The AML/CTF program your MLRO can defend
Generate your program, run forensic source of funds checks, and document MLRO accountability — every clause traceable to the Act, so what you sign is what you can defend.
What your firm actually signs — not a black box
5. Independent Review
Legislative basis: s.162 AML/CTF Act 2006
The firm's AML/CTF Program must be subject to independent review at intervals appropriate to its risk profile, and no less than annually, to assess its continued effectiveness and compliance with Part 1A of the Act.
Generated from your firm's risk profile — not a static template
Solicitors are now a regulated entity. Here's what changes.
No approved template for Part A/B documentation. A 5-step wizard generates both parts, clause-referenced to the Act — sitting alongside your existing practice management system, not replacing it.
MLRO accountability can't be a checkbox appointment. Every obligation is logged against your MLRO with a traceable audit trail — evidence that holds up, not just a signature.
Manual bank statement review is billable time spent on non-billable work. Forensic analysis ties out every statement to the cent and flags $10k+ deposits — in minutes, not an associate’s afternoon.
A biometric check alone doesn’t meet AUSTRAC’s identity-matching standard. Document and liveness checks are layered with a government-record match, beneficial-owner ID, and automatic AML/PEP screening — full CDD depth on every client.
How it fits into a matter
What AUSTRAC asks for. What you hand them.
Everything your firm needs, in one place
From program documentation to ongoing record-keeping — one workflow, not a folder of spreadsheets.
- Part A & Part B program, clause-referenced to the Act
- MLRO appointment & accountability framework
- Source of funds analysis with mathematical tie-out
- PDF metadata audit for tampered statements
- Government-record identity checks and automatic AML/PEP screening
- Training register & SMR log, AUSTRAC-aligned
- 7-year audit snapshots, exportable on demand
- Every client, source of funds report, and reporting obligation grouped by matter
Trusted by Australian law firms navigating Tranche 2
The bank statement forensics alone are worth it. Our previous process was someone manually scrolling a PDF. Now we have a signed audit artefact in minutes, with a math tie-out and tamper detection that we can put in the client file.
James R.
MLRO & Partner · Commercial Law Firm · Sydney
Common questions from firms
Do I still need a compliance consultant?
Tranche removes the blank-page problem — you get a structured, clause-referenced draft in minutes instead of hours of manual drafting. Whether you engage a consultant for independent sign-off is still your call; most firms use Tranche's output as the starting point for that review, not a replacement for it.
Does this replace our practice management system?
No. Tranche is a compliance layer, not a matter or trust accounting system. It sits alongside whatever you already use for case management — nothing to migrate, nothing to rip out.
Is a software-generated document actually defensible at audit?
Every clause is generated from your firm’s specific risk profile and traced to the exact section of the AML/CTF Act it satisfies — visible in the document itself, not hidden in a black box. That provenance is what makes it defensible, not the fact that software produced it.