Inpay A/S ordered to cease new online gaming customers for AML violations

Inpay A/S · Payments and Money Transfers

Regulatory breachRelated-party diversion

The case in brief

Visible before detection

Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight

Verification of customer tax registration and legitimacy for gaming businesses

Can mislead when: Needs taxpayer consent or GSP access. A registered, filing shell still passes this check, which is why C3 and C4 run beside it.

Verification that gaming customer entities actually exist and operate legitimately

Can mislead when: Real companies can be used as pass-throughs. Existence does not prove a real trade, so C6 and C7 still apply.

Confirmation from gaming industry regulators about customer legitimacy

Can mislead when: Counterparties can collude or ignore requests. A non-response is logged as a gap, never as a pass.

Prior complaints or sanctions against customer entities

Can mislead when: Court records lag and name spellings vary. A clean record can mean the problem has not reached court yet.

Where Kubr services would have helped

Offered in India

C4 Verification that gaming customer entities actually exist and operate legitimately
C8 Prior complaints or sanctions against customer entities

Offered in India

C2 Verification of customer tax registration and legitimacy for gaming businesses
C4 Verification that gaming customer entities actually exist and operate legitimately

Offered in India

C4 Verification that gaming customer entities actually exist and operate legitimately
C8 Prior complaints or sanctions against customer entities

Offered in India

C2 Verification of customer tax registration and legitimacy for gaming businesses
C8 Prior complaints or sanctions against customer entities

Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.

Same pattern

India · 2025