Search results
1 – 2 of 2Alice S. Fisher, Douglas K. Yatter, Douglas N. Greenburg, William R. Baker III, Benjamin A. Dozier and Robyn J. Greenberg
This paper aims to analyze the March 6, 2019 enforcement advisory in which the Division of Enforcement (Division) of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to analyze the March 6, 2019 enforcement advisory in which the Division of Enforcement (Division) of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) announced that it will work alongside the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and other agencies to investigate foreign bribery and corruption relating to commodities markets.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper explains the enforcement advisory and outlines key considerations for industry participants and their compliance teams, including the CFTC’s plan to investigate in parallel with other enforcement authorities, an expansion of the CFTC’s existing self-reporting, cooperation and remediation policy to address foreign corruption and the CFTC’s focus on market and economic integrity, and provides guidelines for commodities companies concerning anti-corruption compliance and training programs, investigating potential incidents of bribery and corruption, reporting obligations under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC regulations, voluntary reporting of incidents of foreign corruption and whistleblowing.
Findings
The CFTC announcement adds a new dimension to an already crowded and complex landscape for anti-corruption enforcement. A range of industries, including energy, agriculture, metals, financial services, cryptocurrencies and beyond, must now consider the CFTC and the CEA when assessing global compliance and enforcement risks relating to bribery and corruption.
Originality/value
Expert guidance from lawyers with broad experience in white collar defense, investigations, financial services, securities, commodities, energy and derivatives.
Details
Keywords
John J. Sikora Jr., Stephen P. Wink, Douglas K. Yatter and Naim Culhaci
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…
Abstract
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.
Details