AML compliance in the age of individual accountability

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 44-47
Author(s):  
Carlton Greene ◽  
Thomas Hanusik ◽  
Cari Stinebower ◽  
Sarah Bartle
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Regulatory Enforcement ◽  
Content Type ◽  
First Occurrence ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Individual Accountability ◽  
Enforcement Activity ◽  
Financial Regulatory ◽  
Civil Penalty

Purpose To analyze FinCEN’s settlement with Thomas Haider and examine regulatory agencies’ emphasis on individual accountability and the implications of this emphasis for anti-money laundering (AML) compliance personnel, and to provide practical guidance for personnel who have involvement with or oversight of corporate AML programs. Design/methodology/approach This article analyzes the Thomas Haider settlement and its importance for individuals involved in AML compliance functions. This analysis includes an examination of several recent corporate and individual enforcement actions to contextualize the Thomas Haider settlement and its usefulness in the prediction of trends in the financial regulatory space. Findings This article concludes that FinCEN’s May 2017 settlement with Thomas Haider, which resolved the first occurrence of FinCEN’s filing suit to enforce a civil penalty against an individual, illustrates the importance of effective AML programs and highlights the potential consequences for individuals who fail to ensure effective programs. The article also makes specific practical suggestions for AML compliance personnel, and finds that such personnel should be particularly conscientious in light of regulatory agencies’ focus on individual accountability in resolving corporate enforcement actions. Originality/value This article contains valuable information about recent regulatory enforcement activity and practical guidance for AML compliance personnel from experienced lawyers with specialties in financial services and white collar regulatory enforcement.

SEC charges “ICO Superstore” as unregistered broker-dealer

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-43
Author(s):  
John J. Sikora Jr. ◽  
Stephen P. Wink ◽  
Douglas K. Yatter ◽  
Naim Culhaci
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Securities Laws ◽  
Enforcement Activity

Purpose To analyze the settled order of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against TokenLot LLC (TokenLot), which was the SEC’s first action charging a seller of digital tokens as an unregistered broker-dealer. Design/methodology/approach Analyzes the SEC’s order within the context of other recent actions by the SEC on cryptocurrencies and digital tokens and discusses future implications of the order in this area. Findings The SEC’s order against TokenLot as an unregistered broker-dealer was a logical next step in its enforcement activity in the cryptocurrency and digital token space.The order demonstrates that the SEC expects firms in the cryptocurrency space to use the well-established constructs of federal securities laws to evaluate their business activities to ensure those activities are legally compliant. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers analyzing recent developments in a nascent area of SEC enforcement.

SEC flexes its muscle on accounting fraud and targets more individuals

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
David Woodcock ◽  
Joan McKown
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Internal Controls ◽  
Accounting Fraud ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
A Priority

Purpose To note the increase in accounting and financial reporting matters at the Securities and Exchange Commission by highlighting a number of recent cases filed by the agency. Design/methodology/approach The SEC recently announced the settlement or filing of a number of significant accounting fraud cases. Coupled with recent statements by the SEC and the Department of Justice, it is clear that accounting fraud is a priority and that individuals are in the cross-hairs. This article discusses a few of the recent cases and the trend toward more financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases. Findings The number of financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases will likely continue to increase. Individuals will be targeted in more of those cases, internal controls will be a focus, whistleblowers will continue to be important in this area, and SOX 304 clawbacks will continue to be a weapon for the SEC. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

ESMA issues Brexit opinions to EU regulators: a warning shot not only to the UK but also to the EU27

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 50-52
Author(s):  
William Yonge ◽  
Simon Currie
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Regulatory Response ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Financial Firms ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
The Eu

Purpose To summarize and analyse four opinions issued in May and July 2017 by the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”) concerning regulatory and supervisory arbitrage risks that arise as a result of increased requests from financial market participants to relocate activities and functions in the EU27 following the UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU, and the expected regulatory response to those risks. Design/methodology/approach Discusses the possible relocation of financial firms, activities and functions following the UK’s decision to withdraw from EU; the resulting cross-sectoral regulatory and supervisory arbitrage risks that ESMA foresees; nine principles that ESMA enumerates to guide its regulatory response to those risks; some common themes that emerge from ESMA’s July Opinions; and the implications for UK firms and trading venues seeking to establish a presence in the EU 27. Findings ESMA foresees regulatory and arbitrage risks in Brexit and a potential “race to the bottom” as certain national regulators jostle for and grab UK market share. Practical implications UK firms and trading venues seeking to establish a presence in the EU27 from which to operate will need to give detailed consideration and focus to the resources and operational substance which will need to be located in the jurisdiction in which that presence is established. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced financial services, securities and fund management lawyers.

A review of the SEC Participating Affiliate No-Action Letters’ relief from Investment Advisers Act of 1940 registration for foreign investment advisers

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy E. Cohen ◽  
David Y. Dickstein ◽  
Christian B. Hennion ◽  
Richard D. Marshall ◽  
Allison C. Yacker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Information Update ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose To explain the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) staff’s (the “Staff”) participating affiliate exemption from investment adviser registration for foreign advisers set forth in a line of Staff no-action letters issued between 1992 and 2005 (the “Participating Affiliate Letters”) and to discuss recent guidance issued by the Staff in an information update published in March 2017 (the “Information Update”) with respect to complying with requirements of the Participating Affiliate Letters. Design/methodology/approach Reviews the development of the Staff’s approach regarding the non-registration of foreign advisers that rely on the Participating Affiliate Letters from prior to the issuance of those letters through the Information Update and sets forth recommendations for registered investment advisers and their participating affiliates. Findings While there are arguments that the Information Update goes beyond restating established standards and does not clearly explain whether submission of all listed documentation is required, the Information Update will likely standardize the information submitted to the SEC. Originality/value Practical guidance for advisers relying on the Participating Affiliate Letters from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

What is new after Liu: unsettled questions surrounding SEC disgorgement

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 127-135
Author(s):  
M. Alexander Koch ◽  
Carmen J. Lawrence ◽  
Aaron Lipson ◽  
Russ Ryan ◽  
Richard H. Walker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Federal District ◽  
District Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Equitable Relief ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To analyze the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Liu v. SEC, where the Court confronted the issue of whether the SEC can obtain disgorgement in federal district court proceedings. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides an overview of the authors’ prior work analyzing courts’ treatment of SEC disgorgement and a summary of the background and opinion in Liu v. SEC. This article then focuses on the practical implications of Liu on SEC disgorgement by considering questions left open by the decision. Findings The Court in Liu held that the SEC is authorized to seek disgorgement as “equitable relief” as long as it “does not exceed a wrongdoer’s net profits and is awarded for victims.” But the Court left many unanswered questions, such as whether disgorged funds must always be returned to investors for disgorgement to be a permissible equitable remedy, whether the SEC can obtain joint-and-several disgorgement liability from unrelated co-defendants, what “legitimate expenses” should be deducted in disgorgement calculations, and to what extent the SEC can seek disgorgement in cases when victims are difficult to identify. Originality/value Original, practical guidance from experienced lawyers in financial services regulatory and enforcement practices, many of whom have previously worked in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

MSRB publishes its first compliance advisory for broker-dealers

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 49-51
Author(s):  
Scott R. Anderson ◽  
Kate S. Poorbaugh
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Effective Compliance ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To summarize the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board’s 2016 Compliance Advisory for brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes several Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) rules that the Compliance Advisory highlights as presenting key compliance risks for brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. Discusses the factors included in the Compliance Advisory that dealers should consider when evaluating compliance procedures and controls. Findings By highlighting some key compliance risks and providing considerations tailored to those risks, the Compliance Advisory can be used as a tool to aid dealers in developing and assessing effective compliance programs. Practical implications Dealers should consider reviewing their firms’ existing compliance policies and procedures in light of the considerations discussed in the Compliance Advisory. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services regulatory lawyers.

Blockchain for business

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohith P. George ◽  
Brad L. Peterson ◽  
Oliver Yaros ◽  
David L. Beam ◽  
Julian M. Dibbell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Use Cases ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
The Right ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To introduce blockchain in simple terms for business lawyers to be able to spot the right issues and ask the right questions. Design/methodology/approach This article provides an overview of blockchain, identifies two example use cases, and highlights some of the most pressing legal issues, including issues to address in on-chain programming, off-chain agreements and other issues when determining whether to implement a blockchain solution. Findings This article concludes that there has been a significant growth in investment and interest in blockchain. Numerous companies across different sectors have developed blockchain proof-of-concepts, with some heading towards production deployments. At this point, commercial blockchain is largely in the pilot or proof-of-concept stage across a wide range of use cases, with payments and supply chain being two of the most promising use cases. This article also identifies possible legal issues associated with blockchain. Practical implications Despite the growing interest in blockchain, it is still a novel topic to many business lawyers. It is very important that lawyers are able to identify the right issues and ask the right questions. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced lawyers in the Technology Transactions and Financial Services Regulatory & Enforcement practices.

SEC charges private fund administrator with gatekeeping failures

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-67
Author(s):  
Keith Miller ◽  
Martin E. Lybecker ◽  
Jesse Kanach ◽  
Mary C. Moynihan ◽  
Hillary B. Levun
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
White Collar ◽  
Financial Service ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
Financial Services Sector ◽  
Enforcement Activity

Purpose To explain a set of recent US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) administrative settlements targeting fund administrators and to alert fund administrators and other financial service providers to their growing “gatekeeper” obligations. Design/methodology/approach This article explores the factual and legal contours of SEC administrative settlements with a fund administrator, as well as related enforcement actions against investment managers, to better understand the affirmative steps the SEC is expecting financial service providers to take to help root out fraud and misappropriation in the financial services sector. Findings The SEC’s administrative settlements with this fund administrator illustrate the SEC’s expanding focus on the “gatekeeper” function and signal the intent of the SEC to impute culpability for wrongdoing to fund administrators and other financial service providers simply for not doing enough to root out fraud and misappropriation in the financial services sector. Originality/value This article contains valuable information about recent SEC enforcement activity and practical guidance from experienced white collar, securities, and investment management lawyers.

CFTC clarifies and expands relief relating to delegation of commodity pool operator responsibilities

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-73
Author(s):  
Cary Meer ◽  
Lawrence B. Patent
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Commodity Futures ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Futures Trading ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Commodity Futures Trading Commission ◽  
Practical Guidance

Purpose – To explain CFTC No-Action Letter 14-126, issued on October 15, 2014 by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, which sets forth a number of conditions with which a commodity pool operator (“CPO”) that delegates its CPO responsibilities (“Delegating CPO”) to a registered CPO (“Designated CPO”) must comply in order to take advantage of no-action relief from the requirement to register as a CPO. Design/methodology/approach – Explains the modified conditions provided by Letter 14-126, including clarification of the permissible activities in which a Delegating CPO seeking to take advantage of registration no-action relief may engage regarding investment management, solicitation, and management of pool property; lists other criteria carried over from Letter 14-69 of May 12, 2014; provides analysis and discusses limitations of the relief provided by the CFTC No-Action letter. Findings – The letter makes more liberal several of the conditions set forth in CFTC Letter 14-69 of May 12, 2014, with which many Delegating CPOs could not comply. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

SEC Muni enforcement chief offers her views on Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation initiative (MCDC)

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-34
Author(s):  
M. Norman Goldberger ◽  
John C. Grugan ◽  
Bradley D. Patterson ◽  
William C. Rhodes ◽  
Tesia N. Stanley
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Public Pensions ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Independent Consultant

Purpose – To explain the current status of the SEC’s year-old Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation (MCDC) initiative, which encourages municipal securities issuers, borrowers, and underwriters to self-report possible securities law violations related to inaccurate representations in offering documents concerning an issuer’s prior continuing disclosure compliance. Design/methodology/approach – Discusses the purpose of the MCDC, recent remarks by the chief of the SEC’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit, the SEC’s first cease-and-desist order, and the independent consultant compliance review required by MCDC settlement terms. Recommends how an MCDC self-reporter should respond to a call from the SEC. Findings – Thus far, the SEC has provided little detail regarding the MCDC enforcement process. Members of the SEC enforcement staff have said that underwriter MCDC cease-and-desist orders will be announced in the “coming months” and that issuers will not be named in these enforcement actions. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document