Feedback statement: Schedule 2 Guidelines

Summary

We are reviewing the Schedule 2 framework alongside the Government of Jersey as part of our ongoing efforts to reduce regulatory burdens while maintaining high standards in combatting financial crime. 

Throughout December 2025 and January 2026, we consulted on revised guidelines on interpretation issued under Article 36(2) of the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999. Our proposed changes aim to make the guidelines more accessible and improve the consistency of their application across industry.    

We had an overall positive response from stakeholders, with the majority supporting the new approach to the guidelines. Respondents also requested further detail in some areas and strongly called for a different approach to corporate trustees, which would require legislative change.

To enable us to respond to this feedback, we will not be implementing the revised guidelines in April as originally planned. We will continue to work with government and the industry working group on a wider package of reforms which is proposed to include:

• a new Corporate Non-Professional Trustees Order, which will clarify that in limited circumstances, some corporate trustees are considered “non-professional”, in that they are not conducting their activities as a business
• changes to the Money Laundering (Jersey) Order 2008, to reduce the compliance burden on those (including corporate trustees) using an anti-money laundering services provider (AMLSP)   
• consequential changes to our AML/CFT/CPF Handbook to give effect to these legislative changes
• further changes to the guidelines to reflect responses to the consultation and align with the other legislative and Handbook changes

Government and the JFSC will consult on the proposed package of reforms after the upcoming election period.

Background 

 Our consultation on the guidelines ran for eight weeks from 8 December 2025 to 30 January 2026. The revised guidelines aim to improve clarity and usability by:  

• introducing structured ‘Schedule 2 gateways’ – a three-part test (focussing on activity, ‘as a business’, and Jersey nexus) to determine whether registration is required 
• providing targeted guidance on complex areas to reduce ambiguity and promote consistency  
• revising interpretative guidance for specific Schedule 2 activities, notably fund and security services activities, including to future-proof the guidelines considering planned changes to the Control of Borrowing regime 
• including existing guidance on the meaning of ‘in or from within Jersey’ as an annex in response to industry feedback

As well as seeking feedback from industry on the revised guidelines, we asked for views on the benefits of publishing certain information relating to Schedule 2 businesses on our website to promote transparency.

We received 43 responses to the consultation, including responses from trade bodies and Jersey Finance. We also received, through Jersey Finance, 10 individual endorsements of the Jersey Association of Trust Companies’ submission.  

We are grateful to each of the respondents for taking the time to consider and comment on the proposals within the consultation. 

Key themes

A majority of respondents were positive and supported our approach to the revised guidelines, acknowledging the enhanced clarity and improved structure of the framework. There were also some key areas where respondents sought further work or a different approach: 

• corporate trustees – a strong call for further clarity, particularly on the application of the ‘as a business’ gateway and the need for greater certainty for such entities 
• ‘as a business’ gateway – we received several suggestions on improving the wording of the gateway, in particular, the use of the word ‘professional’ in the text  
• effective date – respondents emphasised the need for sufficient lead‑in time following publication of the final guidelines and requested that implementation was pushed back beyond April 2026 
• intragroup activities – further clarity sought on how intragroup arrangements should be treated for Schedule 2 purposes 
• register of Schedule 2 entities – views were mixed; while some supported the concept, others raised confidentiality, privacy and competitiveness concerns 

We also received a wide range of feedback and suggestions on overall usability to support the practical application of the guidelines. 

Next steps

We remain committed to delivering an approach that is applied consistently across industry while ensuring continued alignment with Jersey’s international obligations.  

Reflecting on the feedback received in relation to corporate trustees and further engagement with the Schedule 2 industry working group, we are working alongside government on further reforms to Schedule 2. This proposed package of measures will be subject to further work and public consultation. The current proposals are summarised as: 

1. Introducing a new Corporate Non‑Professional Trustees Order to clarify that where structures are closely held, non-commercial, pure family arrangements, those structures will be treated as “non‑professional” in that they are not conducting their activities as a business.
   Corporate trustees who meet the relevant criteria are proposed to be made subject to Money Laundering Order obligations in line with the current Proceeds of Crime (Duties of Non-Professional Trustees) (Jersey) Order 2016 and will be required to notify the JFSC. 
2. Amendments to the Money Laundering Order to streamline the AMLSP regime, ensuring that where the AMLSP appropriately fulfils and performs the relevant person’s obligations, there is no need to reperform or duplicate work.  
3. Amendments to the Handbook to reflect the legislative changes above. These will focus on the AMLSP chapter and will clarify obligations in practice for AMLSPs versus their customers as well as providing practical guidance on the delivery of these obligations. 
4. Amendments to the guidelines to take account of these changes as well as reflecting the wealth of feedback received to our consultation