InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
How to Handle a Government Investigation: 13 Things You Should You Do Immediately If the Government Comes Knocking
Actions you take, or don’t take, in the early hours of a government investigation can have costly and far-reaching consequences for a company. At the root of this is the importance of having a plan in place should your company come under investigation, as the last thing you want to be is caught flat-footed. Do your key employees and legal department staff know what to do immediately if the government initiates an investigation?
Below, BuckleySandler’s Government Enforcement and White Collar attorneys identify 13 steps a company and its employees should take immediately when it becomes aware of a government investigation.
- Inform your in-house counsel. Establish a protocol to ensure that counsel is contacted immediately.
- Preserve documents. Inform all necessary employees of the need to retain documents, including electronic documents, with a document hold memo that replaces standard document retention policies for potentially responsive materials.
- Establish early dialogue with the investigating agency. Communication is critical to understanding the scope of the investigation and to establishing a working relationship with the government.
- Assume a parallel investigation will be initiated. Questions about self-reporting, production, and other strategic decisions should be made under the assumption that a parallel criminal or civil suit will follow.
- Alert the Board of Directors and/or Audit Committee. Schedule a meeting with key executives to carefully review the situation and discuss possible remedies and corrective actions. Be mindful that meeting minutes, notes, or emails may be discoverable.
- Consider implementing internal restrictions on the trading of company stock. Be sure all rules regarding insider trading are upheld.
- Evaluate disclosure issues and formulate a plan to address. With the commencement of a government investigation, a number of governance issues will arise. Carefully consider any and all disclosures that may be necessary and take appropriate action.
- Put your insurance carrier on notice. Put your insurer on notice early to increase your chances of having insurance pay for some or all of the investigation and/or litigation costs.
- Determine if actions are needed with respect to employees who are possible wrongdoers. This may involve implementing restrictions or additional oversight of their activities or even dismissal. All issues involving employees need to be carefully considered from a variety of angles, including employment laws, anti-retaliation provisions, and possible future civil litigation.
- Identify remedial measures if needed. It may be necessary to conduct a gap analysis of existing compliance programs and make changes to avoid a future recurrence.
- Prepare for any anticipated media coverage. Any and all public statements will be carefully scrutinized by the media, the public-at-large, and the investigating agency. Therefore, it is critical that sufficient care and attention is given to any public comments by the company or its spokespeople.
- Notify employees of possible contact by the investigating agency and advise them of their rights and obligations. It is important to remind employees of their responsibility to be truthful when speaking with agents of the government, but that they may choose to have an attorney present if they do decide to be interviewed. You should also reiterate your company’s policy on cooperating with investigations and request that employees inform the legal department of any discussions or contacts with the government.
- Commence an internal investigation if necessary. An internal investigation can help your company determine whether the allegations have merit or not, and if they do, the cause and extent and possible corrective actions.
You may also be interested in reading our related blog post on How to Respond to a Subpoena: 10 Things You Should Do Immediately.
European Bank Resolution Proposal Released
On June 6, the European Commission released a proposal to establish common rules for EU member country banking regulators to follow when faced with failing banks. The rules are meant to provide a more standard regulatory structure and approach to help reduce the impact of bank failures, improve market stability, and limit taxpayer risk. To achieve these goals, the Commissions proposal would allow banks that do not pose a systemic risk to fail. Further, the proposal would shift the burden of restructuring costs for a systemically important troubled bank to its shareholders, creditors, and any employees responsible for mismanagement. Public authorities would be given new powers to (i) intervene earlier, (ii) establish in advance bank resolution plans, (iii) assume control of a failing bank if early intervention fails, and (iv) better coordinate cross-border issues raised by a failing bank. Banks, for their part, would be required to put in to place recovery plans and take certain actions if capital reserves fall below a set level, among other things. The proposals must first be considered and approved by the European Parliament and Council, and would take effect in 2018.
European Commission Proposes Electronic Identification Regulation
On June 4, the European Commission adopted a proposed regulation that would create a framework for secure cross-border electronic transactions in Europe. The regulation seeks to facilitate European electronic commerce by requiring mutual recognition of national electronic identification systems, which would allow individuals and businesses to use their national electronic identification schemes to access public services in other EU countries. For example, the regulation would remove technical and legal barriers in order to make it easier for a company in one country to bid on public sector contracts elsewhere within the EU. The regulation does not require action by member states to develop electronic identity cards and will not require an EU-wide electronic identification or database. Under the European Unions ordinary legislative procedure, the regulation now must be adopted by the European Parliament and Council.
UK Upper Tribunal Finds Bank Executive's Compliance Actions Reasonable, Overturns FSA Decision
Recently, the United Kingdoms Upper Tribunal overturned a decision of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) that held a top bank executive liable for failure to take reasonable steps to adequately address certain regulatory compliance problems. Specifically, the FSA charged that the executive failed to take reasonable steps to identify and remediate serious flaws in the design and operational effectiveness of the firms governance and risk management frameworks and was too slow to initiate a comprehensive review of systems and controls across the business, which should have been conducted when he was appointed to lead the firm. The executive challenged the FSA penalty, arguing that his actions to investigate every specific compliance issue that arose and remedy problems in accordance with a defined plan were sufficient and reasonable and that he had undertaken efforts to strengthen his companys compliance monitoring team. The Upper Tribunal agreed, holding that the FSAs expectation that the executive institute a broad overhaul at an earlier date was beyond the bounds of reasonableness. The Upper Tribunal also noted that the majority of the compliance failures originated in one division, that the firm was addressing those issues, and that no one within that or other departments of the firm, nor anyone from the FSA, had ever suggested to the executive a need for a more comprehensive review. The Upper Tribunal directed the FSA to take no action against the executive.
Financial Stability Board Enhances Compensation Practices Monitoring
On April 30, the Financial Stability Board established a new group of national experts from member jurisdictions to monitor and report to the FSB on implementation of the Principles and Standards on Sound Compensation Practices adopted by the FSB in 2009. The FSB also announced a new mechanism for member jurisdictions to bilaterally report, verify, and address specific compensation-related complaints by financial institutions.
Financial Stability Board Publishes Mortgage Underwriting Principles
On April 18, the Financial Stability Board (FSB), an international group comprised of representatives from all G-20 member countries and the European Commission, published principles for sound residential mortgage underwriting practices. The principles are intended to provide minimum acceptable standards to achieve: (i) effective verification of income and other financial information; (ii) reasonable debt service coverage; (iii) appropriate loan-to-value ratios; (iv) effective collateral management; and (v) prudent use of mortgage insurance. The FSB did not attempt to set detailed international standards, but rather established a framework to limit the risks posed by mortgage markets to global financial stability. The report also sets out an implementation framework and describes tools that can be used to monitor and supervise implementation.
UK Financial Regulator Issues Report on Bribery and Anti-Corruption Controls, Proposes New Guidance
On March 29, the United Kingdoms Financial Services Authority (FSA) published the findings of its thematic review into anti-bribery and corruption systems and controls in U.K.-based investment banks. The FSA review also looked at related topics including (i) gift-giving practices and controls, (ii) staff recruitment and vetting, (iii) training, and (iv) incident reporting. The FSA report concludes that the U.K. investment banking sector has been too slow and reactive in managing bribery and corruption risk, and that substantial work remains. In response, the FSA published proposed revisions to its regulatory guide, Financial crime: a guide for firms. The FSA proposes to update Chapters 2 and 6 of Part 1 of the guide, with new guidance and examples of good and poor practice drawn from the report findings. The FSA also proposes to include a new Chapter 13 in Part 2 of the guide, which will consolidate all examples of good and poor practice highlighted in the thematic review. Stakeholders can submit comments on the proposed revisions through April 29, 2012.
Senate Confirms Multiple Nominees
On March 29, the U.S. Senate confirmed President Obama’s three nominees for the FDIC Board of Directors: Martin Gruenberg, Thomas Hoenig, and Jeremiah Norton. However, the Senate did not confirm Mr. Gruenberg as Chair of the FDIC or Mr. Hoenig as the Vice Chair. Instead, Mr. Gruenberg will continue to serve as Vice Chair and will lead the board in an acting capacity. Thomas Curry was confirmed to serve as Comptroller of the Currency. As such, he will also sit on the FDIC Board, as he has in an independent position since 2004. The Senate also confirmed (i) Maurice Jones to be the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, (ii) Christy Romero as Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, (iii) Mary John Miller to serve as the Under Secretary for Domestic Finance at the U.S. Treasury Department, and (iv) Jon Leibowitz to another seven year term as Federal Trade Commission Chairman. Two nominees to the Federal Reserve Board, Jerome Powell and Jeremy Stein, remain pending in the Senate.
DOJ Reaches FCPA Settlement With Medical Device Company
On March 26, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it had reached a settlement with a medical device company to resolve allegations that the company and its subsidiaries made improper payments in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). DOJ alleges that Biomet, its subsidiaries, employees, and agents made illegal payments to publicly-employed health care providers in Argentina, Brazil, and China in exchange for business with certain hospitals in those countries and then falsely recorded the payments on its books to conceal the true nature of the payments. The deferred prosecution agreement requires Biomet (i) to pay a $17.28 million criminal penalty, (ii) to implement a robust compliance program and internal controls, and (iii) to retain an outside compliance monitor for 18 months. Separately, Biomet agreed to disgorge $5.4 million of profits and interest to resolve parallel civil charges brought by the SEC.
FTC Finalizes Consumer Privacy Recommendations, Notes Mobile Issues
On March 26, the FTC released an anticipated report on consumer privacy, calling on all companies to adopt certain practices to protect consumers’ private information. The final report outlines three basic principles: (i) “privacy by design”, (ii) simplified choice, and (iii) increased transparency. Though the report and recommended practices do not carry the force of law, the FTC encourages adoption of the recommendations to support innovation and commerce while improving consumer protection. The report also serves as a blueprint for what the FTC is seeking in federal privacy legislation. Pending congressional action, the FTC will continue to employ its existing enforcement authority to address unfair or deceptive practices, including practices that violate self-regulatory programs. Further, the FTC intends to support implementation of the framework by focusing on several substantive topics and stakeholder groups, including (i) do not track, (ii) mobile services, (iii) data brokers, (iv) large platform providers, and (v) industry codes of conduct. For example, the FTC will focus on mobile services by updating guidance about online advertising disclosures, including holding a workshop on model mobile disclosures on May 30, 2012. It also calls on mobile service providers to establish industry standards that address data collection, transfer, use, and disposal, particularly for location data.