DNB Fines Dutch Trust Office Erez Corporate Service EUR $95,000 for Missing 2019 Annual Audit

Key Takeaways

• De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) fined trust company Erez Corporate Service BV EUR $95,000 for failing to have an audit performed for 2019, as required under the Trust Offices Supervision Act 2018 (Wtt 2018) and the Trust Offices Supervision Decree 2018 (Btt 2018).
• The fine became irrevocable after Erez withdrew its appeal.
• Compliance teams at regulated trust offices should note that DNB treats the annual audit as a core integrity safeguard and enforces it with financial penalties.

Deep Dive

De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) fined trust company Erez Corporate Service BV EUR $95,000 for failing to have an audit performed for 2019, as required under the Trust Offices Supervision Act 2018 (Wtt 2018) and the Trust Offices Supervision Decree 2018 (Btt 2018). The fine became irrevocable after Erez withdrew its appeal. Compliance teams at regulated trust offices should note that DNB treats the annual audit as a core integrity safeguard and enforces it with financial penalties.

DNB imposed the fine on January 20, 2022, for Erez's failure to have an audit performed covering January through December 2019. DNB published the decision on September 17, 2026, after the fine became final. The gap between imposition and publication reflects the legal remedies process: Erez's withdrawal of its appeal made the decision irrevocable and cleared the way for publication. Both the fine decision and the decision on the objection are available as PDFs from DNB.

Under the Wtt 2018 and Btt 2018, trust offices must conduct, or have conducted, an audit at least once a year. The audit serves as an additional safeguard for the integrity and controlled operation of the trust office. It verifies compliance with applicable laws and regulations and examines how the compliance function is exercised. DNB treated the missed audit as a standalone violation of both the Act and the Decree. It did not cite any wider failure, which shows that a purely procedural lapse can draw a significant penalty.

The audit period at issue was calendar year 2019. The process ran as follows:
- Objection: within six weeks of the decision being announced.
- Appeal to the District Court: within six weeks of the decision on the objection.
- Further appeal to the Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal.

Erez withdrew its appeal, so the fine is final. Publication of the decision years after the underlying breach also means the reputational impact can outlast the original violation.

Compliance professionals at trust offices and similar regulated entities should:
- Maintain a compliance calendar that tracks the annual audit obligation, including auditor engagement, scoping, fieldwork, and reporting milestones.
- Assign clear ownership and escalation paths so management and the board see any risk of a missed or delayed audit.
- Confirm that audit scope covers legal and regulatory compliance and the effectiveness of the compliance function.
- Retain evidence of completed audits for supervisory inspection.
- Review contingency plans for auditor unavailability, ownership changes, or resource constraints that could interrupt the audit cycle.

The direct financial exposure was EUR $95,000, but the broader consequences include public naming by DNB, heightened supervisory attention, and possible questions about the entity's overall control environment. Because the audit is meant to detect weaknesses in compliance and integrity controls, a missed audit also means those weaknesses may go undetected. Firms should treat audit timeliness as a regulatory obligation, not an administrative matter.

Source: De Nederlandsche Bank