This article examines how the legal systems of Ecuador, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, and Brazil address the overlap between administrative sanctions and criminal proceedings in light of the ne bis in idem principle. The analysis is based on a corpus of 30 documents from 2010 to 2025. Using a combination of normative, jurisprudential, and doctrinal analyses, the article identifies evidence of triple identity, "same facts," and the material qualification of administrative sanctions, as well as closing rules. The results reveal a hybrid model: prohibition when there is factual identity and punitive purpose, or when the administrative sanction is materially criminal, and conditional compatibility when coordination avoids duplicity. Taxation and free competition generate the most friction. In Ecuador, tensions arise between indigenous and ordinary justice, as well as between fiscal control and criminal prosecution, requiring criteria for competence and coordination. As a contribution, we propose a decision-making flowchart for legal professionals that standardizes institutional tests and solutions. Likewise, the article suggests effective reforms regarding priority, preclusion, and payment that reduce uncertainty and guarantee coherent, proportionate responses.