Chris Blackhurst is a former editor of The Independent, based in London
June 08, 2022
As a society we worship ‘big’. The bigger the better — whether it’s a company, building, pay packet, yacht or car. You name it, we judge most things by their size and scale.
In business, it’s usually a prerequisite to expand the enterprise. Shareholders normally demand and expect it, they want to see their investments grow, they pressure for even greater returns. There is nothing wrong with this, unless a corporation becomes so big that it is unable to manage itself, and because it is so large and connected, we’re scared to apply the normal brakes and controls, such that potential wrongdoing goes unpunished.
This is what occurred with HSBC. Already an enormous international bank, it took the decision to grow even bigger. At the time it made the move, it had been judged the ‘best-run bank’ in the world. That accolade was not enough, they wanted to be number one, to outstrip the mighty American behemoths, in particular Bank of America and Citi.
The result was catastrophic. While HSBC management was busy making acquisitions and doubling the size of the workforce, in one corner of the world, in Mexico, unscrupulous customers exploited the lack of attention. This is the subject of my book, Too Big to Jail– Inside HSBC, the Mexican drug cartels and the biggest banking scandal of the century.
It details how HSBC facilitated the laundering of billions of dollars, drugs money, by the Sinaloa cartel headed by the notorious El Chapo.
HSBC had bought a relatively small bank in Mexico as part of its overseas growth programme. That bank, Bital, paid lip service to compliance. HSBC managers and compliance officials warned as much. Mexico’s banking supervisors knew the same. The feeling was, however, that under HSBC, the new acquisition would soon be brought to heel. That didn’t occur; instead, Chapo and his criminal associates took full advantage of the services and international network now available to them as part of the wider HSBC ‘family’. Safeguards that should have been applied against money laundering simply weren’t.
The Angel of Independence monument stands next to HSBC's headquarters in Mexico City. Reuters
Law enforcers in Mexico and the US watched in horror as the Sinaloa, the world’s biggest drugs organisation formed an unlikely relationship with what had duly become the world’s biggest bank, a corporation hitherto known for its fiercely disciplinarian approach and traditions. American investigators stepped in and wanted to throw the book at HSBC, bringing criminal prosecutions against the bank and its executives. Then, however, they were made to worry that to do so risked weakening the entire global banking system, so in late 2012, HSBC was hit with a fine and entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement, promising to reform its ways.
The $1.9 billion penalty was a US record, but it amounted to only five weeks’ worth of the bank’s profits. And, same as in 2008, when no senior banker was jailed over the banking crisis, when banks were deemed ‘too big to fail’ and had to be bailed out by governments worldwide, no HSBC banker was charged over what, arguably, was a more clear-cut, egregious episode. As for improving its processes, HSBC was fined £91.3 million ($114.5m) late last year by the UK Financial Conduct Authority for “serious weaknesses” in its money-laundering procedures.
This leaves society with some awkward soul-searching. We now have many corporations, not only banks, that are mightier than countries. They employ legions of lawyers and lobbyists, the best in the business. They run rings around the invariably hard-pressed, cash-strapped public officials. Their reach and connections extend everywhere. Politicians feed upon their power and investment; and do not want to fall foul of them. In a globalised, ferociously competitive marketplace, governments are all too aware these multinationals that supply jobs, cash and expertise can always go elsewhere.
We now have many corporations, not only banks, that are mightier than countries
When he was governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King warned that the support handed out by governments in the 2008 crisis “created possibly the biggest moral hazard in history”. Why would a bank behave well if it knew the risk of failure would be borne by someone else? King left the Bank of England in 2013 and said this at his retirement dinner, some 18 months after HSBC was let off the hook: “Governments, regulators, prosecutors and non-executive directors have all struggled to come to terms with firms that pose a risk to taxpayers, cannot be prosecuted because of their systemic importance, and are difficult to manage because of their size and complexity. It is not in our national interest to have banks that are too big to fail, too big to jail, or simply too big.”
As it happens, HSBC’s largest shareholder, Chinese insurer Ping An, is currently calling for the giant bank — Britain’s biggest — to be broken up. Its reasoning is based on HSBC focusing more on high-growth Asia, especially China, rather than a desire to bring the firm into check.
Analysts and investors in HSBC will assemble next week in Birmingham at a pre-arranged meeting to discuss the bank’s UK retail strategy. Clearly, Ping An’s initiative will be foremost in minds.
It’s a hard one to call as HSBC is perpetually torn between trying to be a global bank headquartered in London and a bank that is faithful, and closer, to its roots in Hong Kong and China. In several respects it makes sense to ditch the boring old UK and European bit and concentrate on China and Asia.
Success, though, is not guaranteed. HSBC shareholders will be mindful of the example of Prudential, which hived off its UK arm, renaming it after its asset-management brand, M&G, in 2019. Prudential, which is centred on Asia and Africa, has so far failed to match expectations — all that has occurred is that its shares have tracked those of the less sexy M&G.
Food for thought for followers of HSBC then. Meanwhile, we should be asking ourselves more profound issues, such as just how big we want our businesses to be, how can we exert meaningful control.
Too Big to Jail– Inside HSBC, the Mexican drug cartels and the biggest banking scandal of the century is published by Macmillan
Timeline
2012-2015
The company offers payments/bribes to win key contracts in the Middle East
May 2017
The UK SFO officially opens investigation into Petrofac’s use of agents, corruption, and potential bribery to secure contracts
September 2021
Petrofac pleads guilty to seven counts of failing to prevent bribery under the UK Bribery Act
October 2021
Court fines Petrofac £77 million for bribery. Former executive receives a two-year suspended sentence
December 2024
Petrofac enters into comprehensive restructuring to strengthen the financial position of the group
May 2025
The High Court of England and Wales approves the company’s restructuring plan
July 2025
The Court of Appeal issues a judgment challenging parts of the restructuring plan
August 2025
Petrofac issues a business update to execute the restructuring and confirms it will appeal the Court of Appeal decision
October 2025
Petrofac loses a major TenneT offshore wind contract worth €13 billion. Holding company files for administration in the UK. Petrofac delisted from the London Stock Exchange
November 2025
180 Petrofac employees laid off in the UAE
The specs
Engine: 2.0-litre 4-cyl turbo
Power: 201hp at 5,200rpm
Torque: 320Nm at 1,750-4,000rpm
Transmission: 6-speed auto
Fuel consumption: 8.7L/100km
Price: Dh133,900
On sale: now
Tree of Hell
Starring: Raed Zeno, Hadi Awada, Dr Mohammad Abdalla
1. Domestic VAT refund amendments: request your refund within five years
If a business does not apply for the refund on time, they lose their credit.
2. E-invoicing in the UAE
Businesses should continue preparing for the implementation of e-invoicing in the UAE, with 2026 a preparation and transition period ahead of phased mandatory adoption.
3. More tax audits
Tax authorities are increasingly using data already available across multiple filings to identify audit risks.
4. More beneficial VAT and excise tax penalty regime
Tax disputes are expected to become more frequent and more structured, with clearer administrative objection and appeal processes. The UAE has adopted a new penalty regime for VAT and excise disputes, which now mirrors the penalty regime for corporate tax.
5. Greater emphasis on statutory audit
There is a greater need for the accuracy of financial statements. The International Financial Reporting Standards standards need to be strictly adhered to and, as a result, the quality of the audits will need to increase.
6. Further transfer pricing enforcement
Transfer pricing enforcement, which refers to the practice of establishing prices for internal transactions between related entities, is expected to broaden in scope. The UAE will shortly open the possibility to negotiate advance pricing agreements, or essentially rulings for transfer pricing purposes.
7. Limited time periods for audits
Recent amendments also introduce a default five-year limitation period for tax audits and assessments, subject to specific statutory exceptions. While the standard audit and assessment period is five years, this may be extended to up to 15 years in cases involving fraud or tax evasion.
8. Pillar 2 implementation
Many multinational groups will begin to feel the practical effect of the Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax (DMTT), the UAE's implementation of the OECD’s global minimum tax under Pillar 2. While the rules apply for financial years starting on or after January 1, 2025, it is 2026 that marks the transition to an operational phase.
9. Reduced compliance obligations for imported goods and services
Businesses that apply the reverse-charge mechanism for VAT purposes in the UAE may benefit from reduced compliance obligations.
10. Substance and CbC reporting focus
Tax authorities are expected to continue strengthening the enforcement of economic substance and Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting frameworks. In the UAE, these regimes are increasingly being used as risk-assessment tools, providing tax authorities with a comprehensive view of multinational groups’ global footprints and enabling them to assess whether profits are aligned with real economic activity.
Contributed by Thomas Vanhee and Hend Rashwan, Aurifer
The Specs
Price, base Dh379,000
Engine 2.9-litre, twin-turbo V6
Gearbox eight-speed automatic
Power 503bhp
Torque 443Nm
On sale now
Wicked: For Good
Director: Jon M Chu
Starring: Ariana Grande, Cynthia Erivo, Jonathan Bailey, Jeff Goldblum, Michelle Yeoh, Ethan Slater
Rating: 4/5
Dubai Bling season three
Cast: Loujain Adada, Zeina Khoury, Farhana Bodi, Ebraheem Al Samadi, Mona Kattan, and couples Safa & Fahad Siddiqui and DJ Bliss & Danya Mohammed
Emirates flies from Dubai to Phnom Penh with a stop in Yangon from Dh3,075, and Etihad flies from Abu Dhabi to Phnom Penh with its partner Bangkok Airlines from Dh2,763. These trips take about nine hours each and both include taxes. From there, a road transfer takes at least four hours; airlines including KC Airlines (www.kcairlines.com) offer quick connecting flights from Phnom Penh to Sihanoukville from about $100 (Dh367) return including taxes. Air Asia, Malindo Air and Malaysian Airlines fly direct from Kuala Lumpur to Sihanoukville from $54 each way. Next year, direct flights are due to launch between Bangkok and Sihanoukville, which will cut the journey time by a third.