124. Where supervisors' mandates have been expanded to include new activities not previously subject to AML/CFT supervision, supervisors may not have a good understanding of the risks in the sector or the strength of mitigation measures and need to consider how best to integrate entities engaging in such activities into their risk models.

125. Strategies to address this challenge:

• As a starting point, supervisors should focus on the potential level of ML/TF risk in the sector (i.e., inherent risks). Supervisory authorities should seek to build an initial understanding of the inherent risk that these new activities could present and seek to supplement this knowledge through engagement with law enforcement authorities, other supervisory authorities which are already supervising and licencing/registering such entities and through engagement with the entities themselves (for example, through issuing a ML/TF questionnaire, engaging in meetings with the sector or with specific entities as part of registration or licensing processes) [Cooperating licensing and registering authorities can help develop an understanding the ML/TF risks at an entity level. Any exchange of information would be need to have a legal basis and/or memoranda of understanding to facilitate this exchange.]. To ensure that this process does not result in diverting resources from existing higher risk sectors, additional resources may be required or sought. These resource considerations should be part of planning and rolling out regulation to new sectors. Supervisors can also learn from other jurisdictions that are already supervising the activities (i.e. where regulation has been introduced by their international counterparts).