Judge Armella questions former Banfield directors in Sur Finanzas money laundering case

The federal court in Lomas de Zamora has moved into a new phase of the Sur Finanzas case, which ties financier Maximiliano Ariel Vallejo to an alleged money laundering network inside Argentine football. For PSPs and acquirers, the key detail is the alleged use of club sponsorships, loans and a reconstruction trust as a funding channel dressed up as ordinary business.

1. Federal judge Luis Armella took testimony from former Club Atlético Banfield president Eduardo Juan Spinosa, his brother Federico José Spinosa, who served as club secretary, and former first vice president Oscar Fabián Tucker. All three submitted written defenses and categorically rejected the accusations in case No. FLP 29.107/2025.
2. Vallejo had testified days earlier and also denied the charges against him, including leading a criminal association, usury and money laundering. The investigation centers on Sur Finanzas Group SA and its relationship with several clubs affiliated with the Asociación del Fútbol Argentino (AFA).
3. According to prosecutor Cecilia Incardona, the financial group linked to the AFA allegedly built a penetration strategy in sport that took advantage of clubs’ financial distress and positioned itself as a source of funds to mix capital of allegedly illicit origin into what appeared to be legitimate financing.
4. The case also included testimony from the people behind Centro de Inversiones Concordia SRL and a second statement from Vallejo as a defendant. In the prosecutors’ version, Banfield became one of the points where the money was integrated through sponsorship contracts and loans with Vallejo-linked companies, with payments routed through the Fideicomiso de Reconstrucción Banfileña, described in the file as a “vehicle of opacity.”
5. Spinosa led Banfield in three periods: 2012-2015, 2015-2018 and 2021 until October 2024, when Matías Mariotto’s list won the election. In his filing, prepared with lawyers Diego María Olmedo and Hernán Guaita, he argued that the accusation does not identify any personal act of deception, concealment or asset diversion by him, and asked for dismissal under the terms of the art.