Well, the point I take away from Taibbi is that a big bank like HSBC can do things that are (a) criminal and (b) bad for us (US, developed world economy) and th

Well, the point I take away from Taibbi is that a big bank like HSBC can do things that are (a) criminal and (b) bad for us (US, developed world economy) and they won't be forced to change their ways, even after they are caught, repeatedly. I don't see anything in what you say that disagrees with that. What you say just amounts to "it is their business model." So they have a business model that encourages, or possibly requires, criminal behavior, and this appears to be effectively OK with regulators... Regarding your point about "giving a great deal of independence to country offices." Why do these country offices need to belong to HSBC? Why do people bank with offices of HSBC rather than local banks? I'm fairly sure that these local offices provide essential connections to the larger financial network -- for example to move funds from African countries to the Gulf countries. But regulators do not, for example, require HSBC to divest itself of any of these country offices which abuse their independence -- which seems like a rather mild sanction under the circumstances, and likely to greatly mitigate the issues.