SEC Intensifies Enforcement Actions on Off-Channel Communication Violations
All Fintech
Regulatory Exams and Oversight
November 30, 2024
The Case
The SEC has recently taken a series of enforcement actions against financial firms for failing to maintain and preserve electronic communications, particularly those conducted through off-channel methods like personal devices.
These actions highlight the SEC's focus on recordkeeping requirements and the importance of firms implementing robust compliance policies and procedures. While penalties have been significant—reaching tens of millions of dollars in some cases—the SEC has shown leniency towards firms that self-report violations, cooperate with investigations, and take prompt remedial action.
Regulatory Implications
The SEC’s recent enforcement actions underscore the critical importance of adhering to recordkeeping requirements under the Exchange Act and the Advisers Act. Financial firms, including broker-dealers and investment advisors, should take note of these implications:
Off-Channel Communications:
The use of personal devices and unapproved messaging apps for business communications poses significant compliance risks. Firms are expected to monitor and control such communications to follow recordkeeping regulations.
Supervision Failures:
Senior employees and supervisors who engage in off-channel communications increase firms’ exposure to regulatory scrutiny and penalties. Effective oversight and enforcement of communication policies are essential to mitigate these risks.
Importance of Self-Reporting:
The SEC has shown leniency toward firms that voluntarily report violations, cooperate fully during investigations, and promptly implement remedial measures. Self-reporting can lead to reduced or waived penalties.
Severe Penalties for Non-Compliance:
Firms that fail to address recordkeeping violations can face significant financial penalties, censure, and ongoing regulatory oversight. Recent cases have resulted in penalties exceeding $88 million across multiple firms.
Practical Guidance for Firms
To address recordkeeping compliance and mitigate the risk of enforcement actions, firms should take the following steps:
Update Communication Policies
Establish clear policies prohibiting the use of personal devices and unauthorized messaging apps for business communications.Enhance Supervision and Monitoring
Implement supervision systems to detect and address off-channel communications. Regularly review employee communication methods and patterns.Train Employees
Provide regular training on the importance of recordkeeping compliance and the risks associated with off-channel communications.Conduct Internal Audits
Perform periodic audits to identify and address recordkeeping gaps, focusing on the use of electronic communications.Self-Report Violations
If recordkeeping violations are discovered, consider self-reporting to the SEC to demonstrate cooperation and potentially reduce penalties.Engage Compliance Consultants
Work with external consultants to review and strengthen policies, procedures, and compliance frameworks related to recordkeeping obligations.
InnReg assists financial firms in developing and enhancing recordkeeping compliance programs and conducting internal audits. Our expertise helps firms address regulatory expectations and mitigate the risk of enforcement actions.
Blockchain
On December 30, 2024, the US Department of the Treasury and the IRS issued final regulations focused on decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms and their role in digital asset transactions.
RIAs
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against nine investment advisors and three broker-dealers for failures by the firms and their personnel to maintain and preserve electronic communications in violation of recordkeeping provisions of the federal securities laws.
RIAs
The SEC’s order finds that, from at least October 2018 until January 2022, an investment advisory firm stated in its offering materials and other documents provided to prospective and existing private fund investors that it was voluntarily complying with AML due diligence laws despite those laws not applying to investment advisors.