DOJ Sets New Focus and Priorities in Digital Assets Enforcement

On April 7, 2025, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memorandum titled “Ending Regulation by Prosecution” (the “Memorandum”), which set out clear and direct enforcement priorities for the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) relating to digital assets. The Memorandum clarifies that DOJ is not a digital assets regulator and that it will not continue with what it characterizes as the prior Administration’s “regulation by prosecution” strategy. Rather, DOJ will now prioritize enforcement actions that target individual bad actors that use digital assets to perpetuate scams or are engaged in other criminal activity involving digital assets such as organized crime, narcotics, and terrorism. Importantly, the Memorandum scales back the scenarios in which DOJ will pursue enforcement actions against digital asset exchanges or other platforms (e.g., mixers or tumblers) that bad actors may use to conduct illegal activity.

UAE Enforcement Update: The FSRA and the DFSA Issue New AML-Related Fines

By Richard Gibbon and Sassi Riar on April 8, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Anti-money laundering, Anti-money laundering measures, Anti-terrorism financing laws, Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Courts, General, Government Investigation, Industry Investigations, Technology, United Arab Emirates

The UAE’s two financial free zones, established in the Emirates of Abu Dhabi and Dubai, possess their own civil and commercial legal frameworks, inclusive of court systems modeled closely on international standards and principles of common law and, importantly, autonomous financial services regulation. In the Abu Dhabi Global Market (“ADGM”), which was established by UAE Federal Decree No. (15) of 2013, the financial services regulatory authority is the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (“FSRA”). In the Dubai International Finance Centre (“DIFC”), which was established by UAE Federal Decree No. (35) of 2004, the financial services regulatory authority is the Dubai Financial Services Authority (“DFSA”). The FSRA and the DFSA have been and continue to be absolutely committed to maintaining Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”), Combating the Financing of Terrorism (“CFT”) and Counter Proliferation Financing (“CPF”) regimes that significantly deter any criminal elements, including money launderers and persons wishing to support, in any way, acts of terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. That commitment includes the rigorous supervision and enforcement of “Rulebooks”, which contain all the regulatory requirements applicable in the respective jurisdictions broken out into “Modules”, such as a “Recognition” Module, a “Conduct of Business” Module, an AML/CFT/CPF-related Module, and more. And in the latest example of their willingness and readiness to take enforcement actions against firms or individuals that violate those Rulebooks, the FSRA and the DFSA recently have imposed substantial fines on financial services businesses in the ADGM and the DIFC for AML/CFT/CPF- and reporting-related noncompliance. We examine those two enforcement actions in this article.

Announcing The Inspector General Podcast

By Squire Patton Boggs on April 1, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Department of Justice, General, Government Investigation, U.S. Congress, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, United States, US Department of Justice, US Treasury

We are pleased to announce a new, quarterly podcast series: “The Inspector General.” Hosted by former State Department and Homeland Security Department Inspector General and partner in our Government Investigations and White Collar practice, Clark Ervin, the podcast is intended especially for government contractors and grantees, who can be the subject of IG investigations and audits. It will also be of interest to those who are part of or who follow the “oversight community.”

The first episode, “A Primer on What Inspectors General are, What They Do, And Why You Should Care,” gives the A-Z on federal Inspectors General – who appoints them; who can remove them; what authorities they have; what work they do; the differences between and among IG investigations, audits, and inspections; what can prompt an IG inquiry; and what can happen as a result of an IG inquiry.

We hope you will listen in regularly as Clark covers the latest developments and interviews key players in this space.

Global Focus on Anti-Corruption Increases

By Colin Jennings, Ayako Russell and Lauryn Durham on March 25, 2025 Posted in Anti-corruption, Bribery, Commercial Bribery, Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Corruption, EU, FCPA Jurisdiction, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), France, General, Government Investigation, Serious Fraud Office (SFO), United Kingdom, United States

While the United States has announced a pause on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement, the rest of the world is increasing its focus on prosecuting corrupt activities. This is a reminder to companies with a global footprint, including those headquartered in the U.S. that may not have physical operations overseas, that foreign activities likely fall under jurisdictions where foreign bribery and corruption are still enforcement priorities with sizeable penalties.

On March 20, 2025, the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office, France’s Parquet National Financier and the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland announced a new anti-corruption alliance, the International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce, affirming their shared commitment to addressing international bribery and corruption and strengthen cross-border collaboration. The announcement noted that all three countries have wide-reaching anti-bribery legislation with jurisdiction to prosecute criminal conduct, even if that activity occurs overseas, provided there is a link to the prosecuting country. The Taskforce’s founding statement may be found here.

Stay tuned for a more detailed guidance published by our UK, French, and Swiss white-collar teams that will assist global companies to better position themselves to meet the new Taskforce requirements.  

EU CSDDD under US pressure: Some Insights on the PROTECT USA Act

By Ally Rich and Thomas Delille on March 24, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Energy, EU, Government Investigation, United States, US Treasury

The European Commission’s (EC) recent announcement of the Omnibus Simplification Proposals signals that it has heard the challenges and objections raised by companies affected by the new requirements of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). But in the US, Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, has introduced legislation that could impose substantial challenges to CSDDD compliance for US companies.

UK Sanctions Update: OFSI Releases Financial Services Threat Assessment – Part 2

Last month, the UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation’s (“OFSI”) published a Threat Assessment analyzing sanctions compliance involving UK financial services firms since February 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine.

In the first of our two-part article (available here), we summarized the six key areas of risk that OFSI identified in its Threat Assessment.

In this concluding part, we consider next steps for UK financial services firms, including performing targeted lookbacks and assessing whether existing sanctions compliance programs and controls are properly attuned to the threats and vulnerabilities that OFSI identified, or whether urgent remediation is necessary.

UK Sanctions Update: OFSI Releases Financial Services Threat Assessment – Part 1

In February 2025, the UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (“OFSI”) issued a report outlining its assessment of the sanctions-related threats posed to the UK by firms operating in the UK’s financial services sector. As to be expected, the report focuses on the risks associated with transactions since February 24, 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine and countries around the world, including the UK, responded with an unprecedented expansion of financial sanctions. However, while OFSI acknowledges that compliance with Russia sanctions must remain a priority for UK financial services firms, it simultaneously makes sure to remind firms that they must strictly comply with all UK sanctions, and many of the insights in the OFSI report are of broader relevance to sanctions compliance.

In our two-part article, we first outline the key threats that OFSI identified in its report, and then we set forth the steps that financial services firms can and should take to address those threats when developing or enhancing their sanctions compliance programs.

Friends Now, Foes Later – Written JDAs Are Critical to Protecting Clients in Multidefendant Investigations and Criminal Actions

By Benjamin Glassman and Luke Burton on March 7, 2025 Posted in Courts, Department of Justice, General, Government Investigation, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, U.S. Supreme Court, United States

Multi-defendant criminal investigations present a classic prisoner’s dilemma. The parties would benefit from cooperating with one another but are incented to become adversaries, most often due to a lack of information sharing and resultant lack of trust and transparency. Fortunately, the law provides a tool: the common-interest privilege, which enables parties to share information in aid of their common defense while maintaining attorney-client and work-product privileges over the shared information.

Yet even the closest of allies can later turn against one another, leading to a common-interest breakup. What, then, of the information that was shared while the parties were united? And what duties might counsel for one party owe to another because of that sharing?

These questions and others are best addressed at the outset of a common defense via a written joint-defense agreement. Experienced counsel can guide defendants through these issues, thereby maximizing the benefits of a joint defense while minimizing the risks.

DOJ’S False Claims Act Based Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative in 2024

By Vipal Patel, Karen Harbaugh and Kevin Kumar on February 28, 2025 Posted in Compliance Program, Corporate compliance, Cyberattack, Cybersecurity, Data Protection & Privacy, Data provider, False Claims Act (FCA), General, Government Investigation, United States, US Department of Justice

The start of a new year presents an opportune time to reflect on the past. We have been tracking and reporting on the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”)’s Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative (“CCF Initiative”), which former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco announced in October 2021. The CCF Initiative employs the powerful False Claims Act (“FCA”) in an effort to “hold accountable entities or individuals that put U.S. information or systems at risk by (1) knowingly providing deficient cybersecurity products or services, (2) knowingly misrepresenting their cybersecurity practices or protocols or (3) knowingly violating obligations to monitor and report cybersecurity incidents and breaches.”

We previously offered insight into the first two FCA enforcement actions brought under this initiative, then a third, and a fourth. 2024 brought even more.

The EU suspends certain Sanctions on Syria to support Economic Stabilization, Political Transition, and Reconstruction

By Richard Gibbon, José María Viñals and Tigran Piruzyan on February 25, 2025 Posted in Economic sanctions, Energy, EU, General, Middle East, Power/Energy, Sanctions, Sanctions, Technology

To encourage democratic development and achieve a peaceful and inclusive political transition, and to aid the swift reconstruction and economic recovery of the country and facilitate its eventual reincorporation into the global financial system, the European Council decided yesterday to suspend with immediate effect a number of sanctions and restrictive measures that had targeted key sectors of the Syrian economy, including its banking, energy, and transport sectors.

In this article, we summarize the suspensions and consider the positive change that they may foreshadow for all Syrians, in the country and diaspora.