As Australia’s real estate industry edges closer to the rollout of sweeping anti-money laundering reforms, the mood across agency networks is shifting from indifference to urgency. Lisa Pennell, CEO of Barry Plant, says the conversation around AML has “hit home.”
“Everyone’s talking about AML,” she says. “It’s happening, and it’s happening kind of very quickly.”
The reforms, which are overseen by AUSTRAC, will require agencies to conduct identity checks on vendors and buyers, flag suspicious matters, and maintain detailed compliance frameworks, with significant fines for breaches.
While AML obligations have long applied to banks and financial institutions, the property sector is now firmly in scope.
As the deadline is approaching, Lisa describes an industry dividing into distinct mindsets.
“I’m kind of seeing two camps or three camps, actually,” she says.
There’s “the head in the sand camp… thinking that it’s just a political thing and it’ll be over,” which she calls “ridiculous.”
Then there’s “the terrified camp who are like, ‘Oh my god. What does it mean?’”
The third group, she suggests, is taking a longer view – acknowledging the change and working methodically through it. Fear and complacency are, in her view, equally unhelpful.
“There’s fear mongering, and then there’s the opposite… which is causing some people to be complacent.
And they’re the ones that are sitting with their head in the sand. So it’s kind of a weird dichotomy.”
Rather than leaving individual offices to figure it out, Barry Plant has developed a “hybrid model” that combines centralised support with local accountability.
“The model we have landed on is direct-to-office responsibility and liability, but with a centralized support structure,” Lisa explains.
“We have a compliance officer in each office, but they have a deeper level of support through our existing support desk. So it’s like the support you would get in a reporting group, with dedicated expertise, but without the liability being smeared across the entire network if something goes wrong.”
The approach allows offices to remain accountable for compliance while ensuring agents are guided and supported through the process.
“It keeps liability in each business, but gives them the tools and the backup they need,” Lisa says.
What the reforms actually mean
Under the new regime, agencies must verify the identity of vendors before providing services and conduct checks on buyers after exchange.
Transactions will not be halted if a party is flagged, but suspicious matters will be reported to AUSTRAC for further investigation.
“It’s for buyers and sellers,” Lisa says. “Before the provision of service to the vendor, you need to do the vendor check… and those checks obviously will vary in complexity.”
Non-compliance carries heavy consequences. Lisa points to fines of up to $18,000 a day for checks not completed on time, and potentially far greater penalties if money laundering is found and not reported.
“This is not going away,” she says. “Anyone who’s not doing it properly will have to go back and do it again anyway and potentially be fined.”
Industry frustration — and confusion
Beyond the legal mechanics, the reforms are reshaping day-to-day agency life.
“There’s definitely fear from salespeople,” Lisa says. “That was a bit of a surprising one.”
Some agents worry that red flags might circle back to them personally.
Lisa stresses that, provided the correct process is followed, liability sits within the framework, not with individual salespeople acting appropriately.
“There’s also frustration,” she adds. “Why are we having to do all of this stuff? We’re real estate agents.”
Another sticking point is duplication – buyers and sellers may be checked multiple times, prompting confusion about why the system is not streamlined.
Despite concerns, Lisa is clear on one point: AML checks are not designed to delay deals.
“It’s irrelevant to the transaction speed,” she says. “Even if it’s a red flag, the transaction would still proceed. Our job is only to do that assessment.”
Much depends on how well agents communicate the requirements to clients.
“It is going to come down to how well agents are able to explain that this is something that needs to happen,” she says.
A trust reset?
The broader question is whether AML could ultimately improve public confidence in real estate – an industry that has long battled trust issues.
“The intention of it is to create a level playing field and stamp out unethical and criminal activity,” Lisa says.
“From that perspective, I support it. It’s not fun. It’s not sexy, but let’s just get it done.”
In a sector often criticised for regulatory arbitrage and uneven standards across states, the fact that AML is federally enforced may also mark a turning point.
“It would be nice if all of the legislation was federal, wouldn’t it?” she remarks.
For now, the industry is adjusting – some cautiously, some reluctantly, others strategically.
What is clear is that the era of optional engagement is over.
As Lisa puts it: “We have to do the right thing for the right reasons. That’s incumbent on us.”
