“Universal” procedures? An analysis of text (dis)similarities in FATF mutual evaluation reports

Abstract

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) uses Mutual Evaluations (MEs) to monitor national implementation of and compliance with its recommendations. Countries face the risk of being placed “Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring” or “High-Risk Jurisdictions,” commonly known as the greylist and blacklist, if non-compliant. Greylisting has political and economic implications, including reputational damage, reduced development assistance, and reduced capital inflows. Despite “universal procedures” for the process, researchers have noted disparities, including a high number of Global South countries on the greylist. Using a corpus of 353 assessment documents, the research finds that the body or bodies conducting the assessment may have an impact on the assessment text and outcomes and shows that reports for greylisted countries have a high degree of similarity to non-greylisted countries.