September 24, 2022

Volume XII, Number 267


September 23, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 22, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

FinCEN Expands View of Compliance Requirements

On August 18, 2020, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a statement on its approach to enforcing the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), to provide clarity on its approach to bringing compliance or enforcement actions due to potential or actual BSA violations. Most BSA requirements apply only to financial institutions; however, in certain circumstances, the BSA applies to business and individuals engaged in transactions who are not financial institutions. FinCEN also is able to impose civil monetary penalties on those who violate the BSA – and may be able to do so on partners, directors, officers, or employees who participatein the violations. Critically, FinCEN’s statement declares it seeks to establish violations of law based on statutes and regulations, instead of simply noncompliance with standards in a guidance document.

The recent guidance means companies and individuals need to be even more alert and attentive to potential risks. Given FinCEN’s statement and clarification, everyone should take this opportunity to review and enhance their compliance policies and reiterate their importance to their employees. And, consider completing random spot checks to ensure compliance systems are working properly.

FinCEN uses a variety of factors to determine the appropriate response to an actual or possible violation of the BSA. These factors include but are not limited to:

  1. Nature and seriousness of the violations, including the extent of possible harm to the public and the amounts involved.
  2. Impact or harm of the violations on FinCEN’s mission to safeguard the financial system from illicit use, combat money laundering, and promote national security.
  3. Pervasiveness of wrongdoing within an entity, including management’s complicity in, condoning or enabling of, or knowledge of the conduct underlying the violations.
  4. History of similar violationsor misconduct in general, including prior criminal, civil, and regulatory enforcement actions.
  5. Financial gain or other benefit resulting from, or attributable to, the violations.
  6. Presence or absence of prompt, effective action to terminate the violations upon discovery, including self-initiated remedial measures.
  7. Timely and voluntary disclosure of the violations to FinCEN.
  8. Quality and extent of cooperation with FinCEN and other relevant agencies, including as to potential wrongdoing by its directors, officers, employees, agents, and counterparties.
  9. Systemic nature of violations. Considerations include the number and extent of violations, failure rates, and duration of violations.
  10. Whether another agency took enforcement action for related activity. FinCEN will consider the amount of any fine, penalty, forfeiture, and/or remedial action ordered.

In its statement, FinCEN made clear it has the authority to take the following actions in an enforcement action: (1) take no action, (2) issue a warning letter, (3) seek an injunction or other equitable relief, (4) seek a settlement, (5) impose civil monetary penalties, and/or (6) refer the matter criminally. The regulated parties will have an opportunity to respond and contest both facts and conclusions of law in any FinCEN enforcement action.

FinCEN’s statement is an additional reminder to ensure your company’s compliance policies are appropriately tailored to your risk profile – and being closely followed. This statement follows closely behind two other FinCEN guidances1 demonstrating FinCEN’s continued presence and commitment to enforcing legal regimes like the BSA.

1 See Foley Client Alerts: FinCEN Issues Advisory on Cybercrime and Cyber-Enabled Crime Exploiting COVID-19 and FinCEN Issues Updated Guidance for Due Diligence of Hemp Businesses.

© 2022 Foley & Lardner LLPNational Law Review, Volume X, Number 239

About this Author

Lewis Zirogiannis Partner Litigation Attorney Foley & Lardner San Francisco

Lewis Zirogiannis is a partner and litigation lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. Lewis is based in the firm’s San Francisco office, and also has offices in New York and Silicon Valley. He is a member of the firm’s Government Enforcement Defense & Investigations and Finance Practices.

Lewis’ practice focuses on complex litigation as well as government and internal investigations and compliance, including information governance, data privacy and security. He is particularly skilled at counseling corporations on litigation and regulatory matters in the areas of anti-corruption,...

Jenlain A. C. Scott Associate DC  Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution Litigation Government Enforcement Defense & Investigations

Jenlain Scott is an associate with Foley & Lardner LLP. She is a member of the firm's Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice. Prior to joining the firm, Jenlain worked as a summer associate in Foley’s Washington, D.C., office, where she worked on the SCOTUS case for Oil State v. Green’s Energy. As a law student, she interned with the International Prisoner Transfer Unit of the Department of Justice and Transparency International. She also worked as a law clerk at a prominent law firm in Washington and as a research assistant at Georgetown Law’s Annual Review...

Pam Johnston, Trial Attorney, Foley Lardner Law Firm

Pamela L. Johnston is a partner and trial lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP, where she is chair of the firm’s Government Enforcement, Compliance & White Collar Defense Practice, a member of the Securities Enforcement & Litigation Practice, and a member of the Health Care Industry Team. Ms. Johnston focuses in the areas of white collar criminal defense, False Claims Act and whistleblower actions, securities enforcement and other governmental enforcement actions. She represents companies and individuals in parallel civil and criminal proceedings involving a...

Lisa Noller, Trial Lawyer, Foley Lardner Law Firm

Lisa Noller is a trial lawyer and investigator with Foley & Lardner LLP, where she is chair of the Government Enforcement, Compliance & White Collar Defense Practice. She has spent almost 20 years investigating, litigating and trying complex criminal and civil cases, including responding to government investigations, conducting corporate internal investigations, and persuading the government not to pursue clients. When cases proceed to trial, Ms. Noller also has significant experience successfully trying a wide variety of over 30 civil and criminal matters in...

David W. Simon, Foley Lardner, Government Matters, FCPA Attorney

David W. Simon is a litigation attorney who devotes much of his practice to helping corporate clients avoid and manage crises that potentially give rise to government enforcement actions. He provides compliance advice, conducts internal investigations, defends companies against enforcement actions, and represents companies in litigation.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is a principal focus of Mr. Simon’s practice. He also has extensive experience representing clients in antitrust matters and in defending False Claims Act investigations...