Please read the case below and write some notes and your thoughts on the ethical dilemma presented. Did you agree with the penalty, and why or why not? Has such unethical actions been discouraged in the future, and why or why not? What ethical theory justification would you cite for the reasons for the decision and what ethical theory would you cite for a justification of any change in decision that you would have produced?

6 Safari File Edit View History Bookmarks Window Help 23\" 1 25% I - Mon 10:29 PM Q Q 55 . O I V h ctccs.blackboard.com C B Content Course Hero + Eric Holder: United States Attorney General; publicly defended the decision not to criminally prosecute HSBC Bank USA executives. X HSBC Bank USA Executives: Specifically those responsible for the lax monitoring programs and other negligence that violated the Bank Secrecy Act. HSBC Bank USA Employees: would lose their jobs if HSBC were forced to cease banking operations in the United States. The United States' (and possibly the global) economy: As stated by Attorney General Eric Holder, the national economy will suffer greatly if HSBC's U.S. banking charter is revoked. 8 United States Department of the Treasury: As one of the regulators of HSBC Bank USA's financial affairs the Treasury is tasked with advising the Department of Justice on the economic effects of prosecuting HSBC. Office of the Comptroller: As the regulator of HSBC Bank USA's banking charter, the Comptroller can revoke HSBC Bank USA's banking privileges in the U.S. if its executives are prosecuted and convicted. Instruments Bank Secrecy Act (31 USC $5311): enacted by Congress to require banks and other financial institutions to create and maintain anti-money laundering programs and other practices to prevent terrorist financing and other financial crimes. In addition to internal programs and monitoring, the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) also requires ongoing employee training and due diligence for foreign correspondent accounts. Deferred Prosecution Agreement: To avoid criminal prosecution for violations of the BSA, HSBC executives agreed to pay a $1.92 billion fine and comply with elevated monitoring standards for a probationary period of five years. Events From 2003-2006, HSBC Bank USA was under heavy suspicion by United States regulators and operated under a written agreement to correct the deficiencies of their operational practices. HSBC Bank USA specifically agreed to enhance its anti-money laundering program to achieve adequate compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act. Between 2006 and 2010, HSBC Bank USA violated several components of the BSA: Money laundering risks associated with doing business with certain Mexican customers were ignored, compliance issues at HSBC Mexico were overlooked, and a BSA-adequate anti-money laundering program was not implemented. The Court notes four significant HSBC Bank USA failures: O 20 W6 Safari File Edit View History Bookmarks Window Help '53 1 24%| - Mon10230PM Q 9 EE . O