Comments on: Why did Nafta have no effect on banking?

By: CDNrebel

CDNrebel — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 22:22:52 +0000

Is it me or are Mexico’s two biggest banks foreign owned: Banamex is Citi (American), Santander is Spanish… maybe that’s why they don’t make a footprint in America – they themselves are the footprint from elsewhere.

By: HBC

HBC — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:10:24 +0000

Since NAFTA hasn’t done diddly for individuals and small businesses on either side of the frontier, it’s hard to imagine what significant growth in international transfers might have so arisen. Obviously the banks didn’t exactly lose money on NAFTA which, while probably part of the incentive for major corporations to back it, is about all one is likely to learn from the NAFTA situation at this point.

By: Schooner

Schooner — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:01:56 +0000

Scotiabank owns a fairly large Bank in Mexico but I don’t know if it was bought post NAFTA. Scotia is also all over Latin America.

By: lemarin

lemarin — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:15:48 +0000

Felix, branches of foreign banks do not have the same statute as domestics banks and very few of them made inroads in consumer banking (except for HSBC, mostly in the West).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_ Canada#Regulation

By: IbexSalad

IbexSalad — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:12:31 +0000

You forget BBVA.

By: Lou_W

Lou_W — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:01:16 +0000

I would argue this is more a US/Mexico thing than US/Canada. You mention TD, but remember that Bank of Montreal owns Harris in Chicagoland and RBC bought Centura of North Carolina a few years back and has added other community banks in the SE.