Just before sunset on April 10,
2006, a DC-9 jet landed at the international airport in the port
city of Ciudad del Carmen, 500 miles east of Mexico City. As
soldiers on the ground approached the plane, the crew tried to
shoo them away, saying there was a dangerous oil leak. So the
troops grew suspicious and searched the jet.
They found 128 black suitcases, packed with 5.7 tons of
cocaine, valued at $100 million. The stash was supposed to
have
been delivered from Caracas to drug traffickers in Toluca, near
Mexico City, Mexican prosecutors later found. Law enforcement
officials also discovered something else.
The smugglers had bought the DC-9 with laundered funds they
transferred through two of the biggest banks in the U.S.: Wachovia Corp. and Bank of America
Corp.,
Bloomberg Markets
magazine reports in its August 2010 issue.
This was no isolated incident. Wachovia, it turns out, had
made a habit of helping move money for Mexican drug smugglers. Wells Fargo
& Co.,
which bought Wachovia in 2008, has admitted
in court that its unit failed to monitor and report suspected
money laundering by narcotics traffickers -- including the cash
used to buy four planes that shipped a total of 22 tons of
cocaine.
The admission came in an agreement that Charlotte, North
Carolina-based Wachovia struck with federal prosecutors in
March, and it sheds light on the largely undocumented role of
U.S. banks in contributing to the violent drug trade that has
convulsed Mexico for the past four years.
‘Blatant
Disregard’
Wachovia
admitted
it didn’t do enough to spot illicit funds
in handling $378.4 billion for Mexican-currency-exchange
houses
from 2004 to 2007. That’s the largest violation of the Bank
Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history -- a
sum equal to one-third of Mexico’s current gross domestic
product.
“Wachovia’s
blatant
disregard for our banking laws gave
international cocaine cartels a virtual carte blanche to finance
their operations,” says Jeffrey Sloman, the federal prosecutor
who handled the case.
Since 2006,
more
than 22,000 people have been killed in
drug-related battles that have raged mostly along the 2,000-mile
(3,200-kilometer) border that Mexico shares with the U.S. In the
Mexican city of Ciudad Juarez, just across the border from El
Paso, Texas, 700 people had been murdered this year as of mid-
June. Six Juarez police officers were slaughtered by automatic
weapons fire in a midday ambush in April.
Rondolfo
Torre, the
leading candidate for governor in the
Mexican border state of Tamaulipas, was gunned down yesterday,
less than a week before elections in which violence related to
drug trafficking was a central issue.
45,000 Troops
Mexican President Felipe Calderon vowed to crush the drug
cartels when he took office in December 2006, and he’s since
deployed 45,000 troops to fight the cartels. They’ve had little
success.
Among the dead are police, soldiers, journalists and
ordinary citizens. The U.S. has pledged Mexico $1.1 billion in
the past two years to aid in the fight against narcotics
cartels.
In May, President Barack Obama said he’d send 1,200
National Guard troops, adding to the 17,400 agents on the U.S.
side of the border to help stem drug traffic and illegal
immigration.
Behind the carnage in Mexico is an industry that supplies
hundreds of tons of cocaine, heroin, marijuana and
methamphetamines to Americans. The cartels have built a network
of dealers in 231 U.S. cities from coast to coast, taking in
about $39 billion in sales annually, according to the Justice
Department.
‘You’re Missing the Point’
Twenty million people in the U.S. regularly use illegal
drugs, spurring street crime and wrecking families. Narcotics
cost the U.S. economy $215 billion a year -- enough to cover
health care for 30.9 million Americans -- in overburdened
courts, prisons and hospitals and lost productivity, the
department says.
“It’s the banks laundering money for the cartels that
finances the tragedy,” says Martin Woods, director of Wachovia’s
anti-money-laundering unit in London from 2006 to 2009. Woods
says he quit the bank in disgust after executives ignored his
documentation that drug dealers were funneling money through
Wachovia’s branch network.
“If you don’t see the correlation between the money
laundering by banks and the 22,000 people killed in Mexico,
you’re missing the point,” Woods says.
Cleansing Dirty Cash
Wachovia is just one of the U.S. and European banks that
have been used for drug money laundering. For the past two
decades, Latin American drug traffickers have gone to U.S. banks
to cleanse their dirty cash, says Paul Campo, head of the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Administration’s financial crimes unit.
Miami-based American Express Bank International paid fines
in both 1994 and 2007 after admitting it had failed to spot and
report drug dealers laundering money through its accounts. Drug
traffickers used accounts at Bank of America in Oklahoma City to
buy three planes that carried 10 tons of cocaine, according to
Mexican court filings.
Federal agents caught people who work for Mexican cartels
depositing illicit funds in Bank of America accounts in Atlanta,
Chicago and Brownsville, Texas, from 2002 to 2009.
Mexican drug dealers used shell companies to open accounts at
London-based HSBC Holdings Plc, Europe’s biggest bank by
assets,
an investigation by the Mexican Finance Ministry found.
Following Rules
Those two banks weren’t accused of wrongdoing. Bank of
America spokeswoman Shirley Norton and HSBC spokesman Roy Caple
say laws bar them from discussing specific clients. They say
their banks strictly follow the government rules.
“Bank of
America
takes its anti-money-laundering
responsibilities very seriously,” Norton says.
A Mexican
judge on
Jan. 22 accused the owners of six
centros cambiarios, or money changers, in Culiacan and Tijuana
of laundering drug funds through their accounts at the Mexican
units of Banco Santander
SA, Citigroup Inc. and HSBC, according
to court documents filed in the case.
The money
changers
are in jail while being tried.
Citigroup, HSBC and Santander, which is the largest Spanish bank
by assets, weren’t accused of any wrongdoing. The three banks
say Mexican law bars them from commenting on the case, adding
that they each carefully enforce anti-money-laundering programs.
HSBC has
stopped
accepting dollar deposits in Mexico, and
Citigroup no longer allows noncustomers to change dollars there.
Citigroup detected suspicious activity in the Tijuana accounts,
reported it to regulators and closed the accounts, Citigroup
spokesman Paulo Carreno says.
Criminal
Empires
On June 15, the Mexican Finance Ministry announced it would
set limits for banks on cash deposits in dollars.
Mexico’s drug cartels have become multinational criminal
enterprises.
Some of the
gangs
have delved into other illegal activities
such as gunrunning, kidnapping and smuggling people across the
border, as well as into seemingly legitimate areas such as
trucking, travel services and air cargo transport, according to
the Justice Department’s National
Drug Intelligence Center.
These criminal empires have no choice but to use the global
banking system to finance their businesses, Mexican Senator
Felipe Gonzalez says.
“With so much cash, the only way to move this money is
through the banks,” says Gonzalez, who represents a central
Mexican state and chairs the senate public safety committee.
Gonzalez, a
member
of Calderon’s National Action Party,
carries a .38 revolver for personal protection.
“I know this
won’t
stop the narcos when they come through
that door with machine guns,” he says, pointing to the entrance
to his office. “But at least I’ll take one with me.”
Subprime
Losses
No bank has been more closely connected with Mexican money
laundering than Wachovia. Founded in 1879, Wachovia became the
largest bank by assets in the southeastern U.S. by 1900. After
the Great Depression, some people in North Carolina called the
bank “Walk-Over-Ya” because it had foreclosed on farms in the
region.
By 2008,
Wachovia
was the sixth-largest U.S. lender, and it
faced $26 billion in losses from subprime mortgage loans.
That cost Wachovia Chief Executive Officer Kennedy Thompson his
job in June 2008.
Six months later, San Francisco-based Wells Fargo, which
dates from 1852, bought Wachovia for $12.7 billion, creating the
largest network of bank branches in the U.S. Thompson, who now
works for private-equity firm Aquiline Capital Partners LLC in
New York, declined to comment.
As Wachovia’s balance sheet was bleeding, its legal woes
were mounting. In the three years leading up to Wachovia’s
agreement with the Justice Department, grand juries served the
bank with 6,700 subpoenas requesting information.
Not Quick
Enough
The bank didn’t react quickly enough to the prosecutors’
requests and failed to hire enough investigators, the U.S.
Treasury Department said in March. After a 22-month
investigation, the Justice Department on March 12 charged
Wachovia with violating the Bank Secrecy Act by failing to run
an effective anti-money-laundering program.
Five days later, Wells Fargo promised in a Miami federal
courtroom to revamp its detection systems. Wachovia’s new owner
paid $160 million in fines and penalties, less than 2 percent of
its $12.3 billion profit in 2009.
If Wells
Fargo
keeps its pledge, the U.S. government will,
according to the agreement, drop all charges against the bank in
March 2011.
Wells Fargo
regrets
that some of Wachovia’s former anti-
money-laundering efforts fell short, spokeswoman Mary Eshet
says. Wells Fargo has invested $42 million in the past three
years to improve its anti-money-laundering program and has been
working with regulators, she says.
‘Significantly Upgraded’
“We have substantially increased the caliber and number of
staff in our international investigations group, and we also
significantly upgraded the monitoring software,” Eshet says.
The
agreement bars the bank from contesting or contradicting the
facts in its admission.
The bank declined to answer specific questions, including
how much it made by handling $378.4 billion -- including $4
billion of cash-from Mexican exchange companies.
The 1970 Bank Secrecy Act requires banks to report all
cash
transactions above $10,000 to regulators and to tell the
government about other suspected money-laundering activity. Big
banks employ hundreds of investigators and spend millions of
dollars on software programs to scour accounts.
No big U.S. bank -- Wells Fargo included -- has ever been
indicted for violating the Bank Secrecy Act or any other federal
law. Instead, the Justice Department settles criminal charges by
using deferred-prosecution agreements, in which a bank pays a
fine and promises not to break the law again.
‘No Capacity to Regulate’
Large banks are protected from indictments by a variant of
the too-big-to-fail theory.
Indicting a big bank could trigger a mad dash by investors
to dump shares and cause panic in financial markets, says Jack
Blum, a U.S. Senate investigator for 14 years and a consultant
to international banks and brokerage firms on money laundering.
INFORMAMERICANET EDITOR
COMMENT: THIS IS ALL THE MORE REASON THAT THE
LARGER THE BANK, THE MORE OVERSIGHT IT SHOULD GET, INSTEAD OF; THE
LARGER THE BANK, THE MORE CLOUT IT HAS.
THE CRIMINAL POTENTIAL OF THE LARGER BANKS NECESSITATES MORE
ACCOUNTABILITY, NOT LESS.
END COMMENT
The theory is like a get-out-of-jail-free card for big
banks, Blum says.
“There’s no capacity to regulate or punish them because
they’re too big to be threatened with failure,” Blum says. “They
seem to be willing to do anything that improves their bottom
line, until they’re caught.”
Wachovia’s run-in with federal prosecutors hasn’t troubled
investors. Wells Fargo’s
stock traded at
$30.86 on March 24, up 1 percent
in the week after the March 17 agreement was announced.
Moving money is central to the drug trade -- from the cash
that people tape to their bodies as they cross the U.S.-Mexican
border to the $100,000 wire transfers they send from Mexican
exchange houses to big U.S. banks.
‘Doesn’t Stop Anyone’
In Tijuana, 15 miles south of San Diego, Gustavo Rojas has
lived for a quarter of a century in a shack in the shadow of the
10-foot-high (3-meter-high) steel border fence that separates
the U.S. and Mexico there. He points to holes burrowed under
the
barrier.
“They go across with drugs and come back with cash,” Rojas,
75, says. “This fence doesn’t stop anyone.”
Drug money moves back and forth across the border in an
endless cycle. In the U.S., couriers take the cash from drug
sales to Mexico -- as much as $29 billion a year, according to
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That would be about
319 tons of $100 bills.
They hide it in cars and trucks to smuggle into Mexico.
There, cartels pay people to deposit some of the cash into
Mexican banks and branches of international banks. The narcos
launder much of what’s left through money changers.
The Money Changers
Anyone who has been to Mexico is familiar with these
street-corner money changers; Mexican regulators say there are
at least 3,000 of them from Tijuana to Cancun, usually
displaying large signs advertising the day’s dollar-peso
exchange rate.
Mexican banks are regulated by the National Banking and
Securities Commission,
which has an anti-money-laundering unit;
the money changers are policed by Mexico’s Tax Service
Administration, which has no such unit.
By law, the money changers have to demand identification
from anyone exchanging more than $500. They also have to report
transactions higher than $5,000 to regulators.
The cartels get around these requirements by employing
legions of individuals -- including relatives, maids and
gardeners -- to convert small amounts of dollars into pesos or
to make deposits in local banks. After that, cartels wire the
money to a multinational bank.
The Smurfs
The people making the small money exchanges are known as
Smurfs, after the cartoon characters.
“They can use
an
army of people like Smurfs and go through
$1 million before lunchtime,” says Jerry Robinette, who oversees
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations along the
border in east Texas.
The U.S.
Treasury
has been warning banks about big Mexican-
currency-exchange firms laundering drug money since 1996.
By 2004, many U.S. banks had closed their accounts with these
companies, which are known as casas de cambio.
Wachovia
ignored
warnings by regulators and police,
according to the deferred-prosecution agreement.
“As early as
2004,
Wachovia understood the risk,” the bank
admitted in court. “Despite these warnings, Wachovia remained in
the business.”
One customer that Wachovia took on in 2004 was Casa de
Cambio Puebla SA, a Puebla, Mexico-based currency-exchange
company. Pedro Alatorre, who ran a Puebla branch in Mexico City,
had created front companies for cartels, according to a pending
Mexican criminal case against him.
Federal Indictment
A federal grand jury in Miami indicted Puebla, Alatorre and
three other executives in February 2008 for drug trafficking and
money laundering. In May 2008, the Justice Department sought
extradition of the suspects, saying they used shell firms to
launder $720 million through U.S. banks.
Alatorre has been in a Mexican jail for 2 1/2 years. He
denies any wrongdoing, his lawyer Mauricio Moreno says. Alatorre
has made no court-filed responses in the U.S..
During the period in which Wachovia admitted to moving
money out of Mexico for Puebla, couriers carrying clear plastic
bags stuffed with cash went to the branch Alatorre ran at the
Mexico City airport, according to surveillance reports by
Mexican police.
Alatorre opened accounts at HSBC on behalf of front
companies, Mexican investigators found.
Puebla executives used the stolen identities of 74 people
to launder money through Wachovia accounts, Mexican prosecutors
say in court-filed reports.
‘Never Reported’
“Wachovia handled all the transfers, and they never
reported any as suspicious,” says Jose Luis Marmolejo, a former
head of the Mexican attorney general’s financial crimes unit who
is now in private practice.
In November 2005 and January 2006, Wachovia transferred a
total of $300,000 from Puebla to a Bank of America account in
Oklahoma City, according to information in the Alatorre cases in
the U.S. and Mexico.
Drug smugglers used the funds to buy the DC-9 through
Oklahoma City aircraft broker U.S. Aircraft Titles Inc.,
according to financial records cited in the Mexican criminal
case. U.S. Aircraft Titles President Sue White declined to
comment.
On April 5,
2006, a
pilot flew the plane from St.
Petersburg, Florida, to Caracas to pick up the cocaine,
according to the DEA. Five days later, troops seized the plane
in Ciudad del Carmen and burned the drugs at a nearby army base.
‘Wachovia
Knew’
“I am sure
Wachovia
knew what was going on,” says
Marmolejo, who oversaw the criminal investigation into
Wachovia’s customers. “It went on too long and they made too
much money not to have known.”
At Wachovia’s
anti-money-laundering unit in London, Woods
and his colleague Jim DeFazio, in Charlotte, say they suspected
that drug dealers were using the bank to move funds.
Woods,
a
former Scotland Yard investigator, spotted
illegible signatures and other suspicious markings on traveler’s
checks from Mexican exchange companies, he said in a September
2008 letter to the U.K. Financial
Services Authority.
He sent
copies of the letter to the DEA and Treasury Department in the
U.S..
Woods, 45, says
his
bosses instructed him to keep quiet and
tried to have him fired, according to his letter to the FSA. In
one meeting, a bank official insisted Woods shouldn’t have filed
suspicious activity reports to the government, as both U.S. and
U.K. laws require.
‘I Was Shocked’
“I was shocked
by the
content and outcome of the meeting
and genuinely traumatized,” Woods wrote.
In the U.S.,
DeFazio,
who had been a Federal Bureau of
Investigation agent for 21 years, says he told bank executives
in 2005 that the DEA was probing the transfers through Wachovia
to buy the planes.
Bank
executives spurned recommendations to close suspicious
accounts, DeFazio, 63, says.
“I think they
looked
at the money and said, ‘The hell with
it. We’re going to bring it in, and look at all the money we’ll
make,’” DeFazio says.
DeFazio retired
in
2008.
“I didn’t want
anything from them,” he says. “I just wanted
to get out.”
Woods, who
resigned
from Wachovia in May 2009, now advises
banks on how to combat money laundering. He declined to discuss
details of Wachovia’s actions.
U.S. Comptroller
of
the Currency John Dugan told Woods in a
March 19 letter his efforts had helped the U.S. build its case
against Wachovia.
‘Great Courage’
“You
demonstrated
great courage and integrity by speaking
up when you saw problems,” Dugan wrote.
It
was the
Puebla investigation that led U.S. authorities
to the broader probe of Wachovia. On May 16, 2007, DEA agents
conducted a raid of Wachovia’s international banking offices in
Miami. They had a court order to seize Puebla’s accounts.
U.S.
prosecutors and investigators then scrutinized the
bank’s dealings with Mexican-currency-exchange firms. That led
to the March deferred-prosecution agreement.
With Puebla’s
Wachovia
accounts seized, Alatorre and his
partners shifted their laundering scheme to HSBC, according to
financial documents cited in the Mexican criminal case against
Alatorre.
In the three
weeks
after the DEA raided Wachovia, two of
Alatorre’s front companies, Grupo ETPB SA and Grupo Rahero SC,
made 12 cash deposits totaling $1 million at an HSBC Mexican
branch, Mexican investigators found.
Another Drug
Plane
The funds
financed a
Beechcraft King Air 200 plane that
police seized on Dec. 29, 2007, in Cuernavaca, 50 miles south of
Mexico City, according to information in the case against
Alatorre.
For
years,
federal authorities watched as the wife and
daughter of Oscar Oropeza, a drug smuggler working for the
Matamoros-based Gulf Cartel, deposited stacks of cash at a Bank
of America branch on Boca Chica Boulevard in Brownsville, Texas,
less than 3 miles from the border.
Investigator
Robinette
sits in his pickup truck across the
street from that branch. It’s a one-story, tan stucco building
next to a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet. Robinette discusses the
Oropeza case with Tom Salazar, an agent who investigated the
family.
“Everybody in
there
knew who they were -- the tellers,
everyone,” Salazar says. “The bank never came to us, though.”
New Meaning
The Oropeza case
gives
a new, literal meaning to the term
money laundering. Oropeza’s wife, Tina Marie, and daughter
Paulina Marie deposited stashes of $20 bills several times a day
into Bank of America accounts, Salazar says. Bank employees got
to know the Oropezas by the smell of their money.
“I
asked
the tellers what they were talking about, and they
said the money had this sweet smell like Bounce, those sheets
you throw into the dryer,” Salazar says. “They told me that when
they opened the vault, the smell of Bounce just poured out.”
Oropeza, 48, was
arrested 820 miles from Brownsville. On
May 31, 2007, police in Saraland, Alabama, stopped him on a
traffic violation. Checking his record, they learned of the
investigation in Texas.
They searched
the van
and discovered 84 kilograms (185
pounds) of cocaine hidden under a false floor. That allowed
federal agents to freeze Oropeza’s bank accounts and search his
marble-floored home in Brownsville, Robinette says. Inside,
investigators found a supply of Bounce alongside the clothes
dryer.
Guilty Pleas
All three
Oropezas
pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in
Brownsville to drug and money-laundering charges in March and
April 2008. Oscar Oropeza was sentenced to 15 years in prison;
his wife was ordered to serve 10 months and his daughter got 6
months.
Bank of
America’s
Norton says, “We not only fulfilled our
regulatory obligation, but we proactively worked with law
enforcement on these matters.”
Prosecutors
have tried to halt money laundering at American
Express Bank International twice. In 1994, the bank, then a
subsidiary of New York-based American
Express Co.,
pledged not
to allow money laundering again after two employees were
convicted in a criminal case involving drug trafficker Juan
Garcia Abrego.
In 1994, the
bank paid
$14 million to settle.
Five years later, drug money again flowed through American
Express Bank. Between 1999 and 2004, the bank failed to stop
clients from laundering $55 million of narcotics funds, the bank
admitted in a deferred-prosecution agreement in August 2007.
Western Union
It paid $65
million to
the U.S. and promised not to break
the law again. The government dismissed the criminal charge a
year later. American Express sold the bank to London-based Standard
Chartered PLC in February 2008 for $823 million.
Banks aren’t the
only
financial institutions that have
turned a blind eye to drug cartels in moving illicit funds. Western Union Co.,
the world’s largest money transfer firm,
agreed to pay $94 million in February 2010
to settle civil and
criminal investigations by the Arizona attorney general’s
office.
Undercover state
police posing as drug dealers bribed
Western Union employees to illegally transfer money, says
Cameron Holmes, an assistant attorney general.
“Their
allegiance was to the smugglers,” Holmes says. “What
they thought about during work was ‘How may I please my highest-
spending customers the most?’”
Smudged
Fingerprints
Workers in more
than
20 Western Union offices allowed the
customers to use multiple names, pass fictitious identifications
and smudge their fingerprints on documents, investigators say in
court records.
“In all the time
we
did undercover operations, we never
once had a bribe turned down,” says Holmes, citing court
affidavits.
Western Union
has made
significant improvements, it
complies with anti-money-laundering laws and works closely with
regulators and police, spokesman Tom Fitzgerald says.
For four years,
Mexican authorities have been fighting a
losing battle against the cartels. The police are often two
steps behind the criminals. Near the southeastern corner of
Texas, in Matamoros, more than 50 combat troops surround a
police station.
Officers
take two suspected drug traffickers inside for
questioning. Nearby, two young men wearing white T-shirts and
baggy pants watch and whisper into radios. These are los
halcones (the falcons), whose job is to let the cartel bosses
know what the police are doing.
‘Only Way’
While the police
are
outmaneuvered and outgunned, ordinary
Mexicans live in fear. Rojas, the man who lives in the
Tijuana
slum near the border fence, recalls cowering in his home as
smugglers shot it out with the police.
“The only way to
survive is to stay out of the way and hope
the violence, the bullets, don’t come for you,” Rojas says.
To make their
criminal
enterprises work, the drug cartels
of Mexico need to move billions of dollars across borders.
That’s how they finance the purchase of drugs, planes, weapons
and safe houses, Senator Gonzalez says.
“They
are
multinational businesses, after all,” says
Gonzalez, as he slowly loads his revolver at his desk in his
Mexico City office. “And they cannot work without a bank.”
To contact the reporter on this story:
Michael Smith in Santiago, Chile, at mssmith@bloomberg.net.
DISCLAIMER:
This
article is published in the interests of public safety and U.S.
National Security under The Fair Use Clause. We believe the
information herein can assist in saving lives of citizens and law
enforcement and military personnel in Mexico and The United States.
INFORMAMERICA.NET
EDITOR COMMENTS:
"What
good
is all the money you can make with no country left to spend it in?"
These
comments may be expanded.