Beyond Penalties and Disgorgement—What to Expect From the SEC in 2023
When there are violations of the federal securities laws, we can expect the commission to seek and impose remedies that it believes meaningfully punish the wrongdoer and also deter future misconduct, write contributors Jonathan H. Hecht and Emily S. Unger.
February 14, 2023 at 01:48 PM
8 minute read
In Fiscal Year 2022, the SEC pursued what it described as a "robust" enforcement agenda and, according to enforcement director, Gurbir Grewal, was "working with a sense of urgency to protect investors, hold wrongdoers accountable and deter future misconduct in our financial markets." We see nothing to suggest this approach to enforcement will change in 2023. The Division of Enforcement will likely continue to use "every tool in its toolkit" and expect that public companies and other market participants will think rigorously about their business and appropriately tailor compliance practices and internal controls and policies to match. When there are, however, violations of the federal securities laws, we can expect the commission to seek and impose remedies that it believes meaningfully punish the wrongdoer and also deter future misconduct.
This focus on robust enforcement was borne out in the SEC's fiscal year 2022 results. What jumps out immediately from the results are the significant financial remedies that the commission sought or imposed. In fact, the commission set a new record for monetary relief in a single year, with the total, including disgorgement, pre-judgment interest, and civil penalties, reaching nearly $6.5 billion. Civil penalties accounted for $4.2 billion of the total, which is the largest single-year amount in that category in the SEC's history—and more than was ordered the past three years combined. This jump in civil penalties, however, does not paint the complete picture. Importantly, the commission pursued—and we expect will continue to pursue—more aggressive remedies beyond disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and civil money penalties. Those regulated by the SEC should take particular note of what is likely to be a continued aggressive stance with regard to other impactful remedies including admissions, corporate governance and other compliance undertakings, officer and director bars, and executive compensation claw backs pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley Section 304 and think proactively about steps that will help mitigate the risk of becoming subject to such sanctions.
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 AllSullivan & Cromwell Signals 5-Day RTO Expectation as Law Firms Remain Split on Optimal Attendance
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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