-
Dec 27, 2023 | 
lexology.com | Patrick Campbell |Jonathan B. New |Jonathan A. Forman |Christina Gotsis
Key Takeaways On December 11, 2023, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) released a Fact Sheet[1] noting that it likely will repropose some or all of the provisions of FinCEN’s September 1, 2015, Notice of Proposed Rule Making (2015 NPRM) which proposed to expand the application of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) to certain investment advisers (IAs).[2] Opponents of the 2015 NPRM argued that the compliance burden of extending the BSA’s anti-money laundering (AML) rules to IAs outweighed...
-
Oct 29, 2023 | 
lexology.com | Daniel Kaufman |Jonathan A. Forman
Key TakeawaysLast week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) announced changes to the FTC Safeguards Rule (Rule) that will require nonbank financial institutions to provide notice to the agency within 30 days of discovering a “notification event” affecting more than 500 people.
-
Aug 14, 2023 | 
today.westlaw.com | Patrick Campbell |Jonathan B. New |Jonathan A. Forman |Christina Gotsis
(August 24, 2023) - BakerHostetler attorneys Patrick T. Campbell, Jonathan B. New, Jonathan A. Forman and Christina O. Gotsis explain an alert issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission urging broker-dealers to strengthen their anti-money laundering compliance programs.
-
Aug 8, 2023 | 
today.westlaw.com | Jonathan A. Forman |Teresa Goody Guillén |James Sherer |Michelle N. Tanney
(August 16, 2023) - BakerHostetler partners Jonathan A. Forman, Theresa Goody Guillén, James Sherer and Michelle N. Tanney consider a rule proposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission that seeks to address issues arising from securities professionals' use of artificial intelligence.
-
Jul 24, 2023 | 
lexology.com | Jonathan A. Forman |Craig Hoffman |Michelle N. Tanney
Key TakeawaysSince 2022, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed several cybersecurity rules applicable to numerous regulated entities that, if adopted, would impose quick notification obligations and heightened disclosure requirements. Amid significant pushback during the public comment period, the SEC announced it would delay issuance of these rules, which are now expected to be finalized in October 2023 and April 2024.
-
Jul 20, 2023 | 
lexblog.com | Lauren Bass |Jonathan A. Forman |Adam Gale |Teresa Goody Guillén
On July 13, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued its highly anticipated summary judgment decision in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) action against Ripple Labs, Inc. (Ripple) and two of its senior leaders, Bradley Garlinghouse and Christian Larsen. Significantly, the Court found that blind sales of cryptocurrency through digital asset exchanges did not violate federal securities laws.
-
May 17, 2023 | 
lexblog.com | George Stamboulidis |Teresa Goody Guillén |Michelle N. Tanney |Jonathan A. Forman
On May 1, 2023, the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS or Department) issued a consent order (Consent Order), imposing a $1.2 million fine on bitFlyer USA, a cryptocurrency trading platform and custodial wallet service provider. The Consent Order described various alleged failures by bitFlyer USA to establish and maintain an effective cybersecurity program, as required by the DFS’s Virtual Currency and Cybersecurity Regulations.
-
May 17, 2023 | 
lexology.com | Teresa Goody Guillén |Sydney W. Park |Michelle N. Tanney |Jonathan A. Forman |George Stamboulidis
Key TakeawaysNew York is allocating more resources and devoting more attention to the cryptocurrency industry, which will likely result in increased regulatory oversight, potential new rulemaking, significant sanctions for compliance violations, and an increase in its speed of reviewing BitLicense applications.
-
May 15, 2023 | 
lexology.com | Jonathan A. Forman |Matthew Friedman |George Stamboulidis
Key TakeawaysThe U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overturned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s right-to-control theory as a basis to sustain criminal fraud charges. Rather than protecting a victim’s “potentially valuable economic information” that is “necessary to make discretionary economic decisions,” the Supreme Court reinforced that federal fraud statutes protect only traditional property rights, which do not include information necessary to make informed economic decisions.
