USA – FLORIDA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Wifredo A. Ferrer, Barbara A. Martinez, Marcelo J. Ovejero and Oscar Alejandro Quiroz-Chávez, Holland & Knight LLP
Increased US Government Enforcement Targeting Companies Linked to Mexican Cartels Presents New Challenges for White-Collar Lawyers in Florida and Underscores a Need for Increased Compliance Measures Introduction Historically, white-collar crime has been regarded mostly as separate from offences associated with drug cartels, which were typically categorised as organised and violent crimes. However, the US government’s recent designation of major drug cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Desig - nated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) has blurred these dis - tinctions and marks an unexpected paradigm shift in the approach to white-collar enforcement, especially for companies operating in Mexico, where most of these cartels have a strong presence. This develop - ment is formalised by Executive Order 14157 issued by President Donald Trump on 20 January 2025, and reinforced by a Department of Justice Memorandum dated 12 May 2026, titled “Focus, Fairness, and Effi - ciency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime.” Both reflect that pursuing cartels has become a top priority for US authorities, which have significantly increased resources dedicated to investigating and prosecuting these organisations and those who facilitate their ille - gal activities. Importantly, as further discussed below, companies do not have to knowingly facilitate or sup - port cartels to face liability. Florida lawyers have seen more subpoenas, inves - tigations, and other enforcement actions involving companies, particularly financial institutions, associ - ated with Mexican drug cartels. It is not surprising that Florida, a hub for international companies in many industries with strong business ties to Latin America, is one of the first states to witness implementation of the new directive from the US government. For white- collar attorneys this means tackling this work with a different lens. The enforcement emphasis on compa - nies deemed to facilitate drug cartels’ activities, even without direct knowledge, is complex and can have catastrophic implications for businesses. Thus, an approach that encompasses collaborating with cross- border lawyers, understanding traditional white-collar crime and other specialised areas of expertise, such as Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
of 1996 (AEDPA), as well as having a command of the legal and practical challenges international companies are facing to assist with compliance efforts, is critical. For multinational corporations, particularly those operating in regions known to have a cartel presence, these designations create unprecedented compliance challenges. The broad reach of US anti-terrorism laws means that even inadvertent transactions with desig - nated cartels or their associated (“front”) companies may result in direct consequences, as such interac - tions typically carry more severe penalties than most white-collar crimes. This article provides a summary of the legal framework activated by these designations and offers practical guidance for attorneys and companies seeking to navigate this complex new reality. Part I: legal framework OFAC sanctions The most immediate consequence of the new des - ignations is the application of the US sanctions pro - grammes for terrorist organisations administered by OFAC. Cartels designated under Executive Order 14157 become subject to the already existing sanc - tions programmes established by Executive Order 13224, which was originally issued to address the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. The sanctions applicable to designated cartels are blocking sanctions, the most severe type contem - plated under US law. These sanctions categorically prohibit any transaction that involves, directly or indi - rectly, a designated cartel. Additionally, any person or entity possessing assets belonging to cartels must freeze (ie, block) such assets and make them avail - able to OFAC. The regulatory definition of “assets” is remarkably expansive, encompassing all property and interests in property, whether tangible or intangible, present or future. The jurisdictional reach of OFAC sanctions extends broadly across two categories of persons and entities. First, all US persons and entities are directly bound by these prohibitions, regardless of where in the world they conduct their activities. Second, non-US persons and entities become subject to these sanctions when
355 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook