Regulatory

Subscribe to Regulatory via RSS

On September 8, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the U.S. Department of Treasury (FinCEN) issued an alert warning financial institutions to be vigilant against a prominent virtual currency investment scam called “pig butchering.” U.S. law enforcement currently estimates victims in the United States have lost billions of dollars to these types of scams.

On August 29, at a Board Meeting for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Comptroller of the Currency Michael J. Hsu issued a statement supporting the insured depository institution (IDI) Resolution Plan Rule, which would require covered banks to develop and submit detailed plans demonstrating how they could be resolved in an orderly fashion in the event of receivership. Describing the impetus for this rule, Comptroller Hsu stated, “as the large bank failures of this spring have shown, banks and regulators cannot afford to be complacent when it comes to resolution.”

On August 29, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (collectively, the agencies) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking with request for public comment on a proposal that would require banks with total assets of $100 billion or more to maintain a layer of long-term debt. The stated objective of the proposed rule is to “improve the resolvability of these banking organizations in case of failure, reduce costs to the Deposit Insurance Fund, and mitigate financial stability and contagion risks by reducing the risk of loss to uninsured depositors.” This proposal follows an advance notice of proposed rulemaking issued in October 2022 by the Federal Reserve and the FDIC that looked at several possible changes, including a long-term debt requirement to promote more orderly resolutions for large banks.

Earlier this month, the California Department of Financial Regulation and Innovation (CA DFPI) announced a new rule expanding the definition of unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices (UDAAP) to commercial financing. Specifically, the rule makes it unlawful “for a covered provider to engage or have engaged in any unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice in connection with the offering or provision of commercial financing or another financial product or service to a covered entity.” The new rule also includes annual reporting requirements (described below) for any covered provider who makes more than one commercial financing transaction to covered entities in a 12-month period or who makes five or more commercial financing transactions to covered entities in a 12-month period that are “incidental” to the business of the covered provider. Importantly, this rule does not apply to banks, credit unions, federal savings and loan associations, current licensees of the CA DFPI or licensees of other California agencies “to the extent that licensee or employee is acting under the authority of” the license.

In its highly anticipated decision, the Second Circuit has answered the question of whether a syndicated term loan qualifies as a “security” with a definitive “no”. On August 24, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its ruling, affirming the lower court’s holding in Kirschner[1] that leveraged loans are not securities. After the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) declined to submit a brief, the court determined, in its application of the Reves test, that three of the four Reves factors weighed against concluding that the complaint plausibly alleged that the loans in question are securities.

In the realm of financial crime prevention, the adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has the potential to revolutionize Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance. AI offers powerful tools for detecting suspicious activities, identifying patterns, and streamlining compliance processes. However, as with any transformative technology, there are both benefits and risks associated with its use. Here, we summarize key uses and risks of AI in BSA/AML compliance, shedding light on the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in this critical area of financial regulation.

Yesterday, Coinbase Financial Markets, Inc., a leading cryptocurrency exchange, announced that it has secured regulatory approval from the National Futures Association (NFA) to operate a futures commission merchant offering crypto futures on its platforms. The NFA is the self-regulatory organization for the U.S. derivatives industry, designated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). According to Coinbase, its application has been pending since 2021.

At a White House Roundtable on protecting Americans from allegedly harmful “data broker” practices, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) Director Rohit Chopra announced the Bureau’s intention to expand the reach of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to data brokers. He stated, “Next month, the CFPB will publish an outline of proposals and alternatives under consideration for a proposed rule. We’ll soon hear from small businesses, which will help us craft the rule.”

On August 9, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sent a letter to U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres requesting leave to file an interlocutory appeal in SEC v. Ripple Labs, Inc. as to the two adverse liability determinations in her July 13, 2023 order. That order granted partial summary judgment in Ripple Labs’ favor regarding the sale of its XRP token. As we previously discussed here, the court held in deciding cross motions for summary judgment that defendants’ “programmatic” offers and sales to XRP buyers over crypto asset trading platforms and Ripple’s “other distributions” in exchange for labor and services did not involve the offer or sale of securities under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in SEC v. W.J. Howey Co.