Parties push to enforce statutory time limits on SEC enforcement actions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-32
Author(s):  
Benjamin Neaderland ◽  
Jared Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – To alert companies and individuals subject to regulation and investigation by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of potential arguments to enforce time limits on enforcement actions that have heretofore commonly been ignored. Design/methodology/approach – Analyzes two cases - one recently decided and one pending - in US Courts of Appeals, explains significance of issues at stake. Findings – The Courts of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit has recently reviewed, and the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit will soon decide whether statutory timing provisions effectively remove SEC power to bring enforcement actions past their deadlines, at least in some circumstances. Practical implications – Depending on the outcomes of the cases, companies and individuals may gain a new procedural defense or two against SEC enforcement actions. They may also expect the SEC to respond by more actively seeking tolling agreements, and/or being more cautious in issuing Wells notices. Originality/value – Guidance based on pending decisions interpreting US securities law, may bring regulatory adjustments to agency practice and procedure.

Heightened supervision of branch offices

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-21
Author(s):  
Daniel A. Nathan ◽  
Lauren Navarro ◽  
Kevin Matta
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Authority ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Financial Industry ◽  
Content Type ◽  
National Examination ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
The Us ◽  
Branch Office ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – To explain expectations of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) as to what constitutes successful branch inspection programs for broker-dealers. Design/methodology/approach – Summarizes FINRA’s rules requiring firms to implement branch inspection programs; examines the SEC’s and FINRA’s joint 2011 National Examination Risk Alert, which expanded upon FINRA’s rules, requiring firms to conduct risk-based analyses on each branch office to determine the appropriate frequency, intensity, and focus of inspections; discusses FINRA’s expectation that firms examine their registered representatives’ financial circumstances to reduce the risk of fraud; explains how FINRA’s Comprehensive Automated Risk Data System may impact branch inspections; and recommends several sources that firms should review when implementing a successful branch inspection program. Findings – Regulators have heightened their expectations as to what constitutes successful branch inspection programs for broker-dealers. Practical implications – To avoid regulatory intervention and discipline, firms should continue to review their policies and procedures to ensure that their programs are sufficiently comprehensive. Originality/value – This article will encourage firms with branch offices to review their branch inspection programs, and assist those firms in implementing sufficiently comprehensive policies and procedures.

Sanofi settles FCPA charges with SEC for $25.2 million

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Jennifer Kennedy Park ◽  
Abena Mainoo
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Internal Controls ◽  
Healthcare Industry ◽  
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
The Us ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To explain a recent enforcement action by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) highlighting risk factors for Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes the basis of the SEC’s enforcement action against Sanofi for violating the FCPA’s books and records and internal controls provisions, reviews the terms of the SEC’s resolution with Sanofi, explains Sanofi’s remedial efforts and cooperation with the SEC’s investigation, and discusses factors contributing to corruption risks in the healthcare industry. Findings The SEC’s enforcement action against Sanofi, and other recent enforcement actions, underscore the importance of comprehensive anti-corruption compliance programs and strong internal controls across large multinationals and their subsidiaries. Practical implications Companies operating in high-risk industries and markets should regularly assess and address corruption risks. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced enforcement lawyers.

SEC touts whistleblower award to a compliance professional – use care in responding to reports of potential violations

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-78
Author(s):  
Mark Srere ◽  
Mary Beth Buchanan ◽  
Elaine Koch ◽  
Jennifer Mammen ◽  
Tyson A. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
The Us ◽  
Compliance Audit ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Credible Information ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – To highlight the first award granted under the US Securities and Exchange Commission Whistleblower Program to a compliance professional. Design/methodology/approach – Explains the first award issued to a compliance professional under the SEC’s Whistleblower program and the rules for issuing such an award. Findings – The SEC has emphasized this award to a compliance professional, noting that individuals performing compliance, audit, and legal functions are on the front lines against fraud and corruption and are often privy to the very kinds of specific, timely, and credible information that can prevent an imminent fraud or stop an ongoing fraud. The SEC’s specific courting of compliance and audit personnel makes it even more important for companies to pay particular attention to complaints raised by those individuals. Practical implications – Companies should continue to take steps to ensure that they have vigorous compliance programs in place to detect potential issues and to respond immediately and effectively to internally reported information. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced regulatory and employment lawyers.

Cybersecurity enforcement actions: is the SEC bringing strict liability cases?

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
Brian Rubin ◽  
Amy Xu
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Cyber Attack ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To analyze how the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sanctioned broker-dealers (BDs) and registered investment advisers (RIAs) when cybersecurity breaches have occurred and to discuss whether the SEC is imposing a strict liability approach. Design/methodology/approach Describes the cyber-attack of a small RIA, the remedial steps the RIA took after the attack, the SEC’s enforcement action, why this particular case is noteworthy, and the case’s implications for RIAs and BDs. Findings RIAs and perhaps BDs may face strict liability from the SEC if they are victims of cybersecurity attacks. Practical implications Firms may want to address the likelihood of an SEC enforcement action if a breach occurs by reviewing recent enforcement actions, SEC reports and statements, and FINRA reports and statements. Originality/value Discusses the possible future of SEC enforcement actions regarding cybersecurity breaches.

SEC adopts rules to modernize and simplify disclosure

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Laura D. Richman ◽  
David S. Bakst ◽  
Robert F. Gray ◽  
Michael L. Hermsen ◽  
Anna T. Pinedo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Confidential Information ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Disclosure Requirements ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rule Changes ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Material Information ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To describe the modernization and simplification amendments of certain disclosure requirements of Regulation S-K and related rules and forms recently adopted by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Design/methodology/approach This article provides an overview of the amendments, their effective dates and related practical considerations for companies. Findings The amendments cover many provisions within Regulation S-K and affect various forms that rely on the integrated disclosure requirements of Regulation S-K. The amendments are designed to enhance the readability and navigability of SEC filings, to discourage repetition and disclosure of immaterial information and to reduce the burdens on registrants, all while still providing material information to investors. The amendments contain several changes relating to confidential information contained in exhibits. For consistency, parallel amendments have been adopted to rules other than Regulation S-K, as well as to forms for registration statements and reports. Practical implications Most of the amendments are effective May 2, 2019. The amendments relating to the redaction of confidential information in certain exhibits became effective April 2, 2019. Given these dates, companies should review the rule changes implemented by the amendment now and consider how they will impact their disclosure in upcoming SEC filings. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced lawyers in the Corporate & Securities practice.

OCIE issues risk alert on the most frequently identified advisory fee and expense compliance issues

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert Van Grover
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To summarize and interpret a Risk Alert issued on April 12, 2018 by the US SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) on the most frequent advisory fee and expense compliance issues identified in recent examinations of investment advisers. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes deficiencies identified by the OCIE staff pertaining to advisory fees and expenses in the following categories: fee billing based on incorrect account valuations, billing fees in advance or with improper frequency, applying incorrect fee rates, omitting rebates and applying discounts incorrectly, disclosure issues involving advisory fees, and adviser expense misallocations. Findings In the Risk Alert, OCIE staff emphasized the importance of disclosures regarding advisory fees and expenses to the ability of clients to make informed decisions, including whether or not to engage or retain an adviser. Practical implications In light of the issues identified in the Risk Alert, advisers should assess the accuracy of disclosures and adequacy of policies and procedures regarding advisory fee billing and expenses. As a matter of best practice, advisers should implement periodic forensic reviews of billing practices to identify and correct issues relating to fee billing and expenses. Originality/value Expert guidance from experienced investment management lawyer.

Virtual currency in sanctioned jurisdictions: stepping outside of SWIFT

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Kirkpatrick ◽  
Christine Savage ◽  
Russell Johnston ◽  
Matthew Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Virtual Currency ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Expert Analysis ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Foreign Assets

Purpose To understand and analyze sanctions evasion and enforcement via virtual currencies. Design/methodology/approach Discusses various jurisdictions’ attempts to further the use of virtual currency to facilitate and maximize access to international funds; analyzes the aspects that make virtual currency uniquely suited to evade sanctions; suggests best practices for industry participants to be sure to account for the differences in crypto asset structure and related risks. Findings The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has explicitly stated that despite virtual currency’s anonymity, industry participants are still responsible for policing and enforcing client compliance. Although sanctioned jurisdictions are thinking creatively about ways around SWIFT, the use of virtual currency to skirt sanctions presents certain challenges. Practical implications Virtual currency industry participants should understand OFAC’s specific guidance regarding compliance obligations in the cryptocurrency space, and should implement best practices and conservative measures to avoid unknowingly running afoul of sanctions laws. Originality/value Expert analysis and guidance from experienced investigations and sanctions lawyers.

Bringing order to non-GAAP financial measures: SEC sues to enforce “equal-or-greater-prominence” requirement

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 51-57
Author(s):  
Richard J. Parrino
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Financial Measures ◽  
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Accounting Principles ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
The Us ◽  
Earnings Releases

Purpose This article examines the first action by the US Securities and Exchange Commission to enforce the “equal-or-greater-prominence” requirement of its rules governing the presentation by SEC-reporting companies, in their SEC filings and earnings releases, of financial measures not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Design/methodology/approach This article provides an in-depth analysis of the equal-or-greater-prominence rule and the SEC’s enforcement posture in the context of the SEC’s concern that some companies present non-GAAP financial measures in a manner that inappropriately gives the non-GAAP measures greater authority than the comparable GAAP financial measures. Findings Although the appropriate use of non-GAAP financial measures can enhance investor understanding of a company’s business and operating results, investors could be misled about the company’s GAAP results by disclosures that unduly highlight non-GAAP measures. The SEC’s enforcement action signals a focus on the manner in which companies present non-GAAP financial measures as well as on how they calculate the measures. Originality/value This article provides expert guidance on a major SEC disclosure requirement from an experienced securities lawyer.

David’s view of Goliath in open innovation

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Keyword(s):  
Open Innovation ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Open Spaces ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Start Up ◽  
The Us ◽  
Pertinent Information ◽  
Stereotypical Image ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Super Cool

Purpose This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies. Design/methodology/approach This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context. Findings The stereotypical image of a new start-up has probably been driven either by pictures in Wired magazine – where they are super-cool, achingly on-trend lofts with huge open spaces and juicing machines – or by the US sitcom Silicon Valley where young men are sat in some guy’s kitchen fighting over the least rancid mug for a cup of instant coffee. There is a happy medium, and it is a very large place as almost no start-up is like this, and they are like almost everything else. They are probably like the very office you work in every single day. Practical implications The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world’s leading organizations. Originality/value The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

Cryptocurrency regulations will become more variable

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Futures Trading ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Commodity Futures Trading Commission ◽  
Regulatory Scrutiny ◽  
Market Capitalisation ◽  
And Control

Subject Cryptocurrency classification. Significance The classification of crypto assets under US securities law is less clear than in Japan, China and South Korea, but a working group comprising senior officials of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is discussing it. The unclear status of Ethereum’s ether and Ripple’s XRP, the second- and third-largest crypto assets by market capitalisation, is the centre of attention. Impacts Mined crypto assets including bitcoin and litecoin are likely to remain classed as commodities. Ether and XRP are unlikely to be designated as commodities as they were initial coin offerings (ICOs) but also not as standard securities. As ICOs come under increasing regulatory scrutiny and control, more will fail, but a few may achieve notable success.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document