FINTRAC Penalty on TreasureMeta (Cappo FX): A Clear Warning to Canadian MSBs

On 5 February 2026, FINTRAC publicly announced that it had imposed an Administrative Monetary Penalty (AMP) of $24,750 on TreasureMeta Corporation, registered under the name Cappo FX Inc. This entity operates as a money services business (MSB) in Markham, Ontario. The penalty stems from a supervisory activity and was formally imposed on 9 July 2025 for non‑compliance with Part 1 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA) and its Regulations.

Although only a single violation was cited—failure to submit a notification of change to MSB registration information—the case has broader implications for MSB compliance and AML compliance in Canada. It underlines that even “administrative” oversights around registration data are now very much within the scope of FINTRAC enforcement, alongside core obligations such as suspicious transaction reporting, large cash and large virtual currency transaction reporting.

⸻

What Happened: FINTRAC's Examination Findings

FINTRAC’s announcement identifies one specific administrative violation.

Failure to submit notification of change to money services business registration information

FINTRAC requirement: Under the PCMLTFA and associated Regulations, every registered money services business must ensure that its MSB registration information is accurate, complete, and kept up to date. When key details change—such as legal or operating name, ownership, control, business activities, locations, contact details, or other prescribed information—the MSB must submit a notification of change to FINTRAC within the time frames set out in the Regulations. This obligation is foundational to FINTRAC’s ability to supervise MSBs, connect transactions to the right entity, and support effective FINTRAC reporting and analysis.

FINTRAC's finding: Following a supervisory activity, FINTRAC determined that TreasureMeta Corporation (Cappo FX Inc.) failed to submit a required notification of change to its money services business registration information. Despite being a registered MSB based in Markham, Ontario, the business did not update FINTRAC when certain registration details changed, thereby breaching its registration‑maintenance obligations under Part 1 of the PCMLTFA.

Why it matters: For MSBs, accurate registration information is not a formality—it is a regulatory control point. FINTRAC relies on up‑to‑date data to:

Link suspicious transaction reporting, large cash transactions, and large virtual currency transaction reporting to the correct legal entity.
Assess sectoral risk and determine where to focus examinations and AML audit preparedness efforts.
Share accurate information with law enforcement and national security agencies investigating money laundering, terrorist activity financing, sanctions evasion, and broader threats to the security of Canada.

When an MSB fails to notify FINTRAC of changes, it undermines the integrity of the registration regime and can impede the Centre’s ability to connect financial intelligence to the right business. This is especially sensitive for MSBs, which are consistently viewed as higher‑risk in the Canadian AML framework.

⸻

Why This Penalty Matters

Reason 1: FINTRAC is signalling zero tolerance for “basic” registration failures

This AMP is not about complex transaction monitoring or missed suspicious transaction reporting. It is about a core, foundational obligation: keeping MSB registration information current. By issuing a $24,750 penalty for a single violation, FINTRAC is sending a clear signal that administrative non‑compliance is enforcement‑worthy, particularly in higher‑risk sectors like MSBs.

For compliance teams, this means that AML audit preparedness must now explicitly include registration governance—not just policies, training, and monitoring.

Reason 2: MSBs remain a high‑priority sector under the PCMLTFA

FINTRAC’s own quick facts reiterate that money services businesses are among the sectors required to:

Keep prescribed records
Identify clients
Maintain a compliance regime
Report certain transactions (international electronic funds transfers, large cash transactions, large virtual currency transaction reporting, and suspicious transaction reporting)

MSBs are frequently used in cross‑border value transfer, remittances, foreign exchange, and sometimes virtual asset services—activities that are inherently attractive for money launderers and terrorist financiers. Ensuring that FINTRAC has accurate, real‑time information on who operates these services, where, and under what structure is a critical control for AML compliance in Canada.

Reason 3: The case fits a broader pattern of escalating enforcement

FINTRAC noted that in 2024–25 it issued 23 Notices of Violation, the largest number in a single year in the Centre’s history, totalling more than $25 million in AMPs. Since receiving authority to impose penalties in 2008, FINTRAC has levied more than 150 penalties across most business sectors.

This enforcement trajectory shows a clear shift from a predominantly educational posture to a hybrid model of guidance plus assertive enforcement. MSBs—given their risk profile—should assume that even straightforward gaps like outdated registration data can now lead to public naming and significant penalties.

⸻

Lessons for Reporting Entities

Build a formal MSB registration governance process

TreasureMeta’s case underscores the need for a documented, repeatable process to manage registration data. MSBs should:

Maintain a change log for corporate, ownership, and operational details.
Assign clear internal responsibility for FINTRAC registration updates (e.g., Compliance Officer or Legal).
Use checklists to ensure any corporate event—new location, product, owner, or trade name—triggers a notification of change to FINTRAC.

Where possible, integrate this into internal systems or a FINTRAC API‑enabled RegTech solution so that registration changes are tracked systematically.

Integrate registration checks into AML audit preparedness

Internal AML reviews and external AML audits often focus on policies, risk assessments, and suspicious transaction reporting. This case shows that auditors and MSBs must also verify that:

MSB registration data matches current business reality (ownership, addresses, activities).
Historical changes were reported within required timelines.
Evidence of filings (confirmations, screenshots, correspondence) is retained and easily retrievable.

Including registration accuracy in AML audit preparedness strengthens your overall defence if FINTRAC questions your PCMLTFA requirements compliance.

Use RegTech and automation to track and document changes

MSB compliance teams should explore RegTech tools that can:

Map corporate structure, locations, and business lines to regulatory registration fields.
Trigger alerts when internal systems record a change that may require FINTRAC notification.
Centralize documentation of FINTRAC reporting, including registration updates alongside transaction reports.

Even if you are not directly integrating with a FINTRAC API, using APIs across your internal systems to keep compliance data synchronized reduces the risk of missed notifications.

Reinforce a culture that treats “administrative” duties as risk controls

This AMP illustrates that administrative obligations are risk obligations. Compliance training for MSBs should:

Emphasize how outdated registration data can hinder investigations into money laundering, terrorist activity financing, and sanctions evasion.
Connect registration accuracy to the quality and reliability of suspicious transaction reporting and other FINTRAC reporting streams.
Clarify that failure to update FINTRAC is not a minor oversight; it is a breach of law that can result in public sanctions and reputational damage.

⸻

The Bigger Picture

FINTRAC’s announcement situates the TreasureMeta (Cappo FX) AMP within a broader enforcement context:

23 Notices of Violation were issued in 2024–25, the highest annual count to date.
These Notices represented more than $25 million in AMPs across sectors.
Since 2008, FINTRAC has imposed over 150 penalties on entities in most regulated sectors, including casinos, financial entities, MSBs, real estate brokers and sales representatives, and others.

These numbers confirm that FINTRAC is no longer focused solely on outreach and guidance. It is actively using Administrative Monetary Penalties to “encourage change in non‑compliant behaviour,” as the Centre describes it. The Director and CEO, Sarah Paquet, reiterated that while FINTRAC works with businesses to help them understand and meet their obligations, it will “take appropriate actions when they are needed.”

For MSBs, this means that all pillars of the compliance regime—client identification, record‑keeping, reporting, registration, and governance—are now fair game for visible, public enforcement when gaps are identified.

⸻

Final Thoughts

The $24,750 AMP against TreasureMeta Corporation (Cappo FX Inc.), an MSB in Markham, Ontario, is a focused but powerful reminder: keeping FINTRAC registration information current is a mandatory, enforceable obligation under the PCMLTFA. It is not secondary to transaction monitoring or suspicious transaction reporting; it is part of the same control ecosystem.

Canadian MSBs should respond by tightening their registration governance, embedding change‑notification triggers into corporate processes, and leveraging technology to ensure that FINTRAC reporting—whether transactional or administrative—is timely, accurate, and well‑documented. In an era where FINTRAC enforcement is intensifying and penalties are both larger and more frequent, robust, proactive MSB compliance is no longer optional; it is a core business requirement for operating safely and sustainably in Canada’s regulated financial ecosystem.