Dirty Money in Real Estate? Possible in Major Economies -Global OREO Index

In terms of data completeness, India’s score is 6.5/10, data availability 5/10 and data openness Zero.
BERLIN, Mar 29 (The CONNECT) – It’s 2025, and it’s still possible to buy luxury real estate in major economies without disclosing the buyer’s identity. Is that an oversight or an invitation to those looking for ways to launder dirty money?
Laundering money through real estate is not a victimless crime. It can distort housing markets, inflating prices and shutting out residents from their own cities. It can enable kleptocrats to entrench their power and drain public resources from countries that can least afford it.
The release of the first-ever Opacity in Real Estate Ownership (OREO) Index this week offers one of the clearest views yet of how far most of the world’s major economies are falling short in taking action to keep dirty money out of their property markets.
Produced by Transparency International and the Anti-Corruption Data Collective, the index ranks 24 countries – including G20 members and several major financial hubs – on the scope and accessibility of their real estate data and the strength of their anti-money laundering frameworks in the property sector. Both are essential for detecting and deterring illicit flows being invested in property.
The findings are serious, if not surprising. Not a single country scored a perfect ten out of ten. Ten scored below five – suggesting their doors are wide-open to suspicious funds. The best performer was South Africa, followed by Singapore and France. Meanwhile, Australia found itself at the bottom of the ranking, with South Korea and the US not far behind.
Even in countries that performed above average, transparency measures remain inadequate in most cases, and regulatory loopholes are wide enough to accommodate billions in suspicious wealth flowing into property undetected.
In most of the world’s leading economies and major financial centres, criminals, the corrupt and their enablers can exploit a series of loopholes to stash dirty money in real estate while likely avoiding detection.
Property markets are vulnerable to abuse because real estate can be held anonymously and avoid meaningful third-party control in many places. Moreover, law enforcement and public watchdogs are limited in their ability to detect suspicious cases because data is inaccessible or not comprehensive enough.
These are the conclusions of the first edition of the Opacity in Real Estate Ownership (OREO) Index, by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective (ACDC) and Transparency International.
India scores 5 on a scale of 10 of the Anti-Money Laundering Framework Index in which South Africa scores a perfect 10.
Brazil, Canada, China, England & Wales, Japan, India, Mexico, Russia, Türkiye, the UAE and the US score below the average, indicating significant room for improvement, the report says.
Exemptions for small-scale real estate agencies in India leave swathes of the industry outside the scope of AML requirements, it says.
In terms of data completeness , India’s score is 6.5/10,data availability 5/10 and data openness Zero.
This inaugural edition of the OREO Index covers 24 jurisdictions, including 18 G20 members, two G20 guests and four offshore financial centres, namely: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, England & Wales, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Panama, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Türkiye, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the United States (US). It provides a comparative assessment of these countries, identifying gaps and vulnerabilities that allow corrupt individuals to exploit real estate for money laundering.
See the report
The OREO Index assesses and ranks 24 jurisdictions, including 18 G20 member nations plus guest countries Spain and Norway, as well as Hong Kong, Panama, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The index scores them on two metrics: the scope and availability of real estate data; and the strength of anti-money laundering legal frameworks for the real estate sector.
The index reveals that no country achieves a perfect mark, with 10 jurisdictions scoring below five out of possible 10 points.
The best performer on the index is South Africa, where the government collects broad data on real estate transactions and thoroughly regulates the sector for money laundering. However, even here, gaps remain, including a burdensome process for accessing real estate data, which is also not available to foreign citizens, putting the brakes on follow-the-money investigations. Some of the anti-money laundering rules are fairly recent and were adopted following South Africa’s designation to the Financial Action Task Force’s so-called grey list of countries with strategic deficiencies in their frameworks. The practical implementation and effectiveness of these measures remains to be seen.
Australia, South Korea and the United States are among the worst performing countries, largely due to their lack of anti-money laundering regulation for professionals involved in real estate transactions. Australia has recently passed historic legislation extending anti-money laundering obligations to real estate professionals, but these will come into force only in July 2026.
Lack of adequate third-party control
Concerningly, the assessment revealed that property purchases can be made without the involvement of a third party – such as a real estate agent or a notary – in Australia, China, England & Wales, Japan, Türkiye and the UAE. This means that real estate transactions can occur without being screened for anti-money laundering risks. Making things worse, Russia and the UAE also allow real estate transactions to be made in cash, instead of through a bank which could ensure at least some scrutiny.
While most jurisdictions have regulated professional service providers who can be involved in property transactions, real estate developers who can directly sell properties don’t have to screen their clients and report suspicious activity to the authorities in many of the countries.
Anonymous ownership and locked up data
The OREO Index reveals that the corrupt can continue to buy, hold and sell real estate anonymously in most assessed countries. The main way this can happen is by owning property through companies, which rarely have to disclose their real owners when registering properties. Some of the countries which have required companies incorporated domestically to disclose their real owners, usually through separate registers, continue to allow real estate investments by foreign companies to remain secretive. Following the adoption of new rules in the European Union, this glaring loophole will soon have to be closed in France and Spain.
The study also makes the case for easy access to open data on real estate transactions, as well as reference datasets including beneficial ownership, corporate and land registries, is essential for allowing authorities and public-interest researchers to detect cases of money laundering and monitor the effectiveness of policies. At present, however, the jurisdictions assessed are falling far short of the ideal standard.
Maira Martini, Chief Executive Officer of Transparency International, said: “We have known for a long time that real estate is a magnet for dirty money. And yet, the OREO Index shows that countries, including those that have recently reformed their systems, still have major gaps in their systems. It is no wonder that real estate markets are bursting with dirty cash, making cities around the world unaffordable.
“While progress has been slow, the OREO Index also shows that international anti-money laundering standards can have an impact. We urge standard-setter bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force and global fora such as the G20 to develop new policies and guidelines to help countries address remaining loopholes.”
David Szakonyi, co-founder and Director of ACDC, said: “England & Wales and France score the highest on the data pillar of the OREO Index. It is no coincidence that these are also the places where academics and civil society have been able to conduct in-depth data analyses, generating insights for policymakers and leads for journalists and authorities to pinpoint homes bought with illicit wealth. Public-interest data needs to be in the public domain, everywhere.”
The organisations recommend that all jurisdictions use the OREO Index assessment methodology as a guide to protect their real estate markets from the proceeds of crime and corruption.