Money Laundering Schemes against HSBC
Even though the American government has made great steps towards tracking the money laundering schemes of HSBC, there was laxity in bring those responsible to book. The cash penalties that were issued against the company should not have been leveled as an excuse for the prosecution to defer the case. This was against the punitive laws, thereby making it challenging from HSBC to keep off from its behaviors of money laundering. The government oversight was relaxed in following the cash transactions that were made by HSBC both locally and internationally.
The US government focused on screening the local bank transactions made by the organization. This was just a small fraction of the total cash transactions made by the company. As a result of this, the oversight authorities were unable to ensure effective cash tracking. Besides, this was also supported by the idea that most of HSBC’s transactions were made outside the country. The oversight authorities should therefore, have extended their searches to the investments made by the company outside the United States (Windsor, 2013).
The government made a wrong move by signing a five-year agreement with the Justice Department, which authorized HSBC to conduct an evaluation on itself. This was too much freedom that should not have been awarded to the company. The government oversight and law enforcement authorities should have instead, paid a close attention to the progress of HSBC in compliance with its money laundering activities (Windsor, 2013). This can be blamed on the laxity and the lots of trust that the government had on the organization despite the cash scandals that it had been previously caught up in.
Windsor, D. (2013). International Business, Corruption, and Bribery. Advances in Sustainability and Environmental Justice, 11, 65-95.