In discussions around anti-money laundering (AML), counter-terrorism financing (CFT), and international financial regulation, the terms used to describe jurisdictions under increased monitoring can vary widely. While the core concept remains the same, spelling and formatting differences can lead to confusion, particularly across documents from international organizations, academic institutions, and national governments.
This article explores common variants of these terms, referencing how they are used in authoritative publications such as those from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and several international journals and blogs.
Let's review the different terms found online:
This is the most widely used and internationally accepted term for jurisdictions under increased monitoring by the FATF. It is written as two words, using British English spelling (“grey” rather than “gray”). FATF itself uses this form in its official publications and public updates. It is also preferred in EU and Commonwealth contexts and is suitable for any formal writing on FATF compliance or registry modernisation.
Example: “The FATF has added a country to the grey list due to strategic AML/CFT deficiencies.”
Used as a verb in British English, to greylist means placing a country or entity under increased monitoring due to concerns about money laundering, terrorism financing, or proliferation financing. While less frequently used than the noun form, it appears in media and policy commentary.
Example: “The FATF decided to greylist the jurisdiction following the mutual evaluation.”
This hyphenated variant is most commonly used as a compound adjective, rather than a standalone noun. For example, it may describe a “grey-listed country” or “grey-listing policy.” As a noun, this form is uncommon and generally not found in formal regulatory literature.
Example: “Grey-listed jurisdictions may experience capital outflows and reputational harm.”
This is the gerund or noun form describing the process or state of being placed on the grey list. It is commonly used in both academic writing and policy discussions. A notable example appears in MDPI’s 2023 article “The Economic Costs of FATF Greylisting,” which uses the spelling “greylisting” consistently to describe impacts across jurisdictions.
Example: “Greylisting can result in decreased foreign direct investment and strained banking relationships.”
This is the American English equivalent of “grey list” and is occasionally used by U.S.-based organizations or in documents tailored to American audiences. However, it is not the standard in FATF, IMF, or EU documentation.
Example: “The U.S. Treasury monitors entities from countries currently on the gray list.”
The American English equivalent of to greylist, this verb appears in U.S.-based reporting or commentary, particularly in technology or compliance sectors. While not widely used in FATF contexts, it is technically correct within U.S. usage.
Example: “Authorities may graylist institutions that fail to meet disclosure requirements.”
Similar to “grey-list,” this hyphenated form functions best as a compound adjective. It is not commonly used as a noun in formal writing. It may appear in some U.S. government or private-sector reports but lacks standardization.
Example: “A gray-listed country faces restrictions from major correspondent banks.”
This American English gerund form is used in industry papers and blog posts, notably in the 2021 working paper “The Impact of Gray-Listing on Capital Flows: An Analysis Using Machine Learning.” In that document, “gray-listing” describes the process of increased monitoring by FATF and its economic consequences.
Example: “Gray-listing is associated with a measurable drop in capital inflows.”
| Term | Type | Spelling | Usage Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grey list | Noun | British | FATF and international regulation |
| To greylist | Verb | British | British usage in media and policy writing |
| Grey-list | Adjective (compound) | British | Occasionally as descriptor |
| Greylisting | Gerund/Noun | British | Academic and regulatory discourse |
| Gray list | Noun | American | U.S. academic publications or industry audiences |
| To graylist | Verb | American | American usage in tech and compliance |
| Gray-list | Adjective (compound) | American | Occasional U.S. reports |
| Gray-listing | Gerund/Noun | American | U.S.-based industry literature |
While the meanings of these terms are largely consistent, their formality, regional preference, and institutional usage vary. For clarity and consistency, especially in international AML/CFT communications, it is advisable to use “grey list”, “to greylist”, and “greylisting”, in line with FATF and global standards. Writers producing regulatory content or registry guidance should avoid mixing variants and adopt terminology based on the intended audience and context.
For formal documents, academic research, and policy briefs, aligning with FATF conventions ensures both linguistic precision and institutional credibility.