InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
DFPI, Fed issue cease and desist to oversee bank voluntary liquidation
On June 1, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) announced that it issued a joint cease-and-desist order with the Federal Reserve Board to fulfill the voluntary liquidation of a crypto-friendly bank. Focusing on providing financial services in the crypto-asset industry, the bank began operating in 2013. In 2023, however, the bank announced its voluntary liquidation, following a mass exodus of high-profile clients. In the fourth quarter of 2022, the bank experienced a sudden drop in deposits, triggered by the collapse of a crypto-exchange company in the previous quarter. DFPI noted that in its most recent examinations of the bank, the bank showed deficits in security and compliance with regulations. Within 10 days of the order, the bank must submit a voluntary self-liquidation plan acceptable to DFPI and upon approval, must implement that plan to wind down its operations “in a safe and sound manner and in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, rules, and regulations.” The bank has advised that the liquidation will include full repayment of all of its deposits.
OFAC sanctions China and Mexico based enablers tied to illicit drugs
On May 30, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions, pursuant to Executive Order 14059, against 17 individuals and entities for their involvement in the rapid increase of equipment used to make illicit drugs. OFAC detailed the impact of the drugs the equipment produces and explained that the counterfeit pills are often laced with fentanyl and ultimately end up in U.S. markets. Targeting every stage of the pill production process, OFAC designated seven entities and six individuals based in China and three individuals based in Mexico for perpetuating the trafficking of illicit drugs through the sale, manufacturing, and/or shipment of pill press equipment.
As a result of these sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.” U.S. persons are also generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons unless authorized by a general or specific license or exempt. Further, financial institutions and persons that engage in certain transactions with the designated persons may themselves be exposed to sanctions or subject to enforcement.
Florida tightens restrictions on phone and text solicitations
On May 25, the Florida governor signed HB 761 (the “Act”) to clarify notice requirements relating to telephone and text message solicitations and to outline conditions under which certain civil actions may be brought. Specifically, the amendments provide that “unsolicited” telephone sales calls involving an automated system used to select and dial numbers or one that plays a recorded message cannot be made without the prior express written consent of the called party. Consent may now be obtained by a consumer “checking a box indicating consent or responding affirmatively to receiving text messages, to an advertising campaign, or to an e-mail solicitation.”
The Act also clarifies that before the commencement of a civil action for damages for text message solicitations, the called party must reply “STOP” to the number that sent the message. The called party may bring an action only if consent is not given and the telephone solicitor continues to send text messages 15 days after being told to cease. The new requirements apply to any suit filed on or after the Act’s immediate effective date, as well as to any putative class action not certified on or before the effective date of the Act. The Act became effective immediately.
District Court preliminarily approves $2.7 million FCRA settlement
On June 1, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California preliminarily approved a class action settlement, which would require a corporate defendant to pay $2.7 million to resolve allegations that it provided false information on credit reports to auto dealers. The defendant sells credit reports to auto dealers to help dealers manage their regulatory compliance obligations, the order explained, noting that one of these obligations prohibits dealers from engaging in business with anyone designated on the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control’s (OFAC) Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list. The SDN list is comprised of persons and entities owned or controlled by (or acting for or on behalf of) a targeted company, or non-country specific persons, who are prohibited from conducting business in the U.S. The defendant would flag a consumer as an “OFAC Hit” if it matched a name on the SDN list.
The order explained that when using a “similar name” algorithm script to run the consumer’s name against the SDN list to check for a match, the defendant only ran first and last names and did not input other available information such as birth dates and addresses. The lead plaintiff filed a putative class action pleading claims under the FCRA and California’s Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act, alleging his name inaccurately came up as an OFAC hit on a credit report sold to an auto dealer. In turn, the plaintiff was denied credit and suffered emotionally, later learning that the defendant incorrectly matched him with an SDN. According to class members, the defendant failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy when matching consumer information and failed to provide, upon request, all information listed in a consumer’s file. Moreover, the lead plaintiff claimed the defendant failed to investigate the disputed OFAC-related information sold to the dealer. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the premise that it was not acting as a consumer reporting agency and that OFAC check documents were not consumer reports, but the court denied the motion and later certified the class. If finalized, the settlement would provide $1,000 to each of the class members, attorneys fees and costs, and a service award to the lead plaintiff.
FDIC announces Guam disaster relief
On June 2, the FDIC issued FIL-27-2023 to provide regulatory relief to financial institutions and facilitate recovery in areas of Guam affected by Typhoon Mawar. The FDIC acknowledged the unusual circumstances faced by affected financial institutions and encouraged those institutions to work with impacted borrowers to, among other things: (i) extend repayment terms; (ii) restructure existing loans; or (iii) ease terms for new loans, provided the measures are done “in a manner consistent with sound banking practices.” Additionally, the FDIC noted that financial institutions “may receive favorable Community Reinvestment Act consideration for community development loans, investments, and services in support of disaster recovery.” The FDIC will also consider regulatory relief from certain filing and publishing requirements and instructed financial institutions to contact their regional community affairs officer.
SEC fines tech company $2.5 million to settle FCPA charges
On May 26, the SEC announced that a Connecticut-headquartered tech research and consulting company (the “settling company”) agreed to pay nearly $2.5 million to settle claims that it violated the anti-bribery, books and records, and internal accounting controls provisions of the FCPA. According to the SEC’s order, from roughly December 2014 through August 2015 the settling company allegedly entered into a scheme with several private South African companies through which a South African IT consulting company was paid substantial amounts of money even though the settling company “knew or consciously disregarded the possibility” that all or part of this money would go to South African government officials to influence the award of multi-million-dollar contracts to the settling company. During this time, the SEC found that the settling company’s policy regarding third-party consultants failed to adequately address anti-corruption risks, and the settling company lacked sufficient internal accounting controls to document payments made to third parties. The settling company also failed to implement anti-corruption vendor onboarding procedures and lacked adequate monitoring procedures, the SEC said.
The settling company consented to the SEC’s order without admitting or denying the allegations and agreed to pay a $1.6 million civil money penalty and $856,764 in disgorgement and prejudgment interest. The SEC recognized the company’s cooperation and remedial efforts.
OFAC sanctions the leader of Russian private military group in Mali
Recently, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions, pursuant to Executive Order 14024, against a Mali-based principal administrator and head of a Russian private military company’s paramilitary units. Aside from acting as a key player in Russia’s war against Ukraine, the private military company “has meddled in and destabilized countries in Africa, committing widespread human rights abuses and appropriating natural resources,” OFAC said, noting that the sanctioned individual worked with the Malian government to support incoming paramilitary forces to Mali, including preparing living quarters and arranging meetings with officials from several African nations. The action follows previous sanctions issued against those working with or supporting the private military company’s destabilizing activities, involving human rights abuses, and appropriating natural resources.
As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned persons that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.” U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons, unless authorized by a general or specific OFAC license, or otherwise exempt.
OFAC sanctions cut cashflow supporting violence in Sudan
On June 1, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions, pursuant to Executive Order 14098, against four companies for generating revenue from, and contributing to, the conflict in Sudan. Two of the companies are affiliated with the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces and two companies are affiliated with the Sudanese Armed Forces. OFAC stated that sanctions against those who have “directly or indirectly engaged or attempted to engage in actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, or stability of Sudan” will hinder the financial support for the entities waging war in Sudan.
As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned persons that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.” U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons, unless authorized by a general or specific OFAC license, or otherwise exempt.
In conjunction with the sanctions, OFAC issued several Sudan-related general licenses (see General Licenses 1, 2, 3 and 4).
OFAC sanctions target IRGC members and affiliates
On June 1, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated members and affiliates of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its external operations arm, the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF), pursuant to Executive Order 13224, for participating in a series of plots against former U.S. officials, dual U.S. and Iranian nationals, and Iranian dissidents.
The following were specifically designated: (i) two operatives designated “for having acted for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF”; (ii) an IRGC-QF official designated “for acting or on behalf of the IRGC-QF”; and (iii) a dual Iranian and Turkish national designated “for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF” by using his Turkey-based airline to support the IRGC-QF covert operations. (The airline is separately designated.)
As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property of the individuals and entities named above, and of any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by them, individually, or with other blocked persons, that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, must be blocked and reported to OFAC. OFAC’s announcement further noted that its regulations “generally prohibit” U.S. persons from participating in transactions with designated persons unless exempt or otherwise authorized by a general or specific license. The prohibitions include the making or receiving of any contribution of funds, goods, or services to or for the benefit of those persons.
OFAC issues new general licenses related to Russia and Venezuela sanctions
The U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) recently released two general licenses relating to Russia and Venezuela. Newly issued Russia-related General License (GL) 69 authorizes certain debt securities servicing transactions issued by an identified bank that would otherwise be prohibited by Executive Order (E.O.) 14024. Interest or principal payments on the authorized transactions cannot be made to persons located in the Russian Federation, and any payments made to a blocked person must be done in accordance with the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations regardless of where the person is located.
Additionally, OFAC also issued GL 8L, which authorizes transactions involving Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PdVSA) that are deemed necessary for the wind down of operations in Venezuela for certain entities. While authorizing some transactions, GL 8L also includes a comprehensive list of transactions that are not authorized, including “[a]ny loans to, accrual of additional debt by, or subsidization of PdVSA, or any entity in which PdVSA owns, directly or indirectly, a 50 percent or greater interest, including in kind, prohibited by E.O. 13808 of August 24, 2017, as amended by E.O. 13857, and incorporated into the [Venezuela Sanctions Regulations].”