InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
President Trump’s Executive Order Imposes New Sanctions Against North Korea
On September 21, President Trump announced the issuance of new sanctions targeting individuals, companies, and financial institutions that finance or facilitate trade with North Korea, in addition to tightening trade restrictions. The Executive Order approves broad limitations on any foreign financial institution that knowingly conducts “significant” transactions involving North Korea. This includes transactions that “originate from, are destined for, or pass through a foreign bank account that has been determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be owned or controlled by a North Korean person, or to have been used to transfer funds in which any North Korean person has an interest.” These funds “are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.” The restrictions also prohibit dealing with persons involved in North Korea’s “construction, energy, financial services, fishing, information technology, manufacturing, medical, mining, textiles, or transportation industries,” and further authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to restrict U.S.-based correspondent and payable-through accounts.
These sanctions are in addition to those previously passed by President Trump in August. (See previous InfoBytes coverage here.) Separately, as previously covered in InfoBytes, last month the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed sanctions against certain Chinese and Russian entities and individuals, among others, for allegedly aiding North Korea’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction.
In response to President Trump’s latest sanctions, OFAC released updates to its FAQs concerning the additional sanctions. OFAC also issued General License 10 concerning the authorization restrictions to certain vessels and aircraft, and General License 3-A, which addresses permitted “normal service charges.”
China Bans Commercial Trading of Initial Coin Offerings
On September 4, the People’s Bank of China and several Chinese regulators reportedly jointly announced plans to ban the commercial trading of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. This measure, announced in a statement issued by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of the People’s Republic of China, will outlaw all fundraising Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), and declares ICOs and the sale of virtual currency as unauthorized illegal financing behavior, suspected of illegal sale tokens, illegal securities issuance, and illegal fund-raising, including financial fraud, pyramid schemes and other criminal activities. The statement reportedly stresses that virtual currency in China will not be recognized as a legal form of currency and must not be circulated as currency when financing activities. Furthermore, going forward, all cryptocurrency trading platforms are prohibited in China from acting as central counterparties to facilitate the exchange of tokens for virtual currencies. Additionally, one of China’s bitcoin exchanges reportedly published an announcement on its website saying it will close its bitcoin currency trading platform in the country on September 30.
The SEC recently released an investor bulletin about ICO investment risks and offered fraud prevention guidance. (See previous InfoBytes summary here.) ICO sales are often used to raise capital, and the SEC is monitoring companies who use this method for fraudulent purposes.
OFAC Imposes Sanctions on Chinese and Russian Entities and Individuals for Aiding North Korea
On August 22, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced it was imposing sanctions on ten entities and six individuals from China, Russia, Singapore, and Namibia for their roles in supporting North Korea’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, violations of United Nations Security Council Resolutions, and attempted evasion of U.S. sanctions. The sanctions prohibit any U.S. individual from dealing with the designated entities and individuals, and further states that “any property or interests in property of the designated persons in the possession or control of U.S. persons or within the United States must be blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing with them.” OFAC’s notice identified entities and individuals that (i) assisted already-designated persons supporting North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs; (ii) dealt in the North Korean energy trade; (iii) facilitated overseas labor to North Korea; and (iv) enabled sanctioned North Korean entities to access the U.S. and international financial systems. Targets include three Chinese coal companies allegedly responsible for importing nearly half a billion dollars' worth of North Korean coal, as well as three Russians individuals and two Singapore-based companies OFAC claimed were involved in providing oil to North Korea.
Former Guinean Mining Minister Convicted on Bribery and Money Laundering Charges
A former Guinean mining minister was found guilty earlier this week on bribery and money laundering charges following a seven-day jury trial in Manhattan federal court. He was charged with receiving and laundering $8.5 million in bribes allegedly for securing mining rights for two Chinese companies.
The conviction came one day after the former minister took the stand in his own defense and admitted to lying to banks about his status as a government official, as well as failing to report the payments on his IRS tax return.
The conviction also follows other notable enforcement actions involving the mining industry in the Republic of Guinea. Earlier this year, the SEC charged former asset management executives with bribing government officials across Africa to secure mining deals, including in Guinea.
New Survey Reports on Corruption in the Asia Pacific Region
A German nonprofit that tracks global corruption and perceptions of corruption, has published People and Corruption: Asia Pacific – Global Corruption Barometer. In what the organization calls “the most extensive survey of its kind,” the group spent a year and a half interviewing over 21,000 people living in the Asia Pacific region as a litmus test for corruption in the area. The 38-page report found considerable differences in bribery rates between surveyed countries; for example, while Japan weighed in at 0.2%, a staggering 69% of people surveyed in India indicated they had paid a bribe in the past year in exchange for public services. People across the surveyed region agreed that police were the most corrupt part of public services. While Australians expressed the “most positive” outlook on corruption, people in Malaysia and Vietnam felt the least positive overall, and people in China “were most likely to think the level of corruption had increased recently.” The report outlines three key recommendations, encouraging governments to “make good on promises,” “stop[] bribery in public services,” and “encourag[e] more people to report corruption.”
Financial Services Institution Discloses SEC FCPA Investigation into Hiring Practices
On February 24, a major financial services institution disclosed in its 10-K that government and regulatory agencies, including the SEC, are conducting investigations concerning potential violations of the FCPA related to hiring of candidates referred by or related to foreign government officials. The institution stated that it was cooperating with the investigations.
This is not the first FCPA-related investigation of a company’s hiring practices. As previously reported here in November 2016, a global financial company and a Hong Kong subsidiary agreed to pay approximately $264 million to the DOJ, SEC, and the Federal Reserve, ending a nearly three year, multi-agency investigation of the subsidiary’s referral program through which the children of influential Chinese officials were allegedly given prestigious and lucrative jobs as a quid pro quo to retain and obtain business in Asia. Similarly, as reported here, in August 2015, the SEC announced a settlement with a multinational financial services company over allegations that the company violated the FCPA by giving internships to family members of government officials working at a Middle Eastern sovereign wealth fund in hopes of retaining or gaining more business from that fund. The company paid $14.8 million to settle the charges.
Nor are the inquiries confined to financial services companies. For example, the SEC announced in March 2016 that it settled charges with the San Diego-based mobile chip maker. The company agreed to pay a $7.5 million civil penalty to resolve charges that it violated the FCPA by hiring relatives of Chinese government officials and providing things of value to foreign officials and their family members, in an attempt to influence these officials to take actions that would assist the company in obtaining or retaining business in China.
Fired General Counsel Wins $10.9 Million in FCPA Whistleblower-Retaliation Case
On February 6, 2017, a federal jury in San Francisco awarded the former general counsel of a life sciences company $10.9 million in a landmark FCPA whistleblower-retaliation case brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), the Dodd-Frank Act, and California state law. After three hours of deliberation, the jury found that the company’s former general counsel of nearly 25 years, was fired for reporting suspected FCPA violations to the company’s audit committee in February 2013, a protected activity under SOX’s anti-retaliation provisions. Although the former general counsel did not report his concerns to the SEC, the court held in 2015 that internal whistleblowing under SOX was also protected by the Dodd-Frank Act’s anti-retaliation provisions, opening the door to Dodd-Frank’s double back-pay remedy. The company’s last-minute motion to block purported attorney-client privileged information from trial –“virtually all of the evidence and testimony Plaintiff might rely upon to prove his case” – was denied by the court in December 2016.
The jury ultimately awarded the former general counsel $2.96 million in back-pay – to be doubled under Dodd-Frank – plus $5 million in punitive damages. As detailed in a previous FCPA Scorecard post, the company paid $55 million in November 2014 to settle DOJ and SEC allegations that the company violated the FCPA in Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam. The former general counsel’s report to the audit committee had involved separate allegations that the company violated the FCPA in China.
SEC Investigating Multi-level Marketing Corporation for FCPA Violations in China
On January 20, a Los Angeles-based maker of nutritional supplements and weight management products, disclosed in a Form 8-K filing that it is being investigated by the SEC in connection with the company’s activities in China. The company said it is also conducting its own review and “has discussed the SEC’s investigation and the company’s review with the Department of Justice.” It also said it is cooperating with the SEC but “cannot predict the eventual scope, duration, or outcome of the matter at this time.”
The announcement comes months after the company agreed last July to pay $200 million in consumer redress to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that it operated a pyramid scheme and “deceived consumers into believing they could earn substantial money selling diet, nutritional supplement, and personal care products.” The FTC deal also required the company to “fundamentally restructure” its multi-level marketing operations and compensation structure.
American Casino and Resort Company Pays $7 Million Penalty to Resolve Criminal FCPA Charges
On January 17, Nevada-based gaming and resort company agreed to pay the DOJ nearly $7 million to resolve FCPA charges with a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) in connection with payments from 2006 to 2009 totaling almost $6 million to a business consultant to promote its brand in China and Macau. The company admitted that the payments were made “without any discernable legitimate business purpose,” that its executives had knowingly and willfully failed to implement adequate internal accounting controls to ensure that the payments were legitimate, and that it failed to prevent the false recording of those payments in its books and records, continued to make the payments even after warnings from its finance staff and an outside auditor, and terminated the finance department employee who raised those concerns.
The $7 million criminal penalty is a 25-percent discount from the bottom of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range. In announcing the NPA, the DOJ credited the company for its full cooperation in the investigation, including conducting a thorough internal investigation and voluntarily providing evidence and information to the DOJ, and its extensive remedial measures, including expanding its compliance and audit programs and making significant personnel changes. The DOJ found particularly notable that the company no longer employs or is affiliated with any of the individuals implicated in the investigation and hired a new general counsel and new heads of its internal audit and compliance functions.
In an unusual move, the DOJ’s announcement comes several months after the company resolved similar FCPA claims with the SEC in related proceedings last April. There the SEC filed a cease and desist order against the company and the company agreed to pay a civil penalty of approximately $9 million. The SEC alleged that the company violated the FCPA’s internal controls and books and records provisions in connection with more than $62 million in payments to a consultant operating in China and Macau who did not properly document how the money was used. The company had consented to the SEC’s order without admitting or denying the charges. Previous FCPA Scorecard coverage of the company’s SEC settlement can be found here.
UK-based Manufacturer Settles FCPA Charges As Part of $800 Million Global Bribery Investigation Resolution
On January 17, a UK-based manufacturer and distributor for the civil aerospace, defense aerospace, marine, and energy sectors worldwide, agreed to pay nearly $170 million to the DOJ to resolve charges that it conspired to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA around the world. The settlement with the DOJ (via a three-year deferred prosecution agreement (DPA)), was a fraction of the company's $800 million global resolution in connection with bribes paid to government officials in exchange for government contracts in China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Russia, Thailand, Brazil, Kazahkstan, Azerbaijan, Angola, and Iraq.
In addition to settling with the DOJ, the company resolved charges with the UK SFO by entering into a DPA and agreeing to pay a fine of $604,808,392. The company entered into a leniency agreement with the Brazilian Ministério Público Federal (MPF) and agreed to pay a penalty of $25,579,170.
According to the DPA Statement of Facts, the company admitted that between 2000 and 2013, it conspired to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA by paying more than $35 million in bribes to foreign officials in exchange for confidential information and/or government contracts. Many of these contracts benefited RRESI, the company’s indirect U.S. subsidiary. The company made the majority of the bribes by inflating commission payments to third-party intermediaries, who then paid part of the commission as bribes to government officials.
The DOJ lauded the company’s cooperation in its investigation and as a result, the company received a 25 percent reduction from the low end of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range due. However, the DOJ refused to award the company any voluntary disclosure credit. The DOJ has been transparent that it only will award voluntary disclosure credit when the disclosure occurs prior to an imminent threat of disclosure or government investigation. Here, that test was not satisfied because the company did not disclose the conduct until after media reports and the related SFO inquiry began.