| name | bma-licensing-classification |
| description | Classify a Bermuda (non-insurance) entity into its BMA sector + licence class and resolve its AML/ATF position before any capital/Code/filing advice. Used by `bma-financial-institutions-specialist`. Traverses the BMA decision trees, then the sector files. |
Skill: bma-licensing-classification
Purpose: Take a Bermuda entity (or a person operating "in or from within Bermuda") and determine, in order, (1) which BMA sector Act governs, (2) which licence class within it, (3) its AML/ATF status, and (4) its filing/fee/supervisory obligations — so every downstream capital/Code/filing answer is computed against the right yardstick. Used by bma-financial-institutions-specialist.
When to use
- A new Bermuda entity or business line needs its BMA licensing position determined
- A "do we need a BMA licence, and which one?" question
- Before quoting any capital/net-asset floor, Code-of-Conduct obligation, or filing — the class fixes all three
- Before concluding "we're (not) in scope for AML" — a licensing exemption is not an AML exemption
- NOT for Bermuda insurance (route to
bermuda-insurance-specialist) and NOT for legal/eligibility opinions (counsel)
The playbook
Step 0 — Insurance gate
Insurance / reinsurance / captive / ILS → stop and route to bermuda-insurance-specialist. This skill is the non-insurance perimeter only.
Step 1 — Traverse the sector/licence tree
Open ../../knowledge/bma/decision-trees.md and traverse the "Which BMA sector + licence applies" tree. Resolve the licensable activity (not the entity's label) → sector Act:
A single entity can need multiple licences — resolve each licensable activity separately.
Step 2 — Fix the licence class
Within the sector, fix the class (it drives capital/net-asset floor + the applicable Code): bank vs deposit company vs restricted (s.14); unlimited vs limited trust (s.11); unlimited vs limited CSP; Authorised vs Registered fund class; Licensed/Class A/Class B/Non-Registrable (investment business); Class T/M/F (digital assets).
Step 3 — Resolve the AML/ATF position
Traverse the "Is this entity AML/ATF-regulated" tree in the same decision-trees file. If it carries on a relevant financial-business activity, it is an AML/ATF-regulated financial institution (POCA 1997 + AMLR 2008; BMA supervises under SE Act 2008) — regardless of any licensing exemption. Then pull the operational obligations from aml-atf.md: CDD/EDD (Reg 11/11(1)(aa)), MLRO appointment, risk assessments, FIA reporting. Beneficial ownership: 10% gatekeeper vs 25% statutory (BO Act 2025; RoC-held register).
Step 4 — Obligations
From supervision-and-filings.md: the periodic filing(s) and cadence for the sector, the annual fee (due 31 March; many non-insurance figures are [unverified]), the change-of-control regime, and any OpRes/cyber code in scope.
Step 5 — Output
Fill the ../../templates/bma-licensing-classification-workpaper.md. State the sector + class + AML status + filing obligations, cite the Act + section for each, and flag every [unverified] pin for confirmation against the primary PDF.
Common pitfalls
- Mapping the entity's label to a sector ("it's a fund → IFA") instead of resolving the licensable activity.
- Quoting a capital/net-asset figure before the class is fixed — or quoting one that carries
[unverified] in the sector file as if settled.
- Treating a licensing exemption as an AML exemption — exempt PTCs are still AML/ATF-regulated FIs.
- Conflating the 10% gatekeeper and 25% statutory beneficial-ownership thresholds.
- Applying a US MRA/MRIA ladder to a BMA supervisory communication (use
../../knowledge/regulator-finding-severity-triage.md).
See also
