REGULATORY REPORTING · IN DEVELOPMENT
FINTRAC regulatory reporting for MSBs
Regulatory reporting is in development. Soon the report your regulator wants will be built from data your platform already has: suspicious-transaction reporting data in regulator-ready, FINTRAC-oriented shape, drawn from the same monitoring outcomes and audit trail the platform runs on, so your compliance tool files from facts, not from spreadsheets assembled at month-end.
What is live, and what is coming
Live today: pre-departure transaction monitoring, per-client limits and the full audit trail that feed the report, see Transaction monitoring.
In development: exposing that data in regulator-ready, FINTRAC-oriented shape for your filing tool, exactly as described below.
STR reporting data, regulator-ready
Suspicious-transaction reporting will start as structured data, not as a document drafting exercise: the platform will expose the reporting data in the shape a regulator-facing filing expects, FINTRAC-oriented, ready for your downstream compliance tool to consume and submit. What compliance officers usually spend their days reconstructing, the platform will hand over formed.
Fed by monitoring, backed by the audit trail
The data is not gathered for reporting, it exists because the platform already works this way. Every payment passes pre-departure screening with hold, rejection and action-required outcomes; per-client limits respond to risk rating, PEP and US-person status; and the full audit trail preserves payments, signatures, ledger entries and administrative actions. Reporting will draw on that record directly, which is why it will be complete, consistent and defensible.
You produce, your tool files, and automation goes as far as you want
The division of labour is deliberate: the platform will produce regulator-ready data; your compliance tool handles the regulator-facing submission, keeping your filing workflow, review step and tooling choices in your hands. Where end-to-end automated submission makes sense for your jurisdiction, it is a scoped delivery on the same foundation.
Compliance burden that does not grow with volume
Manual STR preparation scales linearly with activity, every flagged transaction is another reconstruction. Data-first reporting will break that line: as volumes grow, the platform keeps producing regulator-ready output from the record it already holds, and your compliance team reviews and files instead of assembling. Headcount follows judgement, not paperwork.
The Canadian MSB stack, complete
FINTRAC reporting closes the loop on a stack few platforms treat as first-class: Interac and ACH/EFT rails for the money movement and pre-departure monitoring for the control are live today; regulator-ready reporting data is the piece in development. For the full obligations-to-capabilities map, see Core Banking for EMIs & MSBs, MSB compliance in Canada is where this platform is deliberately strongest.
FINTRAC reporting FAQ
Is FINTRAC reporting available today?
What exactly will the platform produce for FINTRAC?
Will the platform file directly to FINTRAC?
Where will the reporting data come from?
Is this Canada-only?
How does this fit an MSB wider obligations?
See how the report is built from the record
A flagged payment, its screening outcome, its audit trail, and the regulator-ready data they will become. The demo shows the live chain and where reporting plugs in.