Official site: http://www.hsbc.com/about-hsbc
 See official site: http://www.hsbc.com/about-hsbc
 See: Banks and the New ‘’ed £12.5bn’,g at conferences tation markswe work on the final check we know what to compare it to...Too Big to Jail’ Doctrine
 HSBC has also had dealings with a Saudi bank suspected of financial collaboration with Al Qaida. It is accused by the US justice of having transgressed embargo restrictions. see http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/hsbc-judge-approves-1-9b-drug-money-laundering-accord.html and http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/11/hsbc-bank-us-money-laundering
 Matt Taibbi, ‘Gangster Bankers: Too Big to Jail. How HSBC hooked up with drug traffickers and terrorists. And got away with it,’ 14 February 2013, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214
 Strike Debt, ’United States : The Debt Resisters’ Operations Manual’, 25 March 2014, http://cadtm.org/The-Debt-Resisters-Operations
 The author thanks Daniel Munevar, economist at the CADTM, who produced a very useful and concise preliminary study on the subject and authorised the easy use of his work. I have built on his research. See the original article by Daniel Munevar, « La doctrine «trop grandes pour être condamnées» ou comment les banques sont au-dessus des lois », 20 September 2013, www.cadtm.org/La-doctrine-trop-grandes-pour-etre (in French or Spanish)
 The English-speaking media have been using this phrase for about two years : see for exemple: Abc News, "Once Again, Is JPMorgan Chase Too Big to Jail?", 7 January 2014, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/madoff-ponzi-scheme-prosecutors-find-jpmorgan-chase-big/story?id=21448264 or Forbes, "Why DOJ Deemed Bank Execs Too Big To Jail", 29 July 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/tedkaufman/2013/07/29/why-doj-deemed-bank-execs-too-big-to-jail/
 Another way of saying that no bank has had it’s obligatory licence for banking activities revoked.
 The failure of its “Icesave” subsidiary in the UK and the Netherlands caused a diplomatic crisis between these two coutries and Iceland. This crisis is still ongoing since the two countries are attempting to bring the case before Icelandic courts in spite of the judgement, without possible appeal, by the AELE court that ruled in favour of Iceland in January 2013. See Financial Times, “Iceland premier repels Icesave lawsuit”, 12 February 2014.
 The Financial Times said 13 December 2013, “Iceland, almost uniquely in the western world, has launched criminal cases against the men who used to lead its three main banks that collapsed after the global financial crisis in 2008 after collectively becoming 10 times the size of the island’s economy.” See: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/eab58f7e-6345-11e3-a87d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2thdbsViQ
 This section is largely based on Van de Laar, Aart. 1980. The World Bank and the Poor, Martinus Nijhoff Publishing, Boston/The Hague/London, 1980, p. 56-59 ; Mason Edward S. and Asher, Robert E. 1973. The World Bank since Bretton Woods, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., pp. 380-419 ; Gwin, Catherine. “U.S. relations with the World Bank, 1945-1992”, in Kapur, Devesh, Lewis, John P., Webb, Richard. 1997. The World Bank, Its First Half Century, Volume 2, pp.205-209; Rich, Bruce. 1994. Mortgaging the Earth, Earthscan, London, p.77.