Airlangga: PFII Not for Illicit Funds
PFII is believed not to be a money laundering haven, although it still raises public concerns.
Biro Komunikasi dan Layanan Informasi Ke
By Nina Susilo
22 Jul 2026 20:38 WIB · Ekonomi & Bisnis
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — Amidst scrutiny and criticism regarding the establishment of the Indonesia International Financial Center (PFII), the government assures that the institution will not become a haven for money laundering. The anti-money laundering conventions that have been ratified are believed to protect the PFII from illicit funds.
Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs Airlangga Hartarto assured reporters at the Presidential Palace Complex in Jakarta on Wednesday (July 22, 2026) that PFII would not be used as a money laundering facility. “Now, in the global financial context, ‘know your customer’ is crucial,” he told reporters.
In addition, like many other countries, Indonesia has ratified various anti-money laundering conventions. One of them is that the Republic of Indonesia has enacted Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering Crimes. According to Airlangga, referring to this law and the conventions, PFII will avoid and be protected from the flow of illicit funds.
Previously, the Draft Law on the Indonesian International Financial Center has been approved for enactment into law during the Plenary Meeting of the DPR on Tuesday (21/7/2026). The PFII is expected to attract global capital flows, deepen the national financial market, and open long-term financing sources to support the acceleration of economic growth and development.
Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa stated after the plenary meeting that the establishment of PFII is not solely aimed at attracting foreign investors, but also to ensure that incoming investments provide tangible benefits for national interests.
The plan is for PFII to become an area with several special features, ranging from tax and customs facilities, ease of licensing, the use of foreign currency, to institutional arrangements and dispute resolution mechanisms that differ from other regions in Indonesia.
The discussion of the PFII Bill began on July 2, 2026, through a working meeting of Commission XI with the government. The discussion continued in a series of Working Committee meetings before being agreed upon in the first-level discussions on July 20, 2026. In just 18 days, the discussion of the PFII Bill was completed, and the results were brought to the plenary session and approved for enactment into law.
In addition to the relatively swift discussion issues, PFII has also attracted public attention. Several economists are concerned about the risks associated with the emergence of PFII, ranging from regulatory, institutional, and reputational risks to tax revenue and money laundering.
Concerns regarding the possibility of significant deviations are considerable. Economist and public policy expert from UPN, Achmad Nur Hidayat, questioned the provision of a zero percent income tax (PPh) that could be applicable for up to 50 years to business actors in the area.
Meanwhile, at the same time, the state is expanding the tax base, regulating digital traders, and seeking new sources of revenue to finance the ever-growing social programs.
Besides the irony, Nur assessed the risks of shell companies, round-tripping practices, money laundering, and tax evasion in the management of PFII. These risks, he said, cannot be addressed with promises of oversight after the law is passed.
“The government must also report the tax expenditures of PFII annually to the DPR and the public. The report should include the number of facilities provided, net investments, jobs created, financing for the real sector, taxes forgone, and compliance of the recipients,” he added.
Similar concerns were expressed by Syafruddin Karimi, a Professor at the Faculty of Economics and Business at Andalas University. He stated that Danantara’s investment in PFII does not automatically carry lower risks compared to direct investments in the real sector, such as industrial downstreaming.
“The PFII Bill states that the initial capital of the PFII Management Institution can come from business entities, Danantara, or other legitimate sources. This makes PFII not only a regulatory project but also an institutional investment project that can affect the balance sheet and reputation of Danantara,” said Syafruddin, Monday (13/7/2026).
He warned that if the market views PFII as a cheap tax space, a channel for round tripping practices (turning assets to manipulate reports), or an area with weak supervision, Danantara’s reputation will also be affected.
Writer:
Nina SusiloEditor:
Agnes Theodora