Money laundering using works of art, archaeological artifacts, and other cultural assets remains a little-known and under-reported practice in Latin America. But a recent report sheds light on how these schemes operate.
Purchasing valuable cultural assets with illicit proceeds offers criminals a way to store their ill-gotten gains and obscure their origins. In recent years, major art collections have been tied to corrupt politicians and members of criminal groups across the region.
As of 2023, Colombia’s government agency tasked with managing assets seized by the state held an inventory of more than 1,000 artworks, including two attributed to 17th-century Flemish master Peter Paul Rubens. In Guatemala, authorities confiscated over 120 artworks in 2021 from Erick Archila, a former energy and mines minister under President Otto Pérez Molina, who faces charges of illicit association and money laundering. In Brazil, authorities seized more than 200 pieces—some by Spanish artists Joan Miró and Salvador Dalí—that were allegedly used to launder funds linked to the Lava Jato corruption scandal, one of the largest in the country’s history.
The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) recently released a report that examines how cultural assets are exploited for money laundering and the main challenges faced by institutions tasked with investigating such crimes.
InSight Crime spoke with Roberto de Michele, who co-authored the report with Mariano Federici, about the dynamics behind these laundering schemes and their implications for Latin America.
InSight Crime (IC): Why are cultural assets attractive to criminal actors for laundering money?
Roberto de Michele (RdM): Cultural and artistic goods have certain features that make them appealing to individuals or organizations involved in illegal activity.
One of them is subjectivity. The value or price of a work of art fluctuates. Some fluctuations are logical and expected—for instance, certain artists or periods may be more in demand at one time and less at another, so the market reacts accordingly.
Then there’s the matter of irreplaceability. If a painting by a certain artist is destroyed, stolen, or trafficked, it’s gone forever. Historical and cultural heritage assets, in particular, hold a significance that extends far beyond material or monetary value—they are deeply tied to sociocultural identity.
SEE ALSO: Criminals Set Their Sights on Peru’s Cultural Legacy
Many of these pieces are also relatively small in size compared to the enormous value they can command. A tiny object can be worth millions of dollars. And if there aren’t adequate controls on movement and trade, these items can easily be concealed.
IC: What are the main money laundering methods used in connection with cultural assets?
RdM: In the study, we identified two key dynamics. On the one hand, there are criminal actors who engage in the acquisition, theft, or looting of heritage assets and build an entire illicit chain around their commercialization. On the other, you have cases where the assets themselves are not inherently illicit—for example, a recognized artist’s work that is legally sold but bought by someone intending to launder money.
In the first scenario, criminals are consciously converting dirty money into potentially clean assets. In the second, the laundering takes place within a transaction chain that may be legal on the surface, but where someone spots the opportunity to convert illicit capital into something of value that can later be sold on the open market.
In elite markets, reputation is everything. But there are also many less-regulated, informal, or private transactions—and even barter exchanges—that are much harder to track.
SEE ALSO: Black Market for Mayan Artifacts Still Thrives in Guatemala
It’s important to understand the risks and how they connect to regional and global trends. We live in a highly interconnected world, and local and international perspectives must go hand in hand.
IC: What are the main risks associated with corruption in these schemes in Latin America?
RdM: Although we don’t yet have a comprehensive risk map for the region, existing studies suggest a strong correlation between these crimes and corruption—specifically bribery.
If someone is smuggling an artifact with the aim of getting it to an auction house in Asia, they’ll likely need to bribe someone along the way—a customs officer, a guard at an archaeological site, or another official.
There’s also a widespread lack of awareness. Many people who come into contact with these artifacts are not trained to identify or evaluate them.
So, the two main risk factors are corruption and, often, ignorance or lack of preparation.
IC: What needs to be done to tackle this issue?
RdM: We need better coordination between agencies tasked with safeguarding cultural heritage and those responsible for tackling money laundering. In my 25 years working in this field, I’ve seen that financial intelligence units and market regulators don’t usually place the art and heritage world high on their radar. But now we have a valuable opportunity to bring those worlds together.
Mariano Federici and I have also emphasized the importance of dialogue with the private sector—those who safeguard, trade, and produce cultural goods. Regulatory and institutional reforms should be built hand in hand with stakeholders who are committed to protecting these markets, not simply imposed from the top down.
Another key area is registries—not just of the artworks themselves, but of the individuals and entities that acquire or transact in them. Thanks to technology, maintaining solid registries is easier than in the past. That said, it remains a challenge, especially with the need for dynamic inventories that account for newly discovered archaeological sites or artworks.
The goal is to build institutional capacity and foster conditions that enable compliance and make it easier to spot those trying to circumvent the rules.
This interview was edited for clarity and flow.