ED12 - GoBD and the Transparency Register: documenting the wB determination

Problem

The report to the Transparency Register (ED17) is only the tip of the iceberg. Beneath it lies a cluster of obligations that is decisive in audits and discrepancy procedures (§ 23a GwG) - and that cannot be fulfilled without documentation:

• "We have reported" - but the determination underlying the report is not traceable: Which sources were checked? Which shareholders were interviewed? When?
• Duty to investigate misjudged: If the company does not receive information from its shareholders, it must request information "to an appropriate extent" - and document these information requests and the information obtained (§ 20 Abs. 3a GwG). Without documentation, the duty is not fulfilled - the auditor sees only a result, not a process.
• Shareholders' information obligation unproven: Shareholders who are wB or who are directly controlled by a wB must provide the company with the necessary information and notify any change without delay (§ 20 Abs. 3 GwG). Whether and when they did so is disputed - if the receipt is not documented.
• Fiction unjustified: Reporting fictitious wB (ED04) without a documented justification is incomplete - the justification belongs to the report.
• Change history with gaps: The Transparency Register requires that the entire period since 01.10.2017 (or since incorporation) be covered without gaps. Anyone who documents only the current state can no longer substantiate earlier constellations.

Key message

The wB determination is a process subject to documentation requirements - and therefore a GoBD case that belongs in the Git repo:

1. Four obligations per association (§ 20 Abs. 1 GwG): obtain information on the beneficial owners, retain it, keep it up to date, and notify it to the register-keeping authority without delay. Three of the four are purely documentation obligations.
2. Duty to investigate (§ 20 Abs. 3a GwG): Without information from the shareholders, the company must direct information requests to them - to an appropriate extent - and document the requests and the information received. The document is the proof of compliance with the duty.
3. Information obligation (§ 20 Abs. 3 GwG): The wB and the shareholders directly controlled by them must provide information and notify changes without delay. The company documents the receipt as an artifact (sender, content, time of receipt) - in the event of a dispute, this is the evidence that the information obligation was fulfilled or that the company had to follow up.
4. Retention: The information on wB must be retained - GoBD compliance here means: versioned, immutably traceable, with references to supporting documents. Git with SHA-256 references provides this structurally (ED08, ED09).
5. History: Every determination is a new artifact - nothing is overwritten. Obsolescence tracking (superseded_by) connects the generations: determination 2026-09 (chain A) → determination 2027-03 (chain B, after a share deal) → each with a complete source reference.

Compliance by Design: The determination artifact is created before the report (Schema-First) and referenced by the report - not the other way around. This means the report can be traced back to its basis at any time: report case number → wb_ermittlung.json → articles of association/list of shareholders (SHA-256). Retrograde traceability (ED03) applied to the GwG.

The determination process as a chain

The determination artifact (Schema-First)

{
  "$schema": "https://gitcover.org/schemas/wb-ermittlung-1.0.schema.json",
  "V7GUID": "WB_ERMITTLUNG",
  "uuidV7": "01a065f3-dbbd-7000-8000-000000000001",
  "tenant": "ORG-1",
  "ermittelt_von": { "person": "E1", "role": "GF" },
  "anlass": {
    "typ": "gruendung",
    "datum": "260901",
    "belege": [
      { "art": "gesellschaftsvertrag", "sha256": "…" },
      { "art": "gesellschafterliste", "sha256": "…" }
    ]
  },
  "kette": [
    { "stufe": 1, "inhaber": "ORG-5", "art": "kapital", "anteil_prozent": 100,
      "typ": "koerperschaft", "beholderrschung_ab": "100 %" }
  ],
  "ergebnis": [
    { "person": "E1", "typ": "mittelbar", "art_interesse": "mittelbare Kontrolle über ORG-5",
      "umfang": "100 % an ORG-5", "gueltig_ab": "260901" }
  ],
  "fiktion": null,
  "angabepflicht_eingaenge": [
    { "person": "E1", "art": "angaben_wb", "eingang": "260902",
      "sha256": "…", "dokument": "angaben_e1_org1.json" }
  ],
  "auskunftsersuchen": [],
  "obsolescence": { "status": "active", "superseded_by": null, "superseded_at": null }
}

No datetime field: Here too, the capture time is embedded in the uuidV7 (ED03). Dates in the content (gueltig_ab, eingang) are domain data of the determination (validity of the constellation, date of receipt of a submission) - not the capture time of the artifact.

What happens when changes occur

Pitfall "correction": Changes are submitted to the Transparency Register as a follow-up order - a correction order would overwrite the current entry instead of supplementing it chronologically. This is precisely why the history in the repo is so important: the register shows a chronological sequence, the repo the corresponding determination generations.

Retrograde/progressive traceability (GwG manifestation)

GoBD reference: Traceability (Rz. 146) and auditability (Rz. 147) of the GwG process. An auditor - whether supervisory authority or discrepancy procedure (ED18) - can work through the chain report → determination → supporting document without any follow-up questions.

Risk leverage

Harness requirement (preview)

The complete list of requirements in Harness-Anforderungen.md.

Sources

• Money Laundering Act (GwG): § 20 Abs. 1 (cluster of obligations), § 20 Abs. 3 (information obligation), § 20 Abs. 3a (duty to investigate), § 19 (report content), § 3 (wB definition, fiction)
• Federal Office of Administration: Information sheet on the notification obligation (follow-up orders vs. corrections; gapless coverage since 10/2017)
• GoBD (BMF letter): Rz. 146 (traceability), Rz. 147 (auditability)
• AO § 146 (bookkeeping obligations, retention in the domestic territory or by expedient procedure), § 147 (retention periods)

Source topology and CDN reference links

Note: This assignment of sources, mirror and community hub reflects the current state and may change. Please check the respective canonical source on gitcover.org for the current state.