Federal Administrative Office. Following consultation, a publication date is expected in the near future.

Would you like to find out more about money laundering prevention?

In the Certified Compliance Professional (CCP) certification programme, you will learn all about this topic and much more. Find out more at Certified Compliance Professional (CCP).

 

0 COMMENTS

Send