Regulatory: Companies should take action on employee tips in light of the SEC whistleblower program
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, enacted by Congress in 2010, brought significant changes to financial regulation in the U.S.
June 05, 2013 at 05:15 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, enacted by Congress in 2010, brought significant changes to financial regulation in the U.S. Among these changes was the establishment of the Office of the Whistleblower within the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Office of the Whistleblower is responsible for, among other things, administering a bounty program that permits individual whistleblowers who meet certain requirements to receive awards for information they submit to the SEC regarding securities law violations.
During its first year, the Office of the Whistleblower received more than 3,000 tips, complaints and referrals (TCRs) from whistleblowers in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and 49 countries outside the U.S. More than one-third of the TCRs reported by whistleblowers related to issuer disclosures, with almost 20 percent categorized as corporate disclosures and financials and more than 15 percent categorized as offering fraud.
It is not surprising, as noted by the SEC's Office of the Inspector General in its Jan. 18 “Evaluation of the SEC's Whistleblower Program,” that “the primary demographic for prospective whistleblowers include middle management personnel, controllers, finance department personnel, and other employees who are involved in international transactions.” It is surprising, however, that the majority of whistleblowers were employees who reported their concerns to management, but were ignored.
In fact, the relevant provisions of Dodd-Frank provide incentives for companies to establish internal compliance systems and to work with employee-whistleblowers to address illegal conduct. For example, employees who report potential wrongdoing internally first are deemed to have reported to the SEC on the date they reported it internally. This preserves their place in line in terms of when information was provided to the SEC, and it allows the company to investigate and collect additional evidence for 120 days before the employee brings the information to the SEC. Moreover, one of the considerations the Office of the Whistleblower undertakes when determining the percentage award to recommend is whether the whistleblower cooperated with the company's internal compliance system.
By encouraging employees to report potential violations internally, a company can fully assess the allegations; conduct an internal investigation, if appropriate; and present its findings to the SEC at the same time the employee presents his or her concerns to the SEC. As a result, any subsequent investigation by the staff will likely be more focused, and the company may earn credit for its cooperation.
To date, one TCR has resulted in an award to a whistleblower. The whistleblower has been identified as a bookkeeper of the company she reported as engaging in a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme. Following a successful enforcement action, the SEC awarded the whistleblower 30 percent of the recovery, the maximum allowed under the law.
The fact that the SEC has paid only one award under the new regulations, however, is likely not a good indication of the quality of the information the Office of the Whistleblower has received or will receive. First, not every TCR results in an award, even if it results in successful enforcement. Under the regulations, a whistleblower is only entitled to an award if he or she voluntarily provides the SEC with original information that leads to the successful enforcement by the SEC of a federal court or administrative action in which the SEC obtains monetary sanctions totaling more than $1 million. Second, the time from the TCR to collection of any eventual judgment is generally more than two years, nearly as long as the time the Office of the Whistleblower has been in operation.
In recent public statements, Stephen Cohen, an associate director in the Division of Enforcement in D.C., recently explained that TCRs from whistleblowers make investigations more efficient and more effective. Because the whistleblower usually is from inside the organization, his or her TCR helps to pinpoint the illegal conduct and potentially narrow the SEC's investigation into the conduct.
The SEC's whistleblower program is just getting started, and we should expect an increase in activity as the program develops. Given that the majority of TCRs are initiated by employees, the time has come for corporations that do not have internal compliance systems to develop them. And for companies that already have compliance systems, this is a good time to review them and ensure that there are appropriate policies and procedures for fully addressing employees' reports of potential wrongdoing or violations.
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 AllFrom Reluctant Lawyer to Legal Trailblazer: Agiloft's GC on Redefining In-House Counsel With Innovation and Tech
7 minute readLegal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
Lawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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