Investigators have opened a formal probe into Plus Ultra’s alleged misuse of EU rescue funds, linking the airline’s €50 million COVID‑19 aid to a web of shell companies that funnel money to Venezuelan entities under U.S. and EU sanctions the investigation revealed. The scandal has already ignited a firestorm in Brussels and London, with regulators warning that the case exposes a “dangerous blind spot” in cross‑border anti‑money‑laundering supervision.
The €50 million tranche was part of the EU’s NextGenerationEU recovery package, earmarked for “essential operational continuity and employment preservation” and deposited into a dedicated Rescue‑Funds Account at Banco Santander Spain the EU’s own documentation confirms. While the airline pledged to use the cash for payroll and aircraft maintenance, internal transfers between October 2021 and March 2023 show that roughly €12 million vanished into a maze of newly created entities in Malta, the British Virgin Islands and the United Kingdom the Financial Times traced.
The money trail follows a textbook layering scheme: a Maltese‑registered logistics shell issued fake “air‑cargo services” invoices, moving €7 million to a BVI‑registered trust that subsequently paid for a London luxury property on behalf of a Venezuelan Ministry of Transport front company the National Crime Agency identified. A UK correspondent bank processed the transfers with “transaction‑risk‑based” controls, allowing the funds to bypass the FCA’s customer‑risk checks the regulator’s own guidance outlines.
What the Plus Ultra case lays bare is a set of regulatory cracks that have long been warned about. The EU’s Fifth AML Directive still permits “non‑EU intermediaries” to hide behind opaque beneficial‑ownership registers, a loophole exploited by the Malta‑BVI hybrid structures the European Banking Authority warned in its 2023 deficiencies report. Moreover, the “corporate exemption” to the Travel Rule means high‑value intra‑EU transfers can slip through without transmitting originator and beneficiary details the EU’s AML framework itself admits. In the UK, the FCA’s 2022 Correspondent‑Banking Review flagged the lack of end‑to‑end AML checks on corporate clients, a gap now being weaponised by sanctioned actors the review concluded.
The fallout for British banks could be severe. In a January 2024 speech the FCA’s chief executive warned that any institution found to have facilitated the movement of funds to sanctioned Venezuelan entities “will face swift, proportionate sanctions, including possible licence revocation” the statement made clear. The regulator now expects banks to treat EU‑origin rescue funds as high‑risk, demanding robust source‑of‑funds verification and real‑time sanctions screening that captures indirect ownership links the updated FCA guidance stipulates.
To plug the holes, Brussels has pledged to extend the Travel Rule to all corporate transfers above €1,000 and to create a public, real‑time beneficial‑ownership register that covers offshore entities dealing with EU and UK banks the 2024 AML Action Plan outlines. Simultaneously, UK banks must adopt graph‑analytics tools to spot circular fund movements, integrate global ownership data, and embed “sanctions‑evasion risk indicators” into their AML software the Treasury’s OFR analysis recommends. Only by marrying tighter legislation with cutting‑edge technology can regulators prevent the next Plus Ultra‑style laundering operation from slipping through the cracks.
Image Source: www.tripadvisor.co.uk
