Categories
Daily Compliance News

October 17, 2022 the More Corruption in Soccer Edition

In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • The new head of the Fraud Section speaks to Law.com. (law.com)
  • Gensler backs CFTC’s authority over Stablecoin. (Reuters)
  • More Corruption in soccer. (ESPN)
  • Is Peter Thiel becoming Maltese? (NYT)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

August 8, 2022 the Morgan Stanley Settles edition

In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Ex-PR gov arrested on corruption charges. (Bloomberg)
  • Morgan Stanley settles FTC, CFTC enforcement actions. (Reuters)
  • Top 10 least corrupt countries in Africa. (Business Insider)
  • OBG’s avoided forced birth states. (WaPo)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

June 13, 2022 the Wells Fargo Under Investigation (Again) Edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Senate bill to have CFTC regulate crypto. (WaPo)
  • Wells Fargo is under criminal investigation for fraudulent interviews. (NYT)
  • SEC begins an investigation into Goldman Sachs over ESG reporting. (WSJ)
  • Finance teams prepare for new ESG regs. (WSJ)
Categories
Everything Compliance

Episode 101, the Glencore Edition


Welcome to the only roundtable podcast in compliance as we celebrate our second century of shows. In 2021, Everything Compliance was honored by W3 as a top talk show in podcasting. In this episode, we have the quintet of Jonathan Marks, Karen Woody, Jonathan Armstrong, Tom Fox and Matt Kelly. In this episode, we take up the Glencore FCPA settlement. We conclude with our fan favorite Shout Outs and Rants.

1. Karen Woody takes a deep dive into the history of Glencore, from its founding by Marc Rich in the 1980s through the allegations of bribery, corruption and market manipulation which led to the FCPA and CFTC settlements.  Woody shouts out the US National and state parks systems which provide much needed green spaces for Americans.

2. Matt Kelly takes a deep dive into CCO certification issue and what it might mean for individual CCO criminal liability going forward.  Kelly has a dual shout out and rant. He shouts out to the Boston Celtics for having the greatest NBA Finals-Game 1 comeback to win the game. He rants about the DOJ failing to post the speech by AAG Kenneth Polite where he announced the new requirement for CCO certification.

3. Jonathan Marks explores the role of internal audit in contributing to the compliance failures and what IA can do to facilitate a culture change at the company. Marks also has a dual shout out and rant. He shouts out to the Philadelphia Phillies for firing manager Joe Girardi and rants about Glencore’s Press Release about their updated compliance which he rants “says nothing”.

4. Tom Fox considers the dual monitor aspect of the resolution and the requirements of the monitorships. Fox reads out the names of the students and teachers who were killed in the recent massacre in Uvalde,  TX.

5. Jonathan Armstrong explores the settlement from the UK perspective and considers, what if any charges against individuals that the UK-Serious Fraud Office might bring. Armstrong shouts out to the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee and Sir Andy Murray for speaking out against the murder of school children. Murray is a survivor of a similar event in Scotland.

The members of the Everything Compliance are:
•       Jay Rosen– Jay is Vice President, Business Development Corporate Monitoring at Affiliated Monitors. Rosen can be reached at JRosen@affiliatedmonitors.com
•       Karen Woody – One of the top academic experts on the SEC. Woody can be reached at kwoody@wlu.edu
•       Matt Kelly – Founder and CEO of Radical Compliance. Kelly can be reached at mkelly@radicalcompliance.com
•       Jonathan Armstrong –is our UK colleague, who is an experienced data privacy/data protection lawyer with Cordery in London. Armstrong can be reached at jonathan.armstrong@corderycompliance.com
•       Jonathan Marks is Partner, Firm Practice Leader – Global Forensic, Compliance & Integrity Services at Baker Tilly. Marks can be reached at jonathan.marks@bakertilly.com

The host and producer, ranter (and sometime panelist) of Everything Compliance is Tom Fox the Voice of Compliance. He can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Everything Compliance is a part of the Compliance Podcast Network.

Categories
Daily Compliance News

June 3, 2022 the Clean Up Your Culture Edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Gemini crypto exchange sued by CFTC. (WSJ)
  • Senator tells Wells Fargo to fix its culture. (WSJ)
  • Corruption in emerging markets. (HBR)
  • House to investigate Saudi investment in Kushner firm. (NYT)
Categories
Blog

Glencore Resolution: Part III – The Commodity Price Manipulation Case

Last week, the Attorney General and a host of other Department of Justice (DOJ) officials announced the settlement of a massive Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and market manipulation case against Glencore plc (Glencore). Over the next several blog posts, I will be reviewing the matter and mining it for lessons learned for the compliance community. Today, in Part III, we take a detour into the Commodity Price Manipulation Case and see how this matter should be studied by compliance professional.
In this case separate and apart from the FCPA enforcement action, Glencore admitted to a muti-year scheme to manipulate fuel oil prices at two of the busiest commercial shipping ports in the United States. Under the terms of the Commodities Future Trading Commission (CFTC) resolution, the company will pay a criminal fine of $341,221,682 and criminal forfeiture of $144,417,203. Under the terms of the Plea Agreement, the DOJ will credit over $242 million in payments that the company makes to the CFTC.
According to the CFTC Press Release, Glencore’s manipulative and fraudulent conduct—including conduct relating to foreign corruption—defrauded its counterparties, harmed other market participants, and undermined the integrity of the US and global physical and derivatives oil markets. Platts physical oil benchmarks, including those that were the subject of Glencore’s manipulative conduct, serve as price benchmarks for end-users and market participants, and are incorporated as reference prices for the settlement of numerous derivatives. (For a copy of the CFTC Order, see link in the CFTC Press Release.)
According to the CFTC Order, Glencore had a global commodity trading business, which included trading in fuel oil. Between approximately January 2011 and August 2019, Glencore conspired to manipulate two benchmark price assessments published by S&P Global Platts (Platts) for fuel oil products, specifically intermediate fuel oil 380 CST at the Port of Los Angeles (Los Angeles Fuel) and RMG 380 fuel oil at the Port of Houston (US Gulf Coast Fuel Oil). The Port of Los Angeles is the busiest shipping port in the US by container volume. The Port of Houston is the largest US port on the Gulf Coast and the busiest port in the US by foreign waterborne tonnage.
As part of the conspiracy, Glencore employees sought to unlawfully enrich themselves and the company, by increasing profits and reducing costs on contracts to buy and sell physical fuel oil, as well as certain derivative positions the company held. The price terms of the physical contracts and derivative positions were set by reference to daily benchmark price assessments published by Platts—either Los Angeles Fuel or US Gulf Coast Fuel Oil—on a certain day or days plus or minus a fixed premium. On these pricing days, Glencore employees submitted orders to buy and sell (bids and offers) to Platts during the daily trading “window” for the Platts price assessments with the intent to artificially push the price assessment up or down.
In an example from the CFTC Order, if Glencore had a contract to buy fuel oil, employees submitted offers during the Platts “window” for the express purpose of pushing down the price assessment and hence the price of the fuel oil that Glencore purchased. The bids and offers were not submitted to Platts for any legitimate economic reason by company employees, but rather for the purpose of artificially affecting the relevant Platts price assessment so that the benchmark price, and hence the price of fuel oil that the company bought from, and sold to, another party, did not reflect legitimate forces of supply and demand.
Between approximately September 2012 and August 2016, Glencore Ltd employees conspired to manipulate the price of fuel oil bought from, and sold to, a corrupt counterparty (Company A) through private, bilateral contracts, by manipulating the Platts price assessment for Los Angeles Fuel. Between approximately January 2014 and February 2016, Glencore engaged in a “joint venture” with Company A, which involved buying fuel oil from Company A at prices artificially depressed by Glencore’s manipulation of the Platts Los Angeles Fuel benchmark. Finally, between approximately January 2011 and August 2019, company employees conspired to manipulate the price of fuel oil bought and sold through private, bilateral contracts, as well as derivative positions, by manipulating the Platts price assessment for US Gulf Coast Fuel Oil.
The CFTC also noted Glencore was involved in market manipulation through illegally obtaining confidential information by improperly obtained nonpublic information from employees and agents of the state-owned enterprises (SOEs), including Pemex in Mexico. This information was material to Glencore’s business and trading. Pemex agents who had access to confidential information and owed a duty to Pemex under Mexican law and Pemex internal policies to keep the information confidential—disclosed nonpublic information, “including information material to Glencore’s transactions with the SOE or to related physical and derivatives trading, to Glencore. Glencore traders in knowing possession of the confidential information then entered into related physical transactions and derivatives transactions.”
Finally, as we noted in yesterday’s recitation of the FCPA allegations, Glencore made corrupt payments to employees and agents working at SOEs in Brazil, Cameroon, Nigeria, and Venezuela. Glencore or its affiliates made the corrupt payments in exchange for improper preferential treatment and access to trades with the SOEs. Glencore’s conduct was designed to increase Glencore’s profits from certain physical and derivatives trading in oil markets around the world, including US physical and derivatives markets. Glencore also engaged in this corrupt conduct in connection with derivatives such as swaps and futures contracts subject to the rules of Commission-registered entities.
Tomorrow we will consider the settlement.

Categories
Compliance Into the Weeds

Compliance into the Weeds: On the Naughty List-JPMorgan $200 Settlement

Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast which takes a deep dive into a compliance related topic, literally going into the weeds to more fully explore a subject. Today, Matt and Tom take a deep dive into the JPMorgan settlement with the SEC and CFTC for faulty electronic record-keeping. Some of the issues we consider are:

·      Why does Matt ‘almost feel bad’ for JPMorgan?
·      There was a paucity of facts. So why is the fine so high?
·      Is it a ‘Compliance Consultant’ or a Monitor?
·      The remediation agreed to by JPMorgan.
·      Lessons learned for the compliance professional and ephemeral communications.
·      Focus on consistent and even-handed discipline for JPMorgan employees going forward.
Resources
Matt in Radical Compliance
Tom in the FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog

Categories
Blog

On the Naughty List – JPMorgan and Failures for Record Keeping

We begin the week before Christmas by looking at one heck of a compliance failure (or perhaps series of compliance failures) which led JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, and J.P. Morgan Securities plc (JPMorgan) to paying some $200 million in fines and penalties to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). It breaks down with $125 million to the SEC and $75 million to the CFTC. While that is probably just a rounding error to JPMorgan, it will purchase many, many lumps of coal that JPMorgan will probably get from Santa this year as they clearly have been very, very naughty. Both the SEC and CFTC settled via Orders, (herein CFTC Order and SEC Order).
Matt Kelly, writing in Radical Compliance, said of the underlying facts they do “not paint a pretty picture for JP Morgan. The misconduct happened from at least January 2018 through November 2020, and even supervisors in the broker-dealer unit — the people who were supposed to enforce compliance with records-retention policies — engaged in the same bad habits.” JPMorgan received numerous subpoenas for documents from the SEC between 2018 and 2020. JPMorgan failed to comply with these subpoenas as “JPMorgan frequently did not search for records contained on the personal devices of JPMorgan employees relevant to those inquiries.” Moreover, these failures “impacted the Commission’s ability to carry out its regulatory functions and investigate potential violations of the federal securities laws across these investigations; the Commission was often deprived of timely access to evidence and potential sources of information for extended periods of time and, in some instances, permanently.”
In ongoing investigations, the SEC was provided What’s App, text messaging and emails from parties who were in contact with JPMorgan. The SEC brought this information to the attention of JPMorgan and the bank “identified other recordkeeping failures that it subsequently” reported to the SEC. The bank’s “Supervisory policies tasked supervisors with ensuring that employees completed training in the firm’s communications policies and adhered to JPMorgan’s books and recordkeeping requirements” were just as guilty of such conduct. The internal function charged with the screening and review of electronic communications, the compliance department’s e-surveillance group, “failed to implement a system of follow-up and review to determine that supervisors’ responsibility to supervise was being reasonably exercised so that the supervisors could prevent and detect employees’ violations of the books and records requirements. Even when employees used approved communications methods, including on personal phones, for business communications, JPMorgan failed to implement sufficient monitoring to assure that its recordkeeping and communications policies were being followed.” The Order concluded, “Even after the firm became aware of significant violations, the widespread recordkeeping failures and supervisory lapses continued with a significant number of JPMorgan employees failing to follow basic recordkeeping requirements.”
As a part of the remediation effort during the investigation, the Board of Director’s Audit Committee hired a consultant to help in the effort. The SEC Order broadened this initiative out further to a “Compliance Consultant” to be retained to lead a variety of remedial efforts. (This sounds suspiciously like a monitor). Some of these efforts will include:

  • A comprehensive review of JPMorgan’s supervisory, compliance, and other policies and procedures.
  • A comprehensive review of training conducted by JPMorgan to ensure personnel are complying with the requirements.
  • An assessment of the surveillance program measures implemented by JPMorgan to ensure compliance.
  • An assessment of the technological solutions that JPMorgan implements to meet the record retention requirements.
  • An assessment of the measures used by the firm to prevent the use of unauthorized communications methods for business communications by employees.
  • A review of JPMorgan’s electronic communications surveillance routines.
  • A comprehensive review of the framework to address instances of non-compliance, including (1) how JPMorgan determined which employees failed to comply, (2) the corrective action carried out, (3) an evaluation of who violated policies, (4) why and what penalties were imposed, and (5) whether penalties were handed out consistently across business lines and seniority levels.

There were also additional reporting obligations from the Compliance Consultant in the SEC Order that bear mentioning. In addition to a report at one year of the overall JPMorgan compliance program on record keeping for electronic communications; at two years the Compliance Consultant is to report on any discipline imposed on employees for violations of the record keeping policies. This includes, “written warnings, loss of any pay, bonus, or incentive compensation, or the termination of employment, with respect to any employee found to have violated JPMorgan’s policies and procedures”. JPMorgan’s Internal Audit function is also mandated to conduct an internal audit to determine compliance with the firm’s record keeping policies for electronic communications.
All of these obligations should be studied by compliance professionals for not only best practices but to determine any gaps in your company’s electronic data record keeping regime. This is critical even if you are not under the regulatory regime imposed on financial institutions or other regulated industries. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has long mandated that companies both understand and capture ephemeral communications but if your company gets into a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) or other similar investigation you will need to demonstrate compliance for a FCPA perspective and to then internally investigate any claims. Not much will be worse for your company than if the DOJ or SEC finds out about some FCPA-violative conduct and comes to your company and then you find out your business folks have been communicating through technology you were completely unaware of, you have no record of it and you cannot capture it.
Everyone was aware of the changes in risk when most companies went to WFH. Now are we RTO those risks have changed again. Even if you are aware of and have approved the use of Teams, Slack, Zoom or other technology to collaborate in the RTO environment; these tools are coming out with new features literally weekly that may change your risk profile. Use the JPMorgan SEC and CFTC enforcement actions as benchmarks to guide you through an assessment of your electronic record keeping program as well as key areas to enhance.
Matt Kelly and myself take a deep dive into this matter on this week’s Compliance into the Weeds, which will post Wednesday AM.

Categories
Daily Compliance News

October 22, 2021 the $200MM Whistleblower Award edition

In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Facebook oversight committee lowers the hammer.(NPR)
  • CFTC awards $200MM whistleblower bounty. (WSJ)
  • Total accused of downplaying climate risk. (BBC)
  • Texas whistleblower suit against AG can proceed. (Texas Tribune)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

March 31, 2021 the CFTC edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Why is the CFTC necessary? (NationalLawReview)
  • Goldman says it’s ethical. Does it have to be? (WSJ)
  • Archegos, Credit Suisse and DD. (WSJ)
  • Why did container ships grow so large? (NYT)