Mexico's AML Transparency Shift Raises Global Concerns Amid US Crackdown

Mexico’s recent decision to curtail public access to its cross-border anti-money laundering (AML) information marks a pivotal shift in the country’s stance on financial crime compliance and its role within the global enforcement community. For the first time since 2013, the Financial Intelligence Unit (Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera, UIF) has stopped publishing detailed statistics on international information exchanges related to money laundering and terrorist financing—signaling what could be a major transformation in the region’s approach to combating financial crime.

For over a decade, Mexico had distinguished itself as an active participant in global AML efforts, particularly through its transparent reporting practices. Under the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP), the UIF consistently released public data outlining the number and scope of financial intelligence requests it both received and sent. These exchanges, primarily conducted via the Egmont Secure Web, enabled cooperative investigations, asset recovery, and enforcement actions with international partners including the United States, United Kingdom, and various other jurisdictions.

The Egmont Group—a global collective of more than 170 Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs)—provides a confidential and secure forum for the exchange of financial information. It is regarded as a central pillar in the fight against transnational money laundering and terrorist financing. Mexico and the United States have long ranked among the most active users of the Egmont platform, particularly in relation to cases tied to organized crime, drug trafficking, and large-scale illicit fund transfers.

Until 2024, UIF’s activity reports included comprehensive breakdowns of information requests, naming collaborating countries and outlining the nature of the cases involved. These disclosures were not only seen as affirmations of Mexico’s compliance with international standards—such as those outlined by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)—but also as key tools for transparency and accountability.

However, in a marked change, the UIF’s 2025 reports omit any mention of cross-border AML exchanges or the use of the Egmont platform. The number of transmissions is also undisclosed. This is a sharp break from the 216 exchanges recorded in 2024, 276 in 2023, and 198 in 2022, according to previously published UIF documents. No explanation has been offered for the omission, leaving analysts, compliance officers, and foreign agencies questioning the rationale behind the sudden shift.

The timing of this policy change coincides with escalating pressure from the United States, particularly in light of its intensified focus on cracking down on fentanyl-related money laundering. On June 25, 2025, the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) took its first enforcement actions under new anti-fentanyl legislation, identifying three Mexican financial institutions—Intercam, CIBanco, and Vector—as conduits for laundering opioid trafficking proceeds.

This enforcement development follows the US government's controversial move to designate certain Mexican organized crime groups as terrorist organizations, thereby intensifying bilateral AML expectations. This designation expands legal and regulatory obligations for financial institutions on both sides of the border to more aggressively detect, monitor, and disrupt suspicious transactions tied to narcotics trafficking.

Historically, Mexico has ranked as a top destination for US financial intelligence inquiries. Previous UIF data revealed hundreds of requests annually from the United States alone, far surpassing those from other countries. These exchanges have been essential to identifying and tracing illicit assets linked to drug cartels, shell companies, and suspicious cross-border transfers.

Now, with the United States increasing scrutiny of Mexican banks and cross-border operations, some observers speculate that Mexico’s decision to reduce transparency may be an attempt to shield operational details, mitigate reputational risks, or manage the diplomatic ramifications of ongoing high-profile investigations. It’s a notable reversal in a country that has, for years, championed transparency as part of its AML/CFT strategy.

The Egmont Group remains at the core of global financial intelligence sharing. Since its founding in 1995, the group has facilitated secure and confidential exchanges among FIUs globally, in line with FATF Recommendation 29. Mexico’s participation has historically included a wide range of financial intelligence requests, spanning beneficial ownership data, transaction flows, corporate structures, and large-scale financial movements. The majority of Mexico’s requests and responses have involved partners from North America and Europe—regions intricately linked to transnational criminal networks operating across Mexico.

Until recently, public UIF reports listed the United States as the leading counterpart in both inbound and outbound information requests, followed by jurisdictions such as Spain, Andorra, the British Virgin Islands, the UK, Panama, Canada, Switzerland, and Hong Kong. These disclosures offered critical insight into regional and global AML trends and served as valuable tools for risk assessment among financial institutions and enforcement bodies.

The abrupt end to this level of transparency is raising alarms. Without public data, external stakeholders—including foreign FIUs—struggle to assess Mexico’s current level of cooperation, identify emerging financial threats, or measure the effectiveness of intelligence-driven enforcement actions. Although Mexican authorities insist that confidential cooperation through the Egmont platform continues per protocol and legal requirements, the lack of public reporting diverges from norms encouraged by FATF and long-practiced by Mexico itself.

The broader implications could be felt during Mexico’s next FATF mutual evaluation, in which transparency and international cooperation are key criteria. The move may also unsettle global perceptions of Mexico’s AML/CFT credibility.

Mexico’s legal AML/CFT framework remains robust on paper. Grounded in the Federal Law for the Prevention and Identification of Operations with Resources of Illicit Origin (LFPIORPI), as well as oversight by the CNBV and SHCP, the UIF is mandated to collect, analyze, and share financial intelligence with both domestic and international counterparts. Historically, the UIF’s public activity reports served not only as proof of compliance but also as confidence-building tools for foreign governments, regulators, and financial institutions.

While the absence of data does not necessarily imply a drop in actual cooperation, it introduces ambiguity. As enforcement actions intensify, particularly those connected to fentanyl trafficking and US terrorism designations, the opacity may hinder efforts to assess systemic risks, reduce deterrence, and challenge strategic planning across enforcement networks.

For banks and financial entities with cross-border exposure to Mexico, this shift complicates compliance operations. Many rely on public UIF data to calibrate transaction monitoring systems, guide customer due diligence, and benchmark internal reports. Without granular statistics, these institutions may need to rely more heavily on internal intelligence and external risk forecasts rather than real-time national trends.

International bodies including FATF, the Egmont Group, and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision consistently underscore the importance of transparency in the global fight against money laundering. The public reporting of aggregate intelligence sharing data is not merely procedural—it is a tool to deter illicit finance and uphold market integrity. Mexico’s decision to restrict this visibility could prompt increased scrutiny in future peer reviews and trigger calls for clarification from partner jurisdictions.

Mexico’s silence on international AML cooperation represents more than a policy update—it marks a shift in tone, priorities, and perhaps strategic alignment. With US authorities aggressively targeting Mexican financial channels under anti-fentanyl and anti-terror laws, the stakes for transparent, timely cooperation have never been higher. While operational intelligence flows may continue behind the scenes, the decision to suppress public reporting signals a new, more guarded approach to AML collaboration.

In the months ahead, global AML professionals, regulators, and financial institutions will be closely watching how Mexico manages this delicate balance between confidentiality and accountability. The country’s next moves could reshape expectations for transparency and cooperation in the increasingly complex world of financial crime enforcement.

By fLEXI tEAM