SocGen Fined $1.3 Billion for Sanctions Violations
Société Générale SA and its New York branch agreed to pay the fines and will now be met with charges in federal court for violating state and federal laws and regulations that govern economic sanctions and money laundering.
November 19, 2018 at 03:41 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
A bank based in France has agreed to pay more than $1.3 billion in penalties to state and federal prosecutors and regulators and faces criminal charges after an investigation found the company was involved in billions of dollars of transactions with parties in countries currently under sanctions or embargoed by the United States.
Société Générale SA and its New York branch agreed to pay the fines and will now be met with charges in federal court for violating state and federal laws and regulations that govern economic sanctions and money laundering, according to U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman of the Southern District of New York and the state Department of Financial Services.
About a third of the penalties — $420 million — will be paid to New York, DFS said. The total penalty, which is split between a handful of entities, is the second largest ever imposed on a financial institution for violations of U.S. economic sanctions, according to federal prosecutors.
An investigation by Berman's office, DFS, and other federal entities found the bank did not comply with federal laws and state regulations as they related to Cuba, Iran, Sudan, North Korea, and other U.S. sanctions between 2003 and 2013. The criminal charges related specifically to Société Générale's transactions involving Cuba.
According to the federal indictment, the bank operated 21 credit facilities that provided significant money flow to Cuban banks, entities controlled by Cuba, and Cuban and foreign corporations for business conducted in Cuba from 2004 to 2010. Federal prosecutors alleged that those services violated the Trading With the Enemy Act and other federal regulations related to Cuba.
Société Générale allegedly engaged in more than 2,500 transactions that violated U.S. sanctions in that time, causing U.S. financial institutions to process close to $13 billion in illegal transactions, according to Berman's office. The majority of those transactions, according to federal prosecutors, involved a U.S. dollar credit facility designed to finance oil transactions between a Dutch commodities trading firm and a Cuban corporation with a state monopoly on the production and refining of crude oil in Cuba.
The bank avoided detection of those transactions by including inaccurate or incomplete notations on payment messages with them. In some cases, for example, Société Générale routed payments through a Spanish bank to avoid being noticed.
The company considered ending the practice in 2004, but continued to engage in the transactions until 2010. Senior management officials at the bank were aware of the practice, according to Berman's office, but did not disclose the conduct to federal regulators or prosecutors.
Berman said in a statement that Société Générale has now admitted to wrongdoing and that the fines and charges that have come as a result should serve as a warning to other banks considering the same activities.
“Today, Société Générale has admitted its willful violations of U.S. sanctions laws—and longtime concealment of those violations—which resulted in billions of dollars of illicit funds flowing through the U.S. financial system,” Berman said. “With today's resolution, the Bank has accepted responsibility for its criminal conduct and demonstrated its commitment to remedying these failures and enhancing its compliance programs and internal controls. Other banks should take heed: Enforcement of U.S. sanctions laws is, and will continue to be, a top priority of this Office and our partner agencies.”
The allegations involving state regulations are more extensive than what Berman's office laid out in the indictment, according to details announced by DFS. More than $12.5 billion of nontransparent and improper payments involved Iran, for example.
Many of those transactions were so-called U-Turn payments, which is when a payment is initiated offshore by a non-Iranian, non-U.S. financial institution and only passed through the U.S. financial system en route to another offshore, non-Iranian, non-U.S. financial institution. Those payments can sometimes be delayed because U.S. financial institutions are flagged to review them.
Société Générale expedited the process by creating two message streams—one that included details on the transaction and one that did not. The message with details was sent to the Iranian beneficiary's bank while the second message was sent to Société Générale's New York branch. That way the transaction could be approved faster.
About $29 million in transactions were tied to Sudan as well. According to DFS, Société Générale masked those payments by omitting the Sudanese entity's address through its payment messaging system. That allowed the bank to avoid having the destination of its transactions detected by regulators.
Société Générale entered into two consent orders with DFS over the violations. The bank agreed to pay DFS $325 million for sanctions violations and $95 million for violating anti-money laundering laws.
DFS Superintendent Maria Vullo said in a statement that the bank cooperated with efforts toward remediation of its misconduct.
“The absence of an effective, global sanctions-compliance infrastructure and lack of management oversight allowed Société Générale employees to ignore the scope and applicability of laws governing economic sanctions, as well as New York anti-money laundering and recordkeeping laws,” Vullo said. “With these consent orders, DFS is holding Société Générale accountable for complying with U.S. and New York anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws and ensuring its vigilance against illicit activity. The Department appreciates the bank's cooperation in resolving these matters and commitment to full remediation of its compliance deficiencies.”
A press inquiry sent to Société Générale was not immediately returned on Monday.
READ MORE:
Lawsuit Dismissed Against DFS From UnitedHealthCare Over Risk Adjustment Payments
DFS, Cuomo Propose New Regulations for Bail Bond Industry
Online Lenders Should Be Subject to State Regulations, DFS Says
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 AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 2Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 3Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
- 4Trump's DOJ Delays Releasing Jan. 6 FBI Agents List Under Consent Order
- 5Securities Report Says That 2024 Settlements Passed a Total of $5.2B
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