Jalisco uses asset forfeiture to fight Puerto Vallarta money laundering by targeting properties linked to cartel funds and pursuing three major court cases.
Jalisco authorities have launched a focused campaign to disrupt money laundering in Puerto Vallarta by seizing real estate tied to criminal networks. Using asset forfeiture as a legal tool, the state seeks to strip organized crime groups of properties they bought with illicit proceeds over recent years in this high-profile tourist hub.
For decades, U.S. officials have flagged Puerto Vallarta as a key enclave for the Jalisco Nueva Generación Cartel and its affiliates, noting the area’s strategic value for drug trafficking, extortion and money laundering. In response, the Jalisco Attorney General’s Office quietly filed three forfeiture suits during former Governor Enrique Alfaro Ramírez’s administration against properties whose values total almost 41 million pesos.
The first suit, lodged on December 8, 2023, targeted a residence valued at 8.68 million pesos. One week later, on December 15, 2023, authorities filed a second claim against a separate property worth 7.25 million pesos. The third action came on March 28, 2024, against a high-end estate appraised at 25 million pesos—alone exceeding the combined value of the earlier two assets.
All three cases cite “operations with illicit proceeds,” the statutory term for money laundering in the Jalisco Penal Code. Under Article 310, anyone who knowingly acquires, manages or conceals assets derived from crime faces five to fifteen years in prison and substantial fines.
Despite the filings, each suit remains “in judicial process,” meaning judges have yet to issue final rulings. That delay underscores how asset forfeiture—while promising on paper—depends on lengthy court battles. Prosecutors will need airtight financial trails tying the properties to cartel leaders or money-handling intermediaries.
U.S. pressure has intensified since February 2022, when the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Puerto Vallarta a cartel base of operations. OFAC named a host of businesses—from real estate firms and shopping centers to a luxury boutique hotel—linked to the Jalisco cartel and its ally, Los Cuinis. Those designations aimed to choke off the groups’ ability to launder drug profits through legitimate fronts.
“The cartel uses Puerto Vallarta as a base to plan criminal activities throughout Mexico,” OFAC stated. Its sanctions targeted individuals and companies identified as key nodes in a money laundering network that invested narcotics revenue into hotels, agricultural ventures and entertainment venues.
Backed by these U.S. measures, Jalisco prosecutors say they now have stronger legal grounds to pursue asset seizures. They hope to send a clear message: investing crime money in luxury real estate won’t insulate cartel bosses from justice.
Still, defense lawyers often contest these cases on technical grounds—challenging the links between specific owners and illicit funds or disputing procedural steps in how evidence was gathered. In some instances, courts have returned properties to their owners when prosecutors failed to meet high evidentiary standards.
Anti-money laundering experts note that a combination of domestic forfeiture and international sanctions can amplify pressure on organized crime, but coordination between Mexican and U.S. authorities is crucial. Sharing financial intelligence and aligning legal strategies could speed up rulings and make it harder for cartels to exploit procedural gaps.
For Puerto Vallarta, a city whose image relies on sun, sand and safety, the outcome carries significant stakes. Successful forfeiture could recover millions in stolen wealth and deter criminal investment in tourism infrastructure. Conversely, stalled lawsuits risk leaving cartel-linked properties untouched—undermining public confidence in efforts to clamp down on organized crime.
As these three lawsuits proceed through Jalisco’s courts, observers will watch closely. If prosecutors win, they may set a powerful precedent for other Mexican states grappling with money laundering. If not, critics will argue that legal reforms are needed to streamline asset forfeiture and close loopholes that allow organized crime to flourish.
