In this fireside chat, Richard Fogarty, S-RM’s Head of Disputes & Investigations for the Americas, and William Barry, Chair of Miller & Chevalier, discuss the challenges facing clients operating in Latin America. Together, they share insights on the evolving risk landscape in the region, providing examples of compliance and regulatory concerns that have far-reaching consequences beyond its borders. They also examine how the US national security strategy measures are adding more complexity for investors and companies operating in the region.
This article is part for Corporate Investigations in 2026 report which is available to download.
Rich Fogarty: Will, thanks for joining me today. Let’s dive straight in. We’re here to talk about Latin America but let’s start with the US. One could argue that Latin America is playing – not a disproportionate – but a very significant role in the focus of the current administration. There are tariffs and sanctions issues and then FTOs [Foreign Terrorist Organizations] – the designation given by the US to foreign groups engaging in terrorism that threatens national security.
Will Barry: You’re right Rich, I certainly agree around the emphasis looking southward from the United States right now, the administration has a clear view that security doesn’t just mean who is crossing the border physically, it means economically too – is the US being advantaged or is China or another power infiltrating the markets throughout South America? We of course look at Venezuela and the US action to remove Nicolas Maduro in January 2026, that was an extraordinary example of American power. But for me, what’s happening in Mexico right now – whether that’s the FTO issue you mentioned or TCO [Transitional Criminal Organizations] issues or tariff evasion – is huge.
As a result, if you’re going to participate in the US-Mexican marketplace, it’s no longer enough to think about whether you might come across a stereotypical bribe of a government official. There are a much broader set of concerns that go beyond the individual transaction all the way up to the C-suite. For example, with the FTO initiatives, while you may uncover that somebody paid a bribe at customs – and that’s always been a serious issue – you have to look at whether the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal is going to report tomorrow that your company is supporting terrorism.
Rich Fogarty: Exactly. We’re already seeing public examples of companies with concerns around their exposure to FTOs carrying out comprehensive reviews to discover that exposure. And to your point on the broader set of concerns, I feel we’re almost looking at something akin to “strict liability.”. Technically, the threshold is much lower in terms of what material support of a terrorist organisation might look like.
I also want to note here that the US recently stated it was not going to go forward with the USMCA [United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement] review in July unless strong anti-corruption measures were implemented within these agreements, and a warning that there would be investigations and potential indictments of public officials coming down the road. Indeed, shortly after the comments on USMCA, the DOJ [Department of Justice] announced the indictment of Governor Rocha in Mexico. How does this fit into the context of your clients’ concerns? Does it raise connections to the FCPA [Foreign Corrupt Practices Act] or is it still very much focused on state players and politics?
Will Barry: I’d say client concerns are consistent with what is messaged by the US administration. For example, when it announced the pause on the FCPA in February 2025, clients continued to look at FCPA but potentially weren’t going to be as interested in the more de minimis, perhaps technical violations, as opposed to what we historically called ‘grand corruption’. And you can combine that with the way the FCPA has become a component of national security – that is, it is layered into other criminal activity. For example, years ago you would say ‘here is an FCPA case’, but today there’s an FCPA case that’s part of a wire fraud that is part of a money laundering case, or a sanctions or trade fraud issue.
Rich Fogarty: Another country in the news at the moment is of course Brazil and the Banco Master issue. This is a groundbreaking scandal in the country potentially reminiscent of Operation Lava Jato. Banco Master [a mid-sized lender], and its CEO, Daniel Vorcaro, are embroiled in a huge bank fraud that really, we’re in the nascent stages of at the moment. But my sense is that the ripple effects of this scandal will reach far and wide. And there are other issues coming out of Brazil, tied to US pressure again, right?
Will Barry: Yes, this resonates with me. If I take the latter point first, the US administration has made it quite clear that it has a list of countries that are friends and Brazil is not on that list. As a result, there is increased exposure to companies that are operating out of or in Brazil. When we look at the Banco Master case and the allegations being levelled – inflated assets, misleading descriptions of financial products, corruption etc. – you end up with significant issues being raised regarding the banking system itself. And much like Lava Jato, corruption allegations get tied to the political establishment. On top of all that you have the interconnectedness of the global banking system. Suffice to say, it’s a massive development!
Rich Fogarty: When we think about this complexity, the risks that clients face operating in the countries we’ve spoken about here – and in the region more generally – look, there’s opportunity alongside the risk right? But you need the right partners to guide you, whether you are an investor, private equity, hedge fund, family office – really any entity exposed to Latin America operations. Having local knowledge and networks, fluency in the languages etc, enables clients’ teams to interpret nuanced issues and navigate local contexts effectively, which is particularly important in sensitive legal and compliance matters.
Will Barry: Absolutely, and I will say first, the strength of Miller & Chevalier's Latin America facing practices was one of the main drivers for me joining the firm 10 years ago. I've been practicing in and around Latin America for a couple of decades and the fact that I can go into a room in Brazil or in Mexico, in Colombia, in Argentina, and have native or fluent lawyers from Miller & Chevalier in the room with me who have lived in country, who have spent years working there is a massive value add.
And secondly, when it comes to partners, local experience is key: for example if it is evidence collecting in the region then you need to be conscious of the requirements under multiple regulatory regimes, and that the evidence might end up in a courtroom in New York City as opposed to a conference room in Buenos Aires. You need trusted partners such as S-RM that have the combined understanding of the legal underpinnings of the request and the receipt, collection and analysis of the evidence – the whole process – and are linguistically accurate.
Rich Fogarty: Thanks Will, and another example on this theme, if you’re in Mexico with a large customer base you may think you know who the beneficial owners of those clients are – but actually there’s a good chance in certain circumstances that the true owners are not going to appear in the public record and they may be problematic. In that case you need human intelligence on the ground to help.
Will Barry: Exactly! Or we can flip that, conscious of the focus on cartels and FTOs, there are times you do know who the beneficial owner is. You just might not understand the importance of it until it’s too late!
Rich Fogarty: Very true. Thank you Will, I know you and the team at Miller & Chevalier are ready to support companies meeting these challenges, as are S-RM.
William P Barry, Member, Firm Chair
William Barry is the Chair of Miller & Chevalier. He is a trusted advisor to multinational companies, boards of directors, foreign trustees, hedge funds, private equity funds, universities, and senior officers and executives. For 30 years he has solved complex problems involving multi-jurisdictional investigations and litigation, as well as enforcement, compliance, and transactional issues. He helps his clients emerge from crises and resume focus on their business.
Miller & Chevalier
Founded in 1920, Miller & Chevalier is a Washington, DC law firm with a global perspective and leading practices in Tax, International Law, Litigation, ERISA, White Collar Defense and Internal Investigations, Government Contracts, and Government Affairs.
