As we approach the final quarter of 2025, a dramatic shift in U.S. white-collar crime enforcement is reshaping the risk landscape for businesses operating in Latin America—particularly Mexico. Recent regulatory actions signal an unprecedented convergence of counterterrorism, anti-corruption, and anti-money laundering enforcement that demands immediate attention from corporate counsel, compliance officers, and business leaders throughout the region.
We examine five critical enforcement trends that are fundamentally altering how U.S. authorities approach cross-border business operations, with practical implications for companies navigating this evolving regulatory environment.
1. Cartel Designations: When Counterterrorism Tools Target Transnational Crime
The designation of six Mexican cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) under Executive Order 13224 represents far more than symbolic posturing. These designations activate powerful enforcement mechanisms that extend well beyond traditional law enforcement tools.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, knowingly providing—or attempting or conspiring to provide—material support or resources to an FTO constitutes a federal crime punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment. The Department of Justice has demonstrated its willingness to deploy this statute aggressively, as evidenced by the Lafarge case, where the multinational cement company pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations in Syria.
The financial institution implications are particularly severe. Banks and other financial entities that know they possess or control funds in which an FTO or its agents have an interest face mandatory obligations to retain control of those funds and report them to the U.S. government. Non-compliance carries penalties of $50,000 per violation or up to twice the amount that should have been retained—whichever is greater.
Critically, the Department of Justice claims extraterritorial jurisdiction over these violations, meaning companies and individuals operating entirely outside U.S. borders may find themselves subject to investigation and prosecution. For businesses in Mexico and throughout Latin America, this creates a complex web of compliance obligations that transcend traditional geographic boundaries.
2. FCPA Enforcement Returns with a Sharpened Focus
On June 9, 2025, the Department of Justice issued new guidelines ending the temporary pause on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement and establishing a refined prosecutorial approach with profound implications for the region.
The guidelines articulate a clear hierarchy of enforcement priorities, with cases involving cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) occupying the top tier. Specifically, DOJ will prioritize investigations involving: (1) criminal operations of cartels or TCOs; (2) money launderers or shell companies used to launder cartel resources; or (3) state employees or foreign officials who have received bribes from cartels or TCOs.
This strategic realignment isn’t occurring in a vacuum. The simultaneous designation of Mexican cartels as terrorist organizations and the renewed FCPA focus creates a force multiplier effect—suddenly, corrupt payments that might have previously been viewed solely through an anti-bribery lens may now implicate material support statutes carrying significantly enhanced penalties.
For companies operating in sectors traditionally vulnerable to corruption—particularly oil and gas and financial services—this convergence demands a fundamental reassessment of compliance frameworks and due diligence protocols.
3. Theory Meets Practice: The PEMEX Indictment
The DOJ’s renewed FCPA commitment moved swiftly from policy to practice. In early August 2025, the Southern District of Texas unsealed an indictment charging two Mexican businessmen with orchestrating a bribery scheme to secure contracts with Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and its exploration subsidiary, PEMEX Exploración y Producción.
Defendant Ramón Alexandro Rovirosa Martínez was arrested on August 11, 2025, and has since requested an expedited trial, signaling what promises to be a closely watched prosecution. This case serves as an important proof point: the recalibrated FCPA enforcement guidelines aren’t aspirational—they’re operational.
The PEMEX investigation underscores a broader reality for companies in the energy sector and adjacent industries: historical compliance gaps are not insulated from contemporary enforcement priorities.
4. The FEND Off Fentanyl Act: A New Weapon in Treasury’s Arsenal
June 25, 2025, marked a watershed moment for Mexico’s financial sector when FinCEN issued orders prohibiting certain transmittals of funds involving three Mexico-based financial institutions: CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector Casa de Bolsa. This action represents the first deployment of the FEND Off Fentanyl Act of 2024, which authorizes Treasury to impose sanctions using the same framework established by the USA PATRIOT Act. Originally enacted in 2001 to combat terrorist financing, the PATRIOT Act provides sweeping authority to designate individuals and entities that provide support to terrorist organizations—and to effectively exclude them from the U.S. financial system.
Although FinCEN’s orders have not yet taken full effect due to extensions of the effective dates (now scheduled for October 20, 2025), the consequences for these banks have been devastating. All three institutions were subjected to operational and legal takeovers by Mexico’s CNBV (Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores, the Mexican banking regulator equivalent to the SEC), and by now all of them have been or are in the process of being sold.
The application of these tools to combat fentanyl trafficking, combined with the cartel designations as terrorist organizations, creates a powerful enforcement synergy. Financial institutions that fail to implement robust anti-money laundering controls risk not merely regulatory fines but existential threats to their business operations. These actions are especially severe for financial institutions, as the consequences proved devastating even before any formal proceedings commenced—demonstrating that reputational and operational damage can be catastrophic regardless of ultimate legal outcomes.
5. Beyond Banking: Tourism Sector Sanctions Signal Broader Enforcement Scope
On August 13, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned four Mexican individuals and 13 Mexican companies linked to timeshare fraud allegedly led by the Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG). These individuals and companies are based near Puerto Vallarta, a popular tourist destination. It is worth remembering that CJNG is a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).
The implications of these sanctions are far-reaching. All property and interests in property of the designated or blocked persons that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked. Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or otherwise exempt, OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of blocked persons.
Violations of U.S. sanctions may result in the imposition of civil or criminal penalties on both U.S. and foreign persons, creating significant exposure for companies that inadvertently transact with designated entities.
This expansion reflects a sophisticated understanding of how transnational criminal organizations may integrate illicit proceeds into the legitimate economy. Tourism and hospitality sectors—with their high-volume cash transactions, complex ownership structures, and international clientele—present attractive vehicles for money laundering operations.
For businesses throughout Latin America, the message is clear: no sector is presumptively exempt from scrutiny. Companies must evaluate their exposure not based on industry norms or historical enforcement patterns, but on the actual money laundering and terrorist financing risks present in their specific operational contexts.
Practical Implications and Risk Mitigation
These enforcement trends converge to create a uniquely challenging environment for businesses operating in or with connections to Latin America. Several practical steps can help mitigate exposure:
- Enhanced due diligence on customers, vendors, and business partners should incorporate specific screening for connections to designated organizations and their support networks. Traditional “know your customer” protocols may no longer suffice given the expanded use of FTO designations and OFAC sanctions.
- Compliance program reassessment should occur immediately, with particular attention to whether existing frameworks adequately address the intersection of anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, and counterterrorism financing obligations. The convergence of these enforcement priorities requires integrated compliance approaches rather than siloed programs.
- Transaction monitoring systems must be calibrated to detect patterns consistent with cartel operations, including structuring, shell company usage, and involvement of high-risk individuals or entities. Automated systems should be updated to reflect current OFAC designations and FTO lists.
- Legal counsel engagement should occur early and often—waiting until a subpoena or investigation emerges dramatically limits strategic options and defense preparation opportunities. The Mexican financial institution cases demonstrate that reputational damage can precede formal legal proceedings, making proactive risk assessment critical.
Conclusion
The 2025 enforcement landscape represents a fundamental recalibration in how U.S. authorities approach cross-border white-collar crime, particularly involving Latin America. The convergence of counterterrorism tools, renewed anti-corruption enforcement, and aggressive sanctions deployment creates unprecedented risks for unwary businesses.
Companies that proactively adapt their compliance frameworks, enhance their due diligence processes, and engage experienced counsel to navigate this complex environment will be best positioned not merely to avoid enforcement exposure, but to maintain competitive advantages while competitors stumble.
The regulatory environment will continue evolving, but one constant remains: informed, proactive risk management consistently outperforms reactive crisis response.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Companies facing specific compliance questions or enforcement exposure should consult with qualified legal counsel.
