Overseas Territories miss another critical deadline for enhanced corporate transparency

When is a deadline not a deadline? When it passes without consequence. The UK’s offshore financial centres may be forgiven for reaching this conclusion. For years, they have ducked and dodged key milestones for opening-up their corporate registries to public scrutiny. Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and the Turks and Caicos Islands have just missed yet another one. Missing this delivery date indicates this issue isn’t being prioritised enough by many of the Overseas Territories. However, they still have an opportunity to prove their commitment for tackling financial crime before the of June, when these transparency registers are due to go live. 

Since the general election last year, minister Stephen Doughty has sought to reset relations with these governments and agree new deadlines through mutual consent. Following their 2024 Joint Ministerial Council (JMC) with the UK in London, the premiers of Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and the Turks and Caicos Islands pledged to have the laws enabling greater access to beneficial ownership information in their jurisdictions passed through their legislatures by April 2025. Now we are in May, Transparency International UK has conducted a quick review of whether these jurisdictions have lived up to their word.  

Our initial review found that, as of 1 May 2025, only one out of the five Overseas Territories making a commitment at the 2024 JMC (the Cayman Islands) have delivered enabling legislation for the introduction of legitimate interest registers. This includes some of the UK’s largest offshore financial centres, including the British Virgin Islands and Bermuda.  

This brief assessment only considers whether legislation or regulations have been introduced, rather than whether these meet international standards for beneficial ownership transparency. Where possible, we provide elementary comments on their proposals, but we will be publishing a more substantive assessment later in the year.  For now, here’s a quick overview of the current state of play.  

British Virgin Islands [deadline missed]

The BVI has the largest corporate register in the Overseas Territories with its public finances heavily dependent on this industry. Over half of its government revenue comes from trust and company fees alone. The size of the company register is so disproportionately large that there are ten companies for every person on these islands. Our research has found they also form an outsized proportion (over 90 per cent) of companies from the OTs involved in corruption and money laundering cases. Therefore, it may be no surprise that their proposals for delivery fell way short of the mark – there are some strong vested interests at play. 

Under the BVI’s proposed policy approach, NGOs and journalists would only be able to access critical information from their corporate register in very specific circumstances during court proceedings. Those requesting information would also need to know the name of the beneficial owner they were asking for (making the process redundant). In the unlikely scenario an applicant received information from the register, they would be barred from disclosing it onwards to those who might find it useful for anti-money laundering purposes. And worst of all, the corporate registrar would tell those whose data was being requested the names of those investigating them – tipping-off criminals they were under scrutiny. Former minister, Andrew Mitchell, called this a ‘shameful’ attempt to avoid tackling dirty money, with MP for Kensington and Bayswater, Joe Powell, claiming the BVI’s proposals protect criminals. 

As of today, the BVI have neither published nor passed legislation to deliver on their commitment from 2024. 

Cayman Islands [deadline met]

The Cayman Islands have continued to position themselves as one of the earlier movers towards corporate transparency, delivering both primary and secondary legislation for increased public access to this information before the April deadline. Despite some serious flaws in their proposed approach, and seemingly little change between their draft proposals and final laws, their register is up and running.  

The registrar will charge those requesting beneficial ownership filings $30 if it relates to just one company or $100 it what is being sought relates to more than one company. Contrary to the EU’s sixth anti-money laundering directive (AMLD6), NGOs and journalists investigating money laundering would need to apply on a case-by-case basis, explaining why they have an interest in a particular company when making a request, which would likely need them to know who owns a company in the first place – undermining the register's utility. Any companies controlled by trusts will also be able to dodge disclosing their beneficiaries, instead merely providing details of the trustee. We are in the process of making some requests to see how this system works in practice. Based on the laws in place, this looks like it will be an expensive way of confirming information already known and hitting some dead-ends created by trust structures. 

Anguilla [deadline missed] 

In April 2022, Anguilla passed enabling legislation for its approach to legitimate interest access to beneficial owners of companies. While it is yet to consult on or pass the regulations that would set out the process for making a request, it is clear from the existing law that the registrar would tip-off any company whose beneficial ownership information was accessed and provide them with the identity of the requestor – as the BVI proposes to. This presents a major security risk to those investigating corruption and money laundering, undermining the overall effectiveness of the register.  

Bermuda [deadline missed] 

In January 2025, Bermuda consulted on proposals it claimed had regard to the EU’s AMLD6 – the de facto standard for providing beneficial ownership information to those with a legitimate interest. Our initial analysis at the time found it to be far from the EU’s approach in one key respect. The definition of beneficial owner was worded as such that it would be easy to hide anyone who ultimately owned a company indirectly. Like the Cayman Islands, it risked becoming a glorified register of nominees and opaque trusts controlling companies. Confusingly, Bermuda’s consultation document provides a different timeline for delivery than its commitment at the JMC, with public ‘legitimate interest’ access only available from Q3 2026. 

Turks and Caicos Islands [deadline missed] 

In November 2024, the Turks and Caicos Islands passed enabling legislation for its approach to legitimate interest access to beneficial owners of companies and limited partnerships, which would be defined through regulations. Between 7 and 14 April, the Turks and Caicos Islands Financial Services Commission ran a brief consultation on their proposals for these regulations, which they have drafted but not passed. On first blush, they seem to follow the Cayman Islands’ model, with applicants having to prove why they have an interest in a particular company, and opaque trusts likely providing a stumbling block to investigators. The late timing of the consultation and the limited window for responses raise concerns about how meaningful the process was. 

The Overseas Territories above have committed to implementing legitimate interest registers of beneficial ownership by June 2025. We hope they will continue to prioritise this policy area, working in concert with the UK Government, as well as civil society experts, to build a register with the ‘maximum degree of access and transparency’ to tackle corruption and illicit finance, as they committed to during the JMC. UK financial centres should look at the EU and the Financial Action Taskforce (FATF) as a starting point for good practices and start making plans for the implementation of fully public registers in the long run. We are developing a set of good practice standards for legitimate interest access beneficial ownership registers, which we will be sharing with relevant Overseas Territories later this year.