A dominant assumption is that the processes for evaluating and sanctioning countries for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) failings are infallible and amplify countries’ compliance. Yet, there is scarce literature on the politics and biases of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)’s listing, which affects developing countries disproportionately. This chapter critiques the credibility of the FATF’s listing due to its implicit biases and argues that international institutions should pay less attention to the lists in determining their engagements with countries. Furthermore, the chapter asserts that combating illicit crimes requires a shift away from biased listing to macro-risk listing. Additionally, this chapter examines how countries react to the listing, and contend that contrary to the expected ‘stigma reaction’, the lists occasionally create a stigma paradox where countries engage in superficial compliance merely to get delisted.