The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) previously announced that its 2014 Examination Priorities included a focus on technology, including cybersecurity preparedness.
Steven J. Pearlman, co-head of Proskauer’s Whistleblower & Retaliation Group, recently delivered a PODCAST for TheCorporateCounsel.net, focusing on the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s first SOX whistleblower decision, Lawson v. FMR.
Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it will conduct more than 50 cybersecurity examinations to identify risks and ensure that broker-dealers and investment advisers are adequately protecting customer information.
Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion in the challenge to the SEC’s Conflict Minerals Rule.
On April 14, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled against the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the wishes of human rights groups, after ruling that disclosure requirements included in the Commission’s “conflict minerals” rules violate the First Amendment by compelling companies to disclose whether their products contain certain minerals whose sales fund violent armed groups in Central Africa.
D.C. Circuit Vacates Dodd-Frank Conflict Minerals Provision & SEC Rule As Violating First Amendment Free Speech
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia today, in National Association of Manufacturers v. SEC, affirmed a district court judgment that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) did not violate procedural requirements or misconstrue the statute in promulgating the Conflict Minerals Rule, but vacated the specific underlying statutory provision and the rule because the requirements compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Trading and Markets has issued frequently asked questions (FAQ) concerning the amendments adopted on July 30, 2013, to Rule 17a-5 (Broker-Dealer Reporting Rule) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act).
In a case reminiscent of the “breakpoint” enforcement actions brought 10 years ago by securities regulators, the SEC recently found that a registered investment adviser and broker-dealer overcharged clients because it improperly calculated advisory fees.
As we have previously reported, the SEC is increasingly scrutinizing hedge funds and other private funds and has suggested that it will pursue enforcement actions against advisers to such funds as appropriate.
As Bret Leone-Quick discussed in a post last week, the SEC has been stepping up its scrutiny of municipal bond offerings. Indeed, in the last year the SEC has filed a number of enforcement actions against municipal bond issuers and underwriters.