Mexican Banks Face Extinction Over Alleged Money Laundering
In 2024, the U.S. Treasury accused three Mexican financial institutions—CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector—of facilitating drug cartel money laundering tied to fentanyl trafficking, citing a $46 million 591 thousand transaction. The department linked the crimes to bribes paid to Genaro García Luna, then Mexico’s secretary of Public Security under Felipe Calderón. The sanctions specifically targeted Mexican entities, sparing their U.S. subsidiaries and foreign partners, including Pershing, LLC, a U.S. bank linked to Bank of New York Mellon.
Source 2 notes that the Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores intervened “temporarily” and revoked the licenses of the Mexican institutions to organize their exit from the national financial system and their “ulterior extinción.” The U.S. Treasury’s actions focused solely on the Mexican firms, not their U.S. subsidiaries or foreign affiliates, as highlighted by La Jornada. Additionally, the U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi labeled Mexico an “adversario extranjero,” linking the cases to corruption involving Genaro García Luna.
American Banks Escalate Fines, Avoid Closure
In contrast, U.S. banks facing similar allegations face only financial penalties. The Treasury recently announced a $1 200 millones de dólares fine against Bank of America for violating anti-money laundering laws and sanctions, marking the third-largest penalty in the department’s history. Other U.S. banks, including Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, have also faced repeated sanctions for similar violations.
Source 2 emphasizes that the U.S. applies “la ley con severidad” when financial crimes occur abroad but “se lava las manos” with fines when they occur domestically. Bank of America, the second-largest U.S. bank, was fined $1 200 millones de dólares for alleged violations, while Mexican institutions faced extinction. The sources also note that U.S. banks like Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo have repeatedly been sanctioned for the same offenses without operational shutdowns.
Contrasting Enforcement: U.S. vs. Foreign Institutions
The U.S. Treasury’s approach reveals a stark contrast: foreign institutions face dissolution, while domestic ones receive financial penalties. Source 3 states that the U.S. “aplica la ley con severidad cuando los delitos financieros ocurren fuera de sus fronteras, pero se ‘lava las manos’ con multas si ocurren en territorio estadounidense.” This double standard is exemplified by the Mexican banks’ collapse versus Bank of America’s continued operation after a $1 200 millones de dólares fine. The U.S. also targeted Mexican institutions for their role in drug cartel financing, while U.S. banks’ violations were addressed through monetary penalties rather than institutional liquidation.
What’s Next for Financial Regulation?
While the Mexican case led to institutional collapse, the Bank of America fine reflects a more lenient approach for domestic entities.
FAQ
What was the amount of the U.S. fine against Bank of America?
The U.S. Treasury imposed a $1 200 millones de dólares fine on Bank of America for alleged violations of anti-money laundering laws.
Which Mexican banks were targeted by U.S. sanctions?
CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector were accused of facilitating drug cartel money laundering, as reported by La Jornada.
Why were U.S. banks not shut down despite similar violations?
U.S. financial institutions face fines but not operational shutdowns, unlike their foreign counterparts.
Keep reading