Advertisement

May 21, 2013

Final Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Rules Do Not Mandate Internal Reporting; May Dramatically Reshape FCPA Enforcement

On May 25, 2011, a divided Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved final rules to implement the SEC whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). Because the SEC and the Department of Justice (DOJ) share responsibility for enforcing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the SEC's whistleblower program is likely to dramatically reshape FCPA enforcement which, to date, has been heavily dependent on voluntary self-reporting by companies.

Under the final rules, to be considered for an award, a whistleblower must voluntarily provide 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.

The whistleblower provisions almost certainly will result in a significant increase in the number of FCPA investigations initiated by current and former employees through allegations related to bribery of foreign officials. In recent years, some of the highest SEC recoveries have been in FCPA books and records cases, including, in recent months, settlements of $77 million, $137 million, and $218 million. Whistleblowers, who stand to obtain awards of 10% to 30% of those amounts, are protected against retaliation and will be highly incentivized to report allegations of the books and records provision of the FCPA, which the SEC enforces through civil enforcement proceedings.

Although many parties had urged the SEC to require potential whistleblowers to first report information through their companies' internal compliance programs, the SEC instead made changes to the final rule that would encourage-but not require-internal reporting.

Among other things, the final rules do the following:

  • Make a whistleblower eligible for an award if the whistleblower reports internally and the company informs the SEC about the violations.
     
  • Treat an employee as providing "original information" if the information is not already known to the SEC as of the date the employee reports internally, provided that the employee provides the same information to the SEC within 120 days. (The proposed rules provided for only a 90-day grace period.) Thus, employees are able to report their information internally in the first instance, while preserving their "place in line" for a possible award from the SEC.
     
  • Provide that a whistleblower's voluntary participation in an entity's internal compliance and reporting systems is a factor that can increase the amount of an award, and that a whistleblower's interference with internal compliance and reporting is a factor that can decrease the amount of an award.

In a change from the proposed rules, the final rules provide that sanctions from SEC federal court and administrative enforcement proceedings can be aggregated in determining whether the $1 million monetary sanctions threshold has been satisfied.

During the May 25 Commission hearing, Sean McKessy, the head of the SEC's Whistleblower Office, reported "an uptick, not a flood" of whistleblower reports since the SEC announced its program. McKessy also reported that the "quality" of whistleblower reports has increased.

The final rules serve to emphasize the importance to companies of implementing strong internal compliance programs that will detect and prevent potential FCPA violations, as well as promoting corporate cultures in which employees will value the opportunity to report internally in the first instance.

For more information regarding the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act's whistleblower provisions on FCPA enforcement, please see "The FCPA and Dodd-Frank Act" webinar presentation, available online at http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/FCPAWebinar_Dodd-FrankAct_08march11.pdf.

For more information regarding the final rules, please see the May 25, 2011 Morgan Lewis LawFlash, "SEC's Final Rules for Implementing Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Provisions: Important Implications for Covered Entities," available online at http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/FRR_LEPG_LF_SECFinalRulesForDodd-FrankWhistleblowerProvisions_25may11.pdf

Copyright © 2013 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Eric Kraeutler is the leader of Morgan Lewis's Philadelphia Litigation Practice. His practice focuses on trials and appeals involving complex commercial, intellectual property, and white collar criminal matters. Mr. Kraeutler has been the lead trial lawyer in civil and criminal jury trials, civil bench trials, and arbitrations, including international arbitrations. He also has appellate experience, having argued numerous cases before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Third, Ninth, and Federal Circuits, as well as state appellate courts. 

215-963-4840

About the Author

Partner

Kelly A. Moore is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Litigation Practice. Ms. Moore’s practice concentrates on white collar criminal defense, regulatory enforcement matters, and related civil litigation. She has successfully represented clients in matters involving allegations of securities fraud, money laundering, healthcare fraud, antitrust violations, the False Claims Act, and violations of the bribery and books and records provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Ms. Moore routinely represents corporate and individual clients before the U.S....

212-309-6612

Contributors

Associate

Alison Tanchyk is an associate in Morgan Lewis’s Litigation Practice. Ms. Tanchyk’s practice is concentrated in the representation of companies and individuals in all aspects of complex civil litigation, criminal investigations, and compliance and regulatory matters. She has defended companies and individuals in civil litigation and criminal investigations alleging antitrust and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations, healthcare fraud, tax fraud, securities fraud, and other various business frauds. 

215-963-5847

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.