Regulatory: Reviewing the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Program’s 2011 annual report
Section 924(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC) Office of the Whistleblower to report annually to Congress on whistleblower complaints and its responses.
December 28, 2011 at 04:00 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Section 924(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Office of the Whistleblower to report annually to Congress on whistleblower complaints and its responses. In November 2011, the SEC issued its inaugural annual report on the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Program. Because the final rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Act did not become effective until Aug. 12, 2011 and the SEC's fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2011, the report includes only seven weeks of data describing just 334 whistleblower submissions. Despite the small sample, the report offers a significant takeaway for corporations: internal reporting and compliance programs matter.
Submissions summary
There are a couple of notable metrics included in the report:
1. Geographic origin of submissions The SEC received whistleblower submissions from 37 states and 11 foreign countries. Of the 334 whistleblower submissions, 87 did not report the geographic origin of the submission. Foreign whistleblower submissions, where identified, out-paced all states but California, with the majority originating in China, the U.K. and Australia. Domestically, the largest source of whistleblower submissions was California (34), followed by New York (24) and Florida (19). Given the nation's population and the location of public companies' financial and operational centers, the California and New York numbers are unsurprising.
2. Nature of submissions The report listed 11 different complaint categories. The largest percentage of whistleblower submissions—25.2 percent—were identified as non-descript “other” and “blank” violations. “Market Manipulation” comprised 16.2 percent of the submission complaints, followed by “Offering Fraud” at 15.6 percent and “Corporate Disclosure & Financials” at 15.3 percent. The FCPA category, which pundits have expected to comprise a significant portion of whistleblower submissions under Dodd-Frank, accounted for only 3.9 percent of the submissions.
3 reasons the report calls for effective internal reporting and compliance programs
1. Less submissions received than expected. Though the 334 submissions only represent a seven-week reporting period, the number is lower than most have predicted. Many predicted the Dodd-Frank whistleblower award structure (providing payments between 10 and 30 percent of the SEC's recoveries based on the whistleblower submissions, once the SEC's recovery exceeds $1 million) would lead to a flood of submissions, but that has not been the case. The relatively small number of submissions is likely due to the Dodd-Frank Act's encouragement of internal reporting designed to proactively address complaints by working with the whistleblower before reporting to the SEC.
Consequently, now more than ever, it is important that companies solidify and enhance their internal reporting mechanisms to ensure potential whistleblowers have a meaningful opportunity to resolve potential or reported problems before they reach the SEC.
2. Significant number of foreign country submissions. Of the 334 total submissions, 32 originated abroad. Although the report did not indicate which complaints originated from foreign countries, companies with operations abroad should monitor this activity closely. At the very least, they should ensure their internal reporting and compliance programs are communicated effectively and followed in foreign locations. Companies also should train all employees, regardless of location.
3. Ease of submitting to the SEC. The report subtly emphasizes the ease of making submissions to the SEC. In a footnote, the SEC notes the data reflected in the report represents the information reported by whistleblowers in their online questionnaires or hard copy submissions. Companies should consider this ease of reporting to the SEC when reviewing their internal reporting and compliance programs. Although the Dodd-Frank Act encourages internal reporting, it is not required for a whistleblower to be eligible for an award. Accordingly, the ease of a company's internal reporting mechanisms and possible incentives for whistleblowers to report to the company first, are key in preventing whistleblower submissions to the SEC.
Section 924(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Office of the Whistleblower to report annually to Congress on whistleblower complaints and its responses. In November 2011, the SEC issued its inaugural annual report on the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Program. Because the final rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Act did not become effective until Aug. 12, 2011 and the SEC's fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2011, the report includes only seven weeks of data describing just 334 whistleblower submissions. Despite the small sample, the report offers a significant takeaway for corporations: internal reporting and compliance programs matter.
Submissions summary
There are a couple of notable metrics included in the report:
1. Geographic origin of submissions The SEC received whistleblower submissions from 37 states and 11 foreign countries. Of the 334 whistleblower submissions, 87 did not report the geographic origin of the submission. Foreign whistleblower submissions, where identified, out-paced all states but California, with the majority originating in China, the U.K. and Australia. Domestically, the largest source of whistleblower submissions was California (34), followed by
2. Nature of submissions The report listed 11 different complaint categories. The largest percentage of whistleblower submissions—25.2 percent—were identified as non-descript “other” and “blank” violations. “Market Manipulation” comprised 16.2 percent of the submission complaints, followed by “Offering Fraud” at 15.6 percent and “Corporate Disclosure & Financials” at 15.3 percent. The FCPA category, which pundits have expected to comprise a significant portion of whistleblower submissions under Dodd-Frank, accounted for only 3.9 percent of the submissions.
3 reasons the report calls for effective internal reporting and compliance programs
1. Less submissions received than expected. Though the 334 submissions only represent a seven-week reporting period, the number is lower than most have predicted. Many predicted the Dodd-Frank whistleblower award structure (providing payments between 10 and 30 percent of the SEC's recoveries based on the whistleblower submissions, once the SEC's recovery exceeds $1 million) would lead to a flood of submissions, but that has not been the case. The relatively small number of submissions is likely due to the Dodd-Frank Act's encouragement of internal reporting designed to proactively address complaints by working with the whistleblower before reporting to the SEC.
Consequently, now more than ever, it is important that companies solidify and enhance their internal reporting mechanisms to ensure potential whistleblowers have a meaningful opportunity to resolve potential or reported problems before they reach the SEC.
2. Significant number of foreign country submissions. Of the 334 total submissions, 32 originated abroad. Although the report did not indicate which complaints originated from foreign countries, companies with operations abroad should monitor this activity closely. At the very least, they should ensure their internal reporting and compliance programs are communicated effectively and followed in foreign locations. Companies also should train all employees, regardless of location.
3. Ease of submitting to the SEC. The report subtly emphasizes the ease of making submissions to the SEC. In a footnote, the SEC notes the data reflected in the report represents the information reported by whistleblowers in their online questionnaires or hard copy submissions. Companies should consider this ease of reporting to the SEC when reviewing their internal reporting and compliance programs. Although the Dodd-Frank Act encourages internal reporting, it is not required for a whistleblower to be eligible for an award. Accordingly, the ease of a company's internal reporting mechanisms and possible incentives for whistleblowers to report to the company first, are key in preventing whistleblower submissions to the SEC.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhat to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
4 minute readTurning Over Legal Tedium to AI Requires Lots of Unglamorous Work on Front End
6 minute readKhan Defends FTC Tenure, Does Not Address Post-Inauguration Plans
Best Practices for Adopting and Adapting to AI: Mitigating Risk in Light of Increasing Regulatory and Shareholder Scrutiny
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 2'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 3Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
- 4On the Move and After Hours: Meyner and Landis; Cooper Levenson; Ogletree Deakins; Saiber
- 5State Budget Proposal Includes More Money for Courts—for Now
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250