White Collar Defense & Government Investigations

On November 18, 2021, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a Notice “to call attention to an upward trend in environmental crimes and associated illicit financial activity.” This focus on environmental crimes is designed to help address FinCEN’s priorities previously announced on June 30, 2021.

On June 30, 2021, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) issued national priorities for the anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) policy (the “Priorities”).[i]

Today the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“FinCEN”) published in the Federal Register a notice framing and seeking comment on key questions about how it will implement the new law requiring domestic and foreign legal entities to report their beneficial ownership to the U.S. government.

On January 1, 2021, Congress enacted the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (the “NDAA”), after overriding a presidential veto. Within the NDAA is the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (the “AMLA”), which introduces substantial reforms to U.S. anti-money laundering (“AML”) and counter-terrorism financing (“CFT”) laws.

The August 20, 2020 decision in In re: Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Mktg., Sales Practices, and Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 2672 CRB (JSC) by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (“the Opinion”), dismissing a significant portion of the SEC’s federal securities claims against Volkswagen as having been previously released by the DOJ, serves as an important reminder for why such coordination is important and how defendants may take advantage of the failure to coordinate, as did Volkswagen.

On September 1, 2020, the Financial Crimes Network (“FinCEN”) issued a statement regarding various media outlets’ intent to publish Suspicious Activity Reports (“SARs”) and “other sensitive government documents”.

On September 1, 2020, the Massachusetts Securities Division (“MSD”) began enforcing a new state regulation that holds all broker-dealers and their agents to a fiduciary conduct standard requiring them to “make recommendations and provide investment advice without regard to the financial or any other interest of any party other than the customer”.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the North America Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) put together a task force in April 2020 specifically targeted to use “online investigative techniques to identify websites and social media posts that may be offering or promoting fraudulent offerings, investment frauds, or improper unregistered regulated activities” which were related to any aspect of COVID-19.

This article lists five best practices that employers can adopt to improve their compliance efforts and reduce the risk of a substantiated SEC whistleblower complaint.

As we previously discussed, FINRA issued guidance to member firms and their associated persons in April 2020 to remain “vigilant in their surveillance against cyber threats and take steps to reduce the risk of cyber events.”

In what will likely be the first of many, the SEC brought an action against a company for false and misleading press releases related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspection and Examinations (OCIE) issued two risk alerts relating to Regulation Best Interest (Reg. BI).

As financial professionals struggle to adapt during these trying times, securities regulators are also revising their processes and procedures to address the current realities of investor protection in the time of COVID-19 while being fair to the regulated entities.

On March 23, 2020 the SEC issued a statement warning about the risks of insider trading posed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

This alert covers new regulations taking effect on February 13, 2020 that significantly broaden CFIUS’s jurisdiction by granting it significant new review power over foreign investments in US businesses and real estate.

In my post of April 2, Divided Supreme Court Restricts Provider Challenges to State Medicaid Rates, I wrote about the March 31st Supreme Court decision that providers may not sue in federal court over the adequacy of state Medicaid rates (See Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Ctr., Inc. (“Exceptional Child Center”).

A unanimous U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) announced that Ross Stores Inc. (“Ross”), a national discount retailer, agreed to pay a $3.9 million civil penalty to settle allegations that it failed to report its continued sale of banned children’s upper outerwear containing drawstrings.