Regulatory

Subscribe to Regulatory via RSS

Troutman Pepper Locke’s Securities Investigations and Enforcement team counsels and defends clients through all stages of securities enforcement proceedings. Our attorneys have served in key government agencies and regulatory bodies, and bring their insight to bear in each representation. The team includes a former branch chief of the Division of Enforcement at the SEC, former enforcement lawyers, regulators and government attorneys, assistant United States Attorneys and former assistant attorneys general, as well as in-house counsel for public companies. Our lawyers and practice have been identified as leaders in the field by publications such as the Legal 500, SuperLawyers, Benchmark Litigation, and Chambers USA.

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) April 7, 2026, press release on its fiscal year (FY) 2025 enforcement results is less about numbers and more about a philosophical reset. Under Chairman Paul Atkins and Commissioner Mark Uyeda, who served as acting chair prior to the chairman’s confirmation, the SEC is expressly stepping back from what it characterizes as “regulation by enforcement” and volume‑driven metrics, and recentering on what it has described as fraud, investor harm, and congressional intent. For registrants and other market participants, this shift has direct consequences for how enforcement risk is likely to be assessed going forward.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to implement the broad-based principles set out in the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act for determining when a state-level regulatory regime for “state qualified payment stablecoin issuers” is “substantially similar” to the federal regulatory framework. That determination is the gateway for state-chartered, nonbank stablecoin issuers with up to $10 billion in outstanding stablecoins to operate primarily under state oversight rather than as federally supervised “permitted payment stablecoin issuers.” Comments will be due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

On March 11, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that both agencies describe as “historic.” The MOU is intended to reset the relationship between the agencies by reducing turf battles, avoiding duplicative regulation, and providing clearer, technology-neutral oversight — particularly in markets where securities and derivatives regimes overlap, including crypto. While it does not change either agency’s statutory authority, it creates a formal framework for coordination that will materially affect how policy, examinations, and enforcement play out in practice.

In a recent decision, the Delaware Court of Chancery held on summary judgment that a borrower’s grant of a security interest in substantially all of its assets, including its rights under a license agreement, constituted an “assignment” or “transfer” of such rights that triggered the license agreement counterparty’s contractual right of first negotiation (ROFN) and right of first refusal (ROFR). The decision has implications beyond the pharmaceutical licensing context in which it arose, and should prompt careful review of transfer restriction provisions in any agreement where a party may later seek to pledge its contractual rights as collateral.

On February 11, the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) released a proposed rule to implement the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (the GENIUS Act) for federally insured credit unions (FICUs). Under the proposal, credit unions cannot issue payment stablecoins directly. Instead, only NCUA‑licensed “permitted payment stablecoin issuers” (PPSIs) that are subsidiaries of FICUs would be allowed to issue payment stablecoins, and FICUs would be limited to investing only in PPSIs licensed by the NCUA.

Today, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Enforcement announced significant updates to its Enforcement Manual, the first comprehensive revision since 2017. These changes, which will now be reviewed annually, are designed to promote greater fairness, transparency, and efficiency in SEC investigations and enforcement actions.

At the Securities Enforcement Forum New York 2026, held on February 5, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) Jay Clayton outlined enforcement priorities that should capture the attention of prediction market operators, crypto market participants, and public companies. As reported by Law360, Clayton made clear that the SDNY is actively considering how existing laws apply to prediction markets and that he fully expects fraud cases to be brought in that space. He also stressed that crypto markets are not exempt from traditional fraud scrutiny and described an enforcement approach that encourages companies to self-report misconduct and cooperate in exchange for potential nonprosecution agreements.

On January 29, the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry (AG Committee), led by Chairman John Boozman (R‑AR), advanced S. 3755, the Digital Commodity Intermediaries Act (DCIA), on a party-line vote. The DCIA builds on the bipartisan, House-passed CLARITY Act to create a federal registration and compliance regime for key digital asset intermediaries. The DCIA also would provide a clear legal definition of “digital commodities” and establish a spot market digital commodity intermediary regulatory regime with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). In the press release, Chairman Boozman framed the vote as “a critical step toward creating clear rules for digital asset markets” that protect consumers while allowing innovation to thrive.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has proposed a sweeping update to how broker‑dealers handle outside business activities and private securities transactions. FINRA seeks to consolidate and replace Rules 3270 (Outside Business Activities of Registered Persons) and 3280 (Private Securities Transactions of an Associated Person) with a single new rule: Rule 3290 (Outside Activities Requirements). The proposal preserves the core investor protection concepts of the existing rules but refocuses them on investment‑related activities.