Abacus: Small Enough to Jail is a David versus Goliath story with a twist. David is a bank, and Goliath is a NY district attorney office. It is also two movies in one, and both movies are actually solid: a tale about the Sungs, a family that acts as a microcosm for the Chinese American community in NYC’s Chinatown, and a legal drama to determine if a bank is guilty of conspiracy, larceny and fraud. The Sungs own that bank so the film interweaves their personal story with the legal drama.
Abacus: Small Enough to Jail may feel like a preach to the choir documentary because it is so solidly in favor of the Sung family even though the film does provide the DA’s office an opportunity to share their side and features interviews with jurors who were suspicious of the Sung (hint: 53%). The Sungs are likable. I’m from NYC, but never spent a lot of time in Chinatown. I don’t know them, but they remind me of my friends and me. The daughters are all lawyers like their father. I recognize that perfect good girl demeanor, the eagerness and satisfaction of following the rules and the shock that they could be accused of wrong doing because it never occurred to them that breaking the law is an option.
I like this family. I’m first generation American on my mother’s side so in many ways, I relate to them. Their father was an immigrant, recognized that his community was not getting a fair shake from financial institutions that benefitted from their deposits, addressed the problem, did good and was able to move on up, but not to the east side—Greenwich, CT. In Andrew Hacker terms, they had almost graduated to whiteness, but I’m black so unlike them, regardless of where I live or what I’ve earned, as Paul Mooney would say, I know that I don’t have the complexion for the protection. The unspoken shock for the Sungs is that even though they had to overcome prejudice, there is an implicit promise that if you work hard and do the right thing, bad things won’t happen to you, but it is a lie.
While watching Abacus: Small Enough to Jail, I asked myself if I was biased in the family’s favor when I was examining the legal side. So I exclusively rewatched the courtroom segments. The answer is a resounding no. I am a lawyer, but I don’t practice criminal law. I did enjoy working with banks a long time ago, but none of the banks that I worked with were as small as the titular bank, and this particular area of law is not my expertise so my opinion should not carry any special weight even though I know slightly more than the average viewer. If I had to choose just one aspect of the documentary that outraged me, it is the fact that once Abacus Federal Savings Bank proves that they are more successful than most banks because their customers rarely default on their loans, it never occurs to the regulators or other banks to hire them as consultants to teach others how to achieve the same results, but they are still eyed with suspicion because they allegedly don’t document as well as other banks. Um, if perfect documentation does not lead to fewer defaults, then maybe you should change to the Sungs’ standard.
Abacus: Small Enough to Jail shows and alludes to the disparate treatment of the Sungs and their employees in comparison to other people charged with white collar crimes, but does not fully delve into how racist tropes were exploited in their prosecution. When I saw the perp walk, it reminded me of when they trot out human smugglers in a chain gang. Subconsciously or not, they associated Chinese white collar workers with Chinese human traffickers, an image that is popular in the media, and treated them accordingly either to influence the public and/or as an inadvertent revelation of how the officials saw them. Literally no one can give a legitimate explanation as to why this perp walk happened.
Their detractors rely on a general suspicion that could be rooted in two stereotypes: the sneaky, shady foreigner and the flip side of all Asians are smart so they could not possibly be deceived by their employees. Regardless of how many generations have lived in America, Asian Americans are often greeted with the question, “Where are you REALLY from?” I am aware that the Sungs are not Japanese, but WWII illustrates this pernicious belief that Asian Americans are more allied with their family’s country of origin. East Asians in particular have to deal with the misconception that they are mysterious, and their ways are inscrutable, which is how detractors described their banking practices. A conspiracy charge makes sense if you think the Sungs and their employees are geniuses and use mysterious techniques to govern their business practices whereas their lawyer patiently explains that they have the same business practices that every immigrant community uses: a cash based economy and shared family wealth. Seriously I wanted to scream that you don’t have to be an immigrant to understand that people borrow money from their families. How is this unfathomable? I could tell you stories about the cash based economy. Hint: those carousels with credit gift cards are not just used for gifts. By the time you figure out one practice, eight others are occurring under your nose, and it is not an immigrant thing, it is a people avoiding documentation thing.
The most inadvertently revelatory moment was when DA Cyrus Vance stated that he treated Abacus Federal Savings Bank the same way that he would treat any other IMMIGRANT bank; thus admitting that there is disparate enforcement for “immigrant” banks and other banks, i.e. white and/or big. Intentionally or not, he concedes that the Sungs’ suspicions and theories are warranted. I do wish that the filmmaker had asked Vance to define immigrant bank and distinguish immigrant banks from other banks. He is purposely looking for a small bank without the resources to put up a fight. Intentionally or not, by choosing the Sungs, he is not only looking for a scapegoat for the 2008 financial crisis, but using the Sungs as a placeholder for resentment against China’s financing of American debt as exploited by certain segments in the media. If you think that this characterization is overreaching, just Google, “Fox News racist Chinatown” for a segment that aired on October 6, 2016. It is a thing. It was a cynical move that could have worked, but the Sungs had the time, the money and the fortitude.
Abacus: Small Enough to Jail is ultimately about trust. The Sungs trusted the system and their employees too much, but trust also made them believe in their customers and gave them financial success. The DA did not trust the Sungs’ motives for self-reporting, and in turn, lost the trust of an employee, a community and possibly the rest of the public. None of this bodes well for those with a target on their back, truth on their side, but fewer resources. But for the grace of God go I.