Foreign Exchange Operations in Serbia 2025: New Measures, Penalties, and Enhanced NBS Oversight
NBS Oversight of Foreign Exchange Operations: What Every Company Must Know in 2025
The National Bank of Serbia (NBS) is assuming a more significant supervisory role in overseeing currency exchange and foreign exchange operations. This shift aims to further develop the financial market and enhance protection for users of financial services. Foreign Exchange Operations in Serbia 2025: Is Your Business Model Compliant and Ready?
The Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Foreign Exchange Operations Law (“Official Gazette of RS”, No. 19/2025) entered into force on March 14, 2025. According to the explanatory note of the proposer, the new regulations further strengthen the NBS’s control function.
Supervision over currency exchange operations is particularly intensified. NBS now monitors not only the application of foreign exchange regulations but also those related to anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF). The scope also includes asset control restrictions aimed at preventing terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Additionally, the new law integrates certain provisions from existing bylaws into the area of corrective measures and introduces administrative penalties, alongside the existing option of initiating misdemeanor proceedings.
Amendments to the Law: New Register of Authorized Exchange Dealers
The Foreign Exchange Operations Law (“Official Gazette of RS”, Nos. 62/2006, 31/2011, 119/2012, 139/2014, and 30/2018) now includes a revised Article 39a and new Articles 39b and 39v.
First and foremost, the National Bank of Serbia (NBS) no longer uses Article 39a solely to decide on the revocation or prohibition of exchange authorization. That article now regulates the register of authorized exchange dealers.
For example, the law defines what data NBS must enter into the register. It also establishes the obligation for exchange dealers to report any changes to that data.
Moreover, the law outlines how the register is to be maintained and how information will be made available. It thus provides a legal basis for adopting a bylaw to further regulate these details.
Until now, NBS already maintained a register of exchange dealers, available on its website. However, this obligation stemmed from a bylaw — specifically, the Decision on Conditions and Manner of Performing Exchange Operations.
According to that decision (point 4, paragraph 9), NBS had the authority to maintain the register and publish the data. Now, this authority is formalized at a higher legal level.
Measures and Penalties in the Supervision of Exchange Operations
The law now includes two new articles — 39b and 39v. These articles transfer provisions from existing bylaws into the law itself, expand on them, and introduce new mechanisms.
Corrective Measures and Administrative Penalties
Article 39b defines in detail the corrective measures and administrative penalties that NBS may impose during the inspection of an exchange dealer.
Importantly, the supervision now covers not only compliance with the Law itself but also adherence to AML/CTF regulations — clearly stated in the first paragraph of Article 39b.
In other words, if NBS finds that an exchange dealer has violated AML/CTF regulations, it can impose a corresponding measure or sanction.
Warning as a Lenient Corrective Measure
NBS may issue a warning as an initial corrective measure, but only under two conditions:
The irregularities are minor in nature.
These irregularities do not significantly or directly affect the operation of the authorized exchange dealer.
The law now uses the phrase “minor irregularities” instead of the previous “minor unlawful actions” found in the bylaws.
However, the new amendments still do not clearly define what constitutes a “minor irregularity.” The law also does not specify criteria or a methodology for determining the severity of the irregularity.
As a result, the discretionary power of inspectors will likely continue to play a key role.
Inspectors will now assess irregularities based not only on foreign exchange regulations but also AML/CTF regulations.
Lack of Significant and Direct Impact: Unclear Criterion
It is expected that NBS will maintain a similar approach for the second condition for issuing a warning — that the irregularity must not have a significant and direct impact on the business operations of the exchange dealer.
However, the law does not clarify what “significant and direct impact” actually means. Once again, broad discretion is left to NBS inspectors.
Order to Align Operations with Regulations
The law introduces another key corrective measure — an order to align operations with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regulations.
NBS will issue this decision if an exchange dealer fails to comply with the law and associated regulations.
This measure previously existed through bylaws on the supervision of foreign exchange and currency exchange operations. However, it is now clearly defined in statutory law, granting it higher legal authority.
According to Article 39b, paragraph 2, this measure is applicable only if the irregularity is not minor, thereby excluding less serious offenses from its scope.
Temporary Revocation of Authorization: The Strictest Corrective Measure
In addition to a warning and an order to comply, the law now allows a third corrective measure: temporary revocation of the authorization to perform exchange operations.
Under Article 39b, the National Bank of Serbia may issue a decision temporarily revoking an exchange dealer’s authorization. This measure can apply to:
A single inspected location, or
All exchange offices operated by the dealer
The duration of the revocation can be up to 30 business days.
When Can Temporary Revocation Be Imposed?
NBS may apply this measure in two main situations:
When the dealer fails to act in accordance with the Law or AML/CTF regulations, and
When at least one of the following is true:
The irregularity significantly and directly impacts business operations, or
The irregularity could have such an impact in the future
Regarding the first criterion, all the earlier observations about the lack of clear definitions for “significant and direct impact” also apply here.
How to Assess Future Impact?
The second criterion — potential future impact — introduces a new layer of complexity: how can NBS evaluate the likelihood of future business disruptions due to a present irregularity?
The law provides no method or set of criteria for this assessment. Therefore, as before, it is presumed that NBS inspectors will rely on broad discretionary authority.
However, the legislative rationale highlights the importance of timely intervention, stressing that NBS’s goal is to prevent major issues by identifying risks early.
While this approach appears justified, it remains unclear how such future impact will be predicted and how transparent that assessment process will be.
Deadline for Remedying Irregularities
Regardless of whether it imposes a warning, an order to comply, or a temporary suspension, NBS will always require the exchange dealer to correct the identified irregularities.
The law states clearly that the dealer must align operations with the law or relevant regulations within the period specified in the decision.
Furthermore, the dealer must report to NBS on the corrective actions taken, along with evidence that the irregularities have been resolved.
Administrative Penalty: Fines as a New Legal Measure
In addition to corrective measures (warning, order, temporary suspension), the law now introduces administrative penalties in the form of monetary fines.
Under Article 39b, NBS may impose a fine:
Independently of corrective measures, or
Along with them, if justified by the circumstances.
Who Can Be Fined?
NBS may impose fines on:
The authorized exchange dealer (as a legal entity),
The responsible individual within the legal entity, or
A sole proprietor.
Fines are imposed during the inspection process, considering effectiveness, proportionality, and deterrent impact, as emphasized in the legislative rationale.
Prescribed Fine Ranges
The law sets the following fine ranges:
100,000 to 3,000,000 RSD for legal entities
10,000 to 500,000 RSD for responsible individuals
50,000 to 2,000,000 RSD for sole proprietors
However, if 10% of the entity’s revenue in the previous year exceeds these amounts, the fine may be higher.
Examples:
If 10% of a legal entity’s revenue exceeds RSD 3,000,000, the fine may go beyond that amount.
The same applies to entrepreneurs (threshold: RSD 2,000,000) and responsible individuals (threshold: RSD 500,000).
The fine must never exceed 10% of total revenue from the previous year, with “revenue” defined in accordance with the Law on Protection of Competition.
Criteria for Imposing Fines
When deciding on fines, NBS considers:
Severity of the irregularity
Willingness of the dealer to correct it
Number and interrelation of irregularities
Duration of non-compliance
Cooperation with NBS
Past behavior
Whether measures or fines have previously been imposed
Other relevant circumstances under which the irregularity occurred
Revocation of Authorization to Perform Exchange Operations
Article 39v of the Law now clearly sets out the conditions under which the National Bank of Serbia (NBS) may revoke the authorization of an exchange dealer. This revocation may apply to one or all exchange locations operated by the dealer.
When Must NBS Revoke Authorization? When May It Choose To?
The Law reaffirms situations where revocation is mandatory, already known from previous versions of the Law.
In addition, the Law introduces new cases where NBS has discretion — it may, but is not obliged to revoke authorization. Some of these situations were previously addressed only with temporary bans, but now permanent revocation is also a possibility.
New Grounds for Revocation – AML/CTF Violations
A new reason for revoking authorization is if the exchange dealer violates AML/CTF regulations.
In such cases, NBS may issue a decision revoking authorization and simultaneously impose a fine, in accordance with Article 39b.
Voluntary Cessation of Business
NBS may also revoke authorization at the request of the exchange dealer, provided the dealer wishes to cease operations and submits proof of compliance with all legal obligations.
Consequences of Revocation: Five-Year Ban
Whether the revocation was initiated by NBS or requested by the dealer, it triggers strict consequences:
For five years, the following parties may not apply for a new authorization:
The legal entity whose authorization was revoked
Any person who was the founder, owner, director, or board member at the time of revocation or up to six months prior
Any individual closely linked to such persons (e.g., household members)
Register Coordination: NBS Must Clear Before Deletion
Before removing an exchange dealer from the register of authorized exchange dealers, NBS must complete all related procedures and issue a confirmation.
Until this happens:
The dealer cannot be removed from the Business Entities Register (e.g., APR),
Even if a registration request was submitted or the deletion criteria are met.
The business registry must wait for official confirmation from NBS that the dealer has first been removed from the exchange dealers’ register.
Precondition for Deletion: Fulfilling Fines and Orders
A legal entity or entrepreneur cannot be deleted from the APR if NBS has revoked its authorization and:
All obligations under the revocation decision have not yet been fulfilled
A monetary fine remains unpaid
In such cases, NBS will notify the relevant registry authority that deletion is not possible.
Once all conditions are met, NBS will confirm that no barriers remain to deletion.
Attempt to Circumvent Procedure? Request Rejected
If an exchange dealer tries to bypass the rules and delete itself from the register:
The registry authority must reject the request
And notify NBS of the attempted violation
Unauthorized Exchange Activities: Stricter Control and Serious Consequences
Amendments to the Law grant NBS additional powers to combat unauthorized exchange operations.
Who Is Subject to Inspection?
NBS may carry out direct or indirect inspections when it suspects that the following are engaging in unauthorized exchange activities:
Natural persons
Legal entities
Entrepreneurs
What Counts as Unauthorized Exchange Activity?
The Law now explicitly defines unauthorized activity as providing services that resemble exchange operations, regardless of:
Whether the services are paid
How many users are involved
How frequently the services are provided
Probable Evidence Is Sufficient
NBS may conclude that a party is operating unlawfully even if:
Facts are not fully established
Only indirect evidence exists
The facts are probable, but not definitively proven
This provision greatly enhances NBS’s preventive powers.
Initial Response: Cease and Desist Order + Fine
If NBS confirms unauthorized activity:
It issues a decision ordering the party to immediately cease operations
The same decision imposes a monetary fine (for both the entity and its responsible person)
NBS notifies competent authorities
What If the Party Ignores the Order?
If follow-up inspection reveals continued illegal activity:
NBS issues a new decision and another fine
This process can repeat — especially for natural persons — until compliance is achieved
For Legal Entities or Entrepreneurs: Tougher Measures
If a legal entity or entrepreneur continues operating despite repeated warnings:
NBS issues another fine
Initiates forced liquidation
Prohibits further business activity
Freezes all accounts of the entity
NBS Decision Triggers Automatic Legal Consequences
Such a decision by NBS serves as a legal basis for:
Forced liquidation of the legal entity
Deletion of the entrepreneur from the business register
NBS sends the decision to the relevant authority (e.g., APR), which must:
Immediately begin liquidation or
Delete the entity from the register
These new provisions enable NBS to respond swiftly and firmly — even when only suspicions exist.
Foreign Exchange Control: Modest Amendments, Significant Impact
Although the changes relating to foreign exchange (FX) control are less extensive than those for exchange operations, they still carry substantial implications.
New Legal Basis for Compliance Orders
Article 46v now incorporates and rephrases provisions from existing bylaws. Under this article, NBS may issue a decision ordering the supervised entity to:
Eliminate the identified irregularity within a specific deadline, and
Align its operations with the Law or NBS regulations
This applies to the foreign exchange control of both residents and non-residents.
The decision must also specify the deadline for reporting to NBS on the corrective measures taken. The entity must submit documentation as evidence of compliance.
Important: The decision is final. Even though an administrative dispute can be initiated, filing a lawsuit does not suspend the execution of the decision.
Fines in Foreign Exchange Control
The Law also introduces fines as administrative penalties in the context of foreign exchange control. Article 46g outlines specific situations in which NBS may impose a fine:
The supervised entity obstructs the inspection process
It fails to provide requested data or documentation within the deadline
It does not comply with a compliance order under Article 39v(5) or Article 46v(1)
Who Can Be Fined?
A monetary fine may be imposed on:
A legal entity
A responsible individual within the legal entity
An entrepreneur
A natural person
A branch of a foreign legal entity
The fine ranges are the same as those for exchange operation control. Higher fines are also possible if the previous year’s income exceeds the statutory thresholds, following the same rules as in Article 39b.
Criteria for Fines in FX Control
When imposing fines, NBS aims for fairness, proportionality, and effectiveness. It considers:
The level of cooperation with authorized officials
The entity’s and responsible person’s prior conduct
Whether similar violations were previously penalized
Readiness to comply with the order (Article 39v(5) and Article 46v(1))
Duration of non-compliance
Duration of obstruction
Other relevant circumstances of the case
Temporary Asset Freeze
As part of a penalty decision, NBS may also prohibit the entity from accessing funds across all of its accounts.
However, there’s an exception: access is allowed for the purpose of:
Paying the fine stated in the decision, or
Settling tax obligations
Enforcement and Default Interest
A fine decision serves as an enforceable document. Based on it, NBS may initiate forced collection.
If the fine is not paid within the deadline, NBS may:
Charge default interest on the outstanding amount
Take additional collection measures
Where Are Fines Paid?
Just like fines in exchange operations, these are paid into NBS’s account.
Joint Provisions on FX and Exchange Control
The latest amendments expand the scope of Chapter VIII of the Law. Previously, this chapter applied only to FX control. It now applies to both FX and exchange operations control.
Accordingly, the title of the chapter has been updated to reflect broader legal mechanisms of control.
Control of FX and Exchange Operations in Banks
Under Article 45 of the Law, the National Bank of Serbia (NBS) is authorized to:
Conduct FX operation control of banks, and
Impose measures and fines on both the bank and the responsible individual
This applies if a bank performs international payments contrary to the law or NBS regulations.
The same rules apply to banks’ exchange operations. If irregularities are discovered during control, identical measures can be imposed, as per the Banking Law.
Supervision of E-Money Issuers, Payment Institutions, and the Post Office
The Law also regulates the control of:
Electronic money issuers,
Payment institutions,
And the public postal operator headquartered in Serbia.
If any of these entities conduct international payment operations unlawfully, NBS may:
Impose measures, and
Issue monetary penalties in line with the Law on Payment Services.
How Control is Conducted: New Rules on Procedure and Authorized Officials
The amended Article 46 introduces important innovations regarding how FX and exchange operations control is carried out. For the first time, some bylaw provisions are now embedded directly in the Law.
What is Subject to Inspection?
The first key change expands the scope of inspections.
In addition to reviewing the legality and accuracy of FX and exchange operations under applicable laws, inspections now include:
Compliance with anti-money laundering regulations, and
Counter-terrorism financing provisions
This significantly broadens the inspection scope compared to the previous framework.
Electronic Delivery of Documents
The Law now clearly regulates the delivery of documents issued during inspections. It also enables the receipt of documents in electronic form, modernizing and streamlining the procedure.
Who Conducts Inspections?
Previously, NBS could engage third parties only as technical support during on-site inspections. Their role was limited to assisting inspectors.
This has now changed.
Amended Article 46 stipulates that on-site inspections may be conducted by:
NBS employees, or
Other engaged individuals authorized by an NBS decision
Thus, the role of third parties is now formally equal to that of NBS staff when it comes to inspection authority.
New Unified Term: “Authorized Persons”
The Law introduces the term “authorized persons” to refer to anyone conducting inspections, whether employed by NBS or externally engaged.
Such persons must carry:
An official NBS authorization decision, and
A valid official ID
NBS prescribes the form and content of this ID for all authorized individuals, both internal and external.
Register of Measures and Fines: A New NBS Database
The amendments introduce a new mechanism: a register of measures and fines imposed by NBS, regulated under Article 46đ.
What Data Does the Register Contain?
The register records sanctions imposed on:
Legal entities
Entrepreneurs
Natural persons
NBS logs all penalties issued during FX and exchange operation inspections.
Data Access: Not Public, but Conditionally Available
The register is not publicly accessible, but NBS may grant access under certain conditions:
Based on a request or ruling by:
A court
A prosecutor
The police
An inspectorate
Another competent authority (in connection with specific proceedings)
Upon reasoned request from:
The person to whom the data relates, or
Their legal representative or attorney
In such cases, only data related to that person is disclosed.
Seizure of Items and Data Confidentiality
The amendments further regulate:
The confidentiality level of data in control proceedings, and
The seizure of items (e.g., foreign currency, cash, digital assets, documents) that were:
Used,
Intended for use,
Or obtained through a punishable act
These provisions reinforce both preventive and enforcement mechanisms of NBS in combating unlawful FX and exchange operations.
Interagency Cooperation: Oversight Backed by Police Support
Amended Article 49 governs cooperation between competent authorities during FX and exchange operation inspections. It strengthens coordination between NBS, the police, and the Business Register (APR).
When Is Police Assistance Involved?
There are two scenarios:
Anticipated Obstruction
If NBS reasonably expects that the inspected party may obstruct the process:
NBS may submit a written request to the police,
The police must provide assistance in accordance with the Law on Police
Note: Concrete proof of obstruction is not required — only a justified suspicion.
Actual Obstruction
If the control process is actually obstructed, the authorized person may request immediate police intervention, and the police must respond without delay.
Cooperation with the Business Register (APR)
The Law mandates coordination with the registry authority (e.g., APR).
If NBS initiates control over a legal entity or entrepreneur:
The registry must not allow the entity to be deleted from the register,
Until it receives confirmation from NBS that:
The inspection is complete, or
All related proceedings have concluded
This provision prevents abuse, such as trying to “shut down a company” mid-inspection.
Penal Provisions and Protective Measures: Higher Fines, Clearer Rules
Amendments to the Foreign Exchange Law also revise its penal provisions — specifically, Articles 59 and 61 are amended, while Article 62a is repealed.
Expansion of Article 59 Scope
Article 59 now applies to:
Electronic money issuers based in Serbia
Payment institutions
The public postal operator
These are added to the existing list of obligated entities: residents, non-residents, banks, and foreign branches.
What Now Qualifies as a Misdemeanor?
According to revised point 78), an entity commits a misdemeanor if it: “Acquires, uses, or handles foreign currency, cash, checks, securities, dinars, electronic money, digital assets, payment cards, accounting records, documentation, or other items contrary to NBS regulations.”
New Fine Amounts (Article 59):
RSD 500,000 to 2,000,000 for legal entities, banks, postal operators, and payment institutions (previously: from RSD 100,000)
RSD 50,000 to 150,000 for responsible persons in these entities (previously: from RSD 5,000)
Fines for Entrepreneurs (Article 61):
New range: RSD 150,000 to 500,000 (previously: from RSD 10,000)
The offense description mirrors that of Article 59
Possibility of Higher Fines
Both Articles 59 and 61 now allow fines:
In proportion to the damage caused
Up to 20 times the value of the damage
But not exceeding 5 times the statutory maximum fine
This allows for harsher penalties for serious violations of FX regulations.
Revised Protective Measure: Seizure of Items
Amended Article 64 governs the protective measure of item seizure, especially in cases involving undeclared money discovered at border crossings.
This includes:
Money, checks, cards, digital assets, accounting records, and other tools
That were used, intended, or resulted from a violation
The amendment ensures alignment with:
Constitutional property rights
European Court of Human Rights standards
And a fair balance between public interest and individual rights
Transitional and Final Provisions: Old Rules Still Apply — But Not Always
Article 13 of the Amendments Law outlines how and when the new and old provisions apply.
When Do New Bylaws Take Effect?
NBS must adopt new bylaws within 3 months from the Law’s entry into force. Until then:
Existing bylaws remain in effect, unless they conflict with the new law
What Happens with Ongoing Proceedings?
✅ Inspections: Any inspection that started before March 14, 2025, is completed under the old rules.
✅ Misdemeanor Proceedings: Same applies — they continue under the law in force at the time they were initiated.
Only exception: If a protective item seizure is ordered, it must follow new Article 64.
No “Escaping” into the New Law
If a proceeding has already been launched against an exchange dealer:
It cannot be dropped just to apply new penalties,
Nor can it be suspended while waiting for new bylaws
The Law thereby prevents manipulation of procedural gaps.
When Did the Law Take Effect?
The Amendments to the Foreign Exchange Operations Law came into force on March 14, 2025.
✅ Secure Business Starts with Timely Compliance Checks
In light of the latest amendments and the anticipated more aggressive NBS inspections, a timely compliance check of your business model is no longer just best practice — it’s essential.
This is especially true for models involving:
Cross-border payments and collections
Transfers of foreign currency and e-money
Debt and receivables netting
Complex group and corporate transactions relying on international financial flows
For in-house legal teams and Heads of Legal, now is the time to reassess internal compliance and update FX policies to align with the new legal framework.
🔍 STATT offers comprehensive compliance screening and legal assessments of business models involving international financial flows — practical, fast, and precise, with full insight into the regulations effective from March 14, 2025.
📩 Contact us at [email protected] or book a consultation at www.statt.rs
Manage your risks before they start managing you.