First BanCorp Denies Role as Epstein's "Longest Banking Partner"

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – June 26, 2026 – First BanCorp, the parent company of FirstBank Puerto Rico, has been thrust into the enduring and toxic legacy of Jeffrey Epstein, facing a high-stakes lawsuit that alleges it was the disgraced financier's "longest banking partner." The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claims the bank knowingly provided the financial infrastructure for Epstein's sex-trafficking operation for over two decades.

In a swift and forceful response, the San Juan-based holding company issued a statement categorically denying the allegations. "The Corporation and FirstBank categorically deny the claims alleged in the complaint and intend to vigorously defend against them," the statement read. This sets the stage for a contentious legal battle that places the bank's compliance and governance practices under an intense public and regulatory microscope.

The lawsuit was filed by an anonymous "Jane Doe" on behalf of herself and seeks class-action status for other victims of Epstein's abuse. It paints a damning picture of a financial institution that allegedly turned a blind eye to massive, suspicious transactions long after other major banks had severed their relationships with Epstein.

A Legacy of Complicity Alleged

The complaint details a relationship that it claims spanned from at least 1998 through 2020, positioning FirstBank as a crucial financial lifeline for Epstein after he had become radioactive to other institutions. The lawsuit notes that major players like JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Citi had already cut ties due to mounting compliance and reputational risks associated with Epstein's activities.

According to the plaintiff's filing, FirstBank maintained over 30 accounts for Epstein's various entities. The lawsuit alleges that the bank failed its fundamental duties under the Bank Secrecy Act by ignoring standard anti-money laundering (AML) protocols. Specifically, it claims FirstBank failed to file legally required suspicious activity reports (SARs) until two weeks after Epstein's high-profile arrest in July 2019. Even then, the complaint asserts, the initial report flagged only $1.7 million in questionable transactions from the prior year—a figure the lawsuit dismisses as "a fraction of the suspicious activity."

The filing points to far larger sums, alleging that approximately $1 billion flowed through Epstein's accounts at the bank, including "circular transfers" between his personal accounts and those of his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. These transactions, the lawsuit argues, were clear red flags that should have triggered immediate regulatory alerts. The complaint contends that because of this prolonged and deep banking relationship, FirstBank possessed a "plethora of information" about the sex-trafficking operation and that proper reporting could have led to Epstein's earlier imprisonment. The timing of the bank's eventual, limited disclosure suggests "deliberate" concealment rather than a simple failure of compliance, according to the plaintiff.

The USVI Connection and Corporate Defense

The allegations are inextricably linked to the U.S. Virgin Islands, the nexus of Epstein's criminal empire and a key market for FirstBank. Epstein owned a private island, Little St. James, in the USVI, which was reportedly the center of his trafficking operation. The lawsuit effectively accuses FirstBank of providing the financial plumbing that kept this enterprise running in the territory.

Against these explosive claims, First BanCorp is mounting a defense rooted in its identity as a responsible, regulated financial institution. In its public statement, the corporation emphasized its commitment to "maintaining the highest standards of compliance, governance, and ethical conduct." It highlighted its "comprehensive Bank Secrecy Act and Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) compliance program designed to meet its legal and regulatory obligations."

By referencing its ongoing cooperation with regulators and law enforcement, the bank is signaling that it has always operated as a partner in upholding the integrity of the financial system, not as an enabler of its misuse. The company has stated it is reviewing the complaint and will respond through the courts, declining further comment due to the pending litigation. This defense posture frames the lawsuit not as a revelation of corporate malfeasance, but as an unfounded attack that the bank's robust compliance history will ultimately disprove.

Scrutiny Beyond the Courtroom

Regardless of the eventual legal outcome, the lawsuit has cast what analysts are calling a significant "compliance and reputational overhang" on First BanCorp (NYSE: FBP). The market is now forced to weigh the gravity of the allegations against the bank's underlying financial health. While the company boasts a strong GF Score™ of 80/100, suggesting good long-term potential, and trades at a modest P/E ratio of 11.66x, other indicators raise questions. Recent insider activity shows approximately $200,000 in shares sold over the last three months with no corresponding purchases, a detail some market watchers suggest could imply a lack of confidence in near-term prospects.

This case transcends a single company's legal troubles; it taps into the financial industry's broader post-Epstein reckoning. Institutions are facing unprecedented pressure to demonstrate that their due diligence and AML protocols are not merely performative. The lawsuit against First BanCorp underscores the immense liabilities that can be inherited through acquisitions and the persistent risk associated with high-profile, high-risk clients. For global financial institutions, it serves as another stark warning that the line between facilitating wealth and enabling crime is one that regulators—and now, alleged victims—are determined to enforce, with potentially devastating consequences for any bank found on the wrong side.