Policy Statement Concerning Cooperation by Individuals in Its Investigations and Related Enforcement Actions, 3122-3124 [2010-843]
Download as PDF
3122
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
of the APA requiring notice and
opportunity for comment. Accordingly,
it is effective January 19, 2010.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 200
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 200
[Release No. 34–61339]
Delegations of Authority to the
Director of Its Division of Enforcement
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
Text of Amendment
The Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is
amending its rules to delegate authority
to the Director of the Division of
Enforcement (‘‘Division’’) to submit
witness immunity order requests to the
Department of Justice for witnesses who
have provided or have the potential to
provide substantial assistance in the
Commission’s investigations and related
enforcement actions. This delegation is
intended to conserve Commission
resources, enhance the Division’s ability
to detect violations of the federal
securities laws, increase the
effectiveness and efficiency of the
Division’s investigations, and improve
the success of the Commission’s
enforcement actions.
DATES: Effective Date: January 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan
McKown, Chief Counsel, (202) 551–
4933; or Jordan A. Thomas, Assistant
Chief Litigation Counsel, (202) 551–
4475.
The
Commission today is amending its rules
governing delegations of authority to the
Director of the Division of Enforcement.
The amendment to Rule 30–4 (17 CFR
200.30–4) authorizes the Director of the
Division of Enforcement (‘‘Director’’) to
submit witness immunity order requests
to the Department of Justice for
witnesses who have provided or have
the potential to provide substantial
assistance in the Commission’s
investigations and related enforcement
actions. This delegation is intended to
conserve Commission resources,
enhance the Division’s ability to detect
violations of the federal securities laws,
increase the effectiveness and efficiency
of the Division’s investigations, and
improve the success of the
Commission’s enforcement actions.
Nevertheless, the Division may
submit matters to the Commission for
consideration, as it deems appropriate.
The Commission finds, in accordance
with the Administrative Procedure Act
(‘‘APA’’) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A)), that this
revision relates solely to agency
organization, procedures, or practices. It
is therefore not subject to the provisions
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES3
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:09 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
17 CFR Part 202
[Release No. 34–61340]
Policy Statement Concerning
Cooperation by Individuals in Its
Investigations and Related
Enforcement Actions
■
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Administrative practice and
procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies).
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
PART 200—ORGANIZATION;
CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND
INFORMATION AND REQUESTS
1. The authority citation for Part 200,
Subpart A, continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77o, 77s, 77sss, 77d,
78d–1, 78d–2, 78w, 78ll(d), 78mm, 80a–37,
80b–11, and 7202, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
*
*
2. Section 200.30–4 is amended by
adding paragraph (a)(14) to read as
follows:
■
§ 200.30–4 Delegation of authority to
Director of Division of Enforcement.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(14) To submit witness immunity
requests to the U.S. Attorney General for
approval to seek an order compelling an
individual to give testimony or provide
other information pursuant to a
subpoena that may be necessary to the
public interest in connection with
investigations and related enforcement
actions pursuant to section 22(b) of the
Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C.
77v(b)), section 21(c) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78u(c)),
section 42(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a41(c)) and section 209(c) of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15
U.S.C. 80b-9(c)).
*
*
*
*
*
By the Commission.
Dated: January 13, 2010.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
PO 00000
ACTION:
Policy statement.
SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange
Commission is issuing a policy
statement announcing the analytical
framework it uses to evaluate
cooperation by individuals.
DATES:
Effective Date: January 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan
McKown, Chief Counsel, (202) 551–
4933; or Jordan A. Thomas, Assistant
Chief Litigation Counsel, (202) 551–
4475.
The
Securities and Exchange Commission is
issuing a policy statement announcing
the analytical framework it uses to
evaluate cooperation by individuals.
This framework serves two important
purposes: it promotes the fair and
effective exercise of discretion by the
Commission, and it enhances
confidence on the part of the public and
cooperating individuals that decisions
regarding cooperation in the
Commission’s investigations and related
enforcement actions will be made in an
appropriate and consistent manner.
The provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’), 5 U.S.C. 553,
regarding notice of proposed
rulemaking, opportunities for public
comment, and prior publication are not
applicable to general statements of
policy, such as this policy statement.
Similarly, the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–
602, apply only when notice and
comment are required by the APA or
another statute and are therefore not
applicable.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 202
[FR Doc. 2010–842 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Administrative practice and
procedure.
Text of Amendment
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
■
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19JAR3.SGM
19JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
PART 202—INFORMAL AND OTHER
PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for Part 202
continues to read, in part, as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77s, 77t, 77sss,
77uuu, 78d–1, 78u, 78w, 78ll(d), 80a–37,
80a–41, 80b–9, 80b–11, 7202 and 7211 et
seq., unless otherwise noted.
*
■
*
*
*
*
2. Add § 202.12 to read as follows:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES3
§ 202.12 Policy statement concerning
cooperation by individuals in its
investigations and related enforcement
actions.
Cooperation by individuals and
entities in the Commission’s
investigations and related enforcement
actions can contribute significantly to
the success of the agency’s mission.
Cooperation can enhance the
Commission’s ability to detect
violations of the federal securities laws,
increase the effectiveness and efficiency
of the Commission’s investigations, and
provide important evidence for the
Commission’s enforcement actions.
There is a wide spectrum of tools
available to the Commission and its staff
for facilitating and rewarding
cooperation by individuals, ranging
from taking no enforcement action to
pursuing reduced charges and sanctions
in connection with enforcement actions.
As with any cooperation program, there
exists some tension between the
objectives of holding individuals fully
accountable for their misconduct and
providing incentives for individuals to
cooperate with law enforcement
authorities. This policy statement sets
forth the analytical framework
employed by the Commission and its
staff for resolving this tension in a
manner that ensures that potential
cooperation arrangements maximize the
Commission’s law enforcement
interests. Although the evaluation of
cooperation requires a case-by-case
analysis of the specific circumstances
presented, as described in greater detail
below, the Commission’s general
approach is to determine whether, how
much, and in what manner to credit
cooperation by individuals by
evaluating four considerations: the
assistance provided by the cooperating
individual in the Commission’s
investigation or related enforcement
actions (‘‘Investigation’’); the importance
of the underlying matter in which the
individual cooperated; the societal
interest in ensuring that the cooperating
individual is held accountable for his or
her misconduct; and the
appropriateness of cooperation credit
based upon the profile of the
cooperating individual. In the end, the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:09 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
goal of the Commission’s analysis is to
protect the investing public by
determining whether the public interest
in facilitating and rewarding an
individual’s cooperation in order to
advance the Commission’s law
enforcement interests justifies the credit
awarded to the individual for his or her
cooperation.
(a) Assistance provided by the
individual. The Commission assesses
the assistance provided by the
cooperating individual in the
Investigation by considering, among
other things:
(1) The value of the individual’s
cooperation to the Investigation
including, but not limited to:
(i) Whether the individual’s
cooperation resulted in substantial
assistance to the Investigation;
(ii) The timeliness of the individual’s
cooperation, including whether the
individual was first to report the
misconduct to the Commission or to
offer his or her cooperation in the
Investigation, and whether the
cooperation was provided before he or
she had any knowledge of a pending
investigation or related action;
(iii) Whether the Investigation was
initiated based on information or other
cooperation provided by the individual;
(iv) The quality of cooperation
provided by the individual, including
whether the cooperation was truthful,
complete, and reliable; and
(v) The time and resources conserved
as a result of the individual’s
cooperation in the Investigation.
(2) The nature of the individual’s
cooperation in the Investigation
including, but not limited to:
(i) Whether the individual’s
cooperation was voluntary or required
by the terms of an agreement with
another law enforcement or regulatory
organization;
(ii) The types of assistance the
individual provided to the Commission;
(iii) Whether the individual provided
non-privileged information, which
information was not requested by the
staff or otherwise might not have been
discovered;
(iv) Whether the individual
encouraged or authorized others to
assist the staff who might not have
otherwise participated in the
Investigation; and
(v) Any unique circumstances in
which the individual provided the
cooperation.
(b) Importance of the underlying
matter. The Commission assesses the
importance of the Investigation in
which the individual cooperated by
considering, among other things:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
3123
(1) The character of the Investigation
including, but not limited to:
(i) Whether the subject matter of the
Investigation is a Commission priority;
(ii) The type of securities violations;
(iii) The age and duration of the
misconduct;
(iv) The number of violations; and
(v) The isolated or repetitive nature of
the violations.
(2) The dangers to investors or others
presented by the underlying violations
involved in the Investigation including,
but not limited to:
(i) The amount of harm or potential
harm caused by the underlying
violations;
(ii) The type of harm resulting from or
threatened by the underlying violations;
and
(iii) The number of individuals or
entities harmed.1
(c) Interest in holding the individual
accountable. The Commission assesses
the societal interest in holding the
cooperating individual fully
accountable for his or her misconduct
by considering, among other things:
(1) The severity of the individual’s
misconduct assessed by the nature of
the violations and in the context of the
individual’s knowledge, education,
training, experience, and position of
responsibility at the time the violations
occurred;
(2) The culpability of the individual,
including, but not limited to, whether
the individual acted with scienter, both
generally and in relation to others who
participated in the misconduct;
(3) The degree to which the
individual tolerated illegal activity
including, but not limited to, whether
he or she took steps to prevent the
violations from occurring or continuing,
such as notifying the Commission or
other appropriate law enforcement
agency of the misconduct or, in the case
of a violation involving a business
organization, by notifying members of
management not involved in the
misconduct, the board of directors or
the equivalent body not involved in the
misconduct, or the auditors of such
business organization of the
misconduct;
(4) The efforts undertaken by the
individual to remediate the harm caused
by the violations including, but not
limited to, whether he or she paid or
agreed to pay disgorgement to injured
investors and other victims or assisted
these victims and the authorities in the
recovery of the fruits and
instrumentalities of the violations; and
1 Cooperation in Investigations that involve
priority matters or serious, ongoing, or widespread
violations will be viewed most favorably.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR3.SGM
19JAR3
3124
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES3
(5) The sanctions imposed on the
individual by other federal or state
authorities and industry organizations
for the violations involved in the
Investigation.
(d) Profile of the individual. The
Commission assesses whether, how
much, and in what manner it is in the
public interest to award credit for
cooperation, in part, based upon the
cooperating individual’s personal and
professional profile by considering,
among other things:
(1) The individual’s history of
lawfulness, including complying with
securities laws or regulations;
(2) The degree to which the
individual has demonstrated an
acceptance of responsibility for his or
her past misconduct; and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:09 Jan 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
(3) The degree to which the
individual will have an opportunity to
commit future violations of the federal
securities laws in light of his or her
occupation—including, but not limited
to, whether he or she serves as: A
licensed individual, such as an attorney
or accountant; an associated person of a
regulated entity, such as a broker or
dealer; a fiduciary for other individuals
or entities regarding financial matters;
an officer or director of public
companies; or a member of senior
management—together with any
existing or proposed safeguards based
upon the individual’s particular
circumstances.
Note to § 202.12. Before the Commission
evaluates an individual’s cooperation, it
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
analyzes the unique facts and circumstances
of the case. The above principles are not
listed in order of importance nor are they
intended to be all-inclusive or to require a
specific determination in any particular case.
Furthermore, depending upon the facts and
circumstances of each case, some of the
principles may not be applicable or may
deserve greater weight than others. Finally,
neither this statement, nor the principles set
forth herein creates or recognizes any legally
enforceable rights for any person.
Dated: January 13, 2010.
By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–843 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
E:\FR\FM\19JAR3.SGM
19JAR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3122-3124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-843]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 202
[Release No. 34-61340]
Policy Statement Concerning Cooperation by Individuals in Its
Investigations and Related Enforcement Actions
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission is issuing a policy
statement announcing the analytical framework it uses to evaluate
cooperation by individuals.
DATES: Effective Date: January 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan McKown, Chief Counsel, (202) 551-
4933; or Jordan A. Thomas, Assistant Chief Litigation Counsel, (202)
551-4475.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Securities and Exchange Commission is
issuing a policy statement announcing the analytical framework it uses
to evaluate cooperation by individuals. This framework serves two
important purposes: it promotes the fair and effective exercise of
discretion by the Commission, and it enhances confidence on the part of
the public and cooperating individuals that decisions regarding
cooperation in the Commission's investigations and related enforcement
actions will be made in an appropriate and consistent manner.
The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''), 5
U.S.C. 553, regarding notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunities for
public comment, and prior publication are not applicable to general
statements of policy, such as this policy statement. Similarly, the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, apply
only when notice and comment are required by the APA or another statute
and are therefore not applicable.
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 202
Administrative practice and procedure.
Text of Amendment
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
[[Page 3123]]
PART 202--INFORMAL AND OTHER PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for Part 202 continues to read, in part,
as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77s, 77t, 77sss, 77uuu, 78d-1, 78u, 78w,
78ll(d), 80a-37, 80a-41, 80b-9, 80b-11, 7202 and 7211 et seq.,
unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
0
2. Add Sec. 202.12 to read as follows:
Sec. 202.12 Policy statement concerning cooperation by individuals in
its investigations and related enforcement actions.
Cooperation by individuals and entities in the Commission's
investigations and related enforcement actions can contribute
significantly to the success of the agency's mission. Cooperation can
enhance the Commission's ability to detect violations of the federal
securities laws, increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the
Commission's investigations, and provide important evidence for the
Commission's enforcement actions. There is a wide spectrum of tools
available to the Commission and its staff for facilitating and
rewarding cooperation by individuals, ranging from taking no
enforcement action to pursuing reduced charges and sanctions in
connection with enforcement actions. As with any cooperation program,
there exists some tension between the objectives of holding individuals
fully accountable for their misconduct and providing incentives for
individuals to cooperate with law enforcement authorities. This policy
statement sets forth the analytical framework employed by the
Commission and its staff for resolving this tension in a manner that
ensures that potential cooperation arrangements maximize the
Commission's law enforcement interests. Although the evaluation of
cooperation requires a case-by-case analysis of the specific
circumstances presented, as described in greater detail below, the
Commission's general approach is to determine whether, how much, and in
what manner to credit cooperation by individuals by evaluating four
considerations: the assistance provided by the cooperating individual
in the Commission's investigation or related enforcement actions
(``Investigation''); the importance of the underlying matter in which
the individual cooperated; the societal interest in ensuring that the
cooperating individual is held accountable for his or her misconduct;
and the appropriateness of cooperation credit based upon the profile of
the cooperating individual. In the end, the goal of the Commission's
analysis is to protect the investing public by determining whether the
public interest in facilitating and rewarding an individual's
cooperation in order to advance the Commission's law enforcement
interests justifies the credit awarded to the individual for his or her
cooperation.
(a) Assistance provided by the individual. The Commission assesses
the assistance provided by the cooperating individual in the
Investigation by considering, among other things:
(1) The value of the individual's cooperation to the Investigation
including, but not limited to:
(i) Whether the individual's cooperation resulted in substantial
assistance to the Investigation;
(ii) The timeliness of the individual's cooperation, including
whether the individual was first to report the misconduct to the
Commission or to offer his or her cooperation in the Investigation, and
whether the cooperation was provided before he or she had any knowledge
of a pending investigation or related action;
(iii) Whether the Investigation was initiated based on information
or other cooperation provided by the individual;
(iv) The quality of cooperation provided by the individual,
including whether the cooperation was truthful, complete, and reliable;
and
(v) The time and resources conserved as a result of the
individual's cooperation in the Investigation.
(2) The nature of the individual's cooperation in the Investigation
including, but not limited to:
(i) Whether the individual's cooperation was voluntary or required
by the terms of an agreement with another law enforcement or regulatory
organization;
(ii) The types of assistance the individual provided to the
Commission;
(iii) Whether the individual provided non-privileged information,
which information was not requested by the staff or otherwise might not
have been discovered;
(iv) Whether the individual encouraged or authorized others to
assist the staff who might not have otherwise participated in the
Investigation; and
(v) Any unique circumstances in which the individual provided the
cooperation.
(b) Importance of the underlying matter. The Commission assesses
the importance of the Investigation in which the individual cooperated
by considering, among other things:
(1) The character of the Investigation including, but not limited
to:
(i) Whether the subject matter of the Investigation is a Commission
priority;
(ii) The type of securities violations;
(iii) The age and duration of the misconduct;
(iv) The number of violations; and
(v) The isolated or repetitive nature of the violations.
(2) The dangers to investors or others presented by the underlying
violations involved in the Investigation including, but not limited to:
(i) The amount of harm or potential harm caused by the underlying
violations;
(ii) The type of harm resulting from or threatened by the
underlying violations; and
(iii) The number of individuals or entities harmed.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Cooperation in Investigations that involve priority matters
or serious, ongoing, or widespread violations will be viewed most
favorably.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Interest in holding the individual accountable. The Commission
assesses the societal interest in holding the cooperating individual
fully accountable for his or her misconduct by considering, among other
things:
(1) The severity of the individual's misconduct assessed by the
nature of the violations and in the context of the individual's
knowledge, education, training, experience, and position of
responsibility at the time the violations occurred;
(2) The culpability of the individual, including, but not limited
to, whether the individual acted with scienter, both generally and in
relation to others who participated in the misconduct;
(3) The degree to which the individual tolerated illegal activity
including, but not limited to, whether he or she took steps to prevent
the violations from occurring or continuing, such as notifying the
Commission or other appropriate law enforcement agency of the
misconduct or, in the case of a violation involving a business
organization, by notifying members of management not involved in the
misconduct, the board of directors or the equivalent body not involved
in the misconduct, or the auditors of such business organization of the
misconduct;
(4) The efforts undertaken by the individual to remediate the harm
caused by the violations including, but not limited to, whether he or
she paid or agreed to pay disgorgement to injured investors and other
victims or assisted these victims and the authorities in the recovery
of the fruits and instrumentalities of the violations; and
[[Page 3124]]
(5) The sanctions imposed on the individual by other federal or
state authorities and industry organizations for the violations
involved in the Investigation.
(d) Profile of the individual. The Commission assesses whether, how
much, and in what manner it is in the public interest to award credit
for cooperation, in part, based upon the cooperating individual's
personal and professional profile by considering, among other things:
(1) The individual's history of lawfulness, including complying
with securities laws or regulations;
(2) The degree to which the individual has demonstrated an
acceptance of responsibility for his or her past misconduct; and
(3) The degree to which the individual will have an opportunity to
commit future violations of the federal securities laws in light of his
or her occupation--including, but not limited to, whether he or she
serves as: A licensed individual, such as an attorney or accountant; an
associated person of a regulated entity, such as a broker or dealer; a
fiduciary for other individuals or entities regarding financial
matters; an officer or director of public companies; or a member of
senior management--together with any existing or proposed safeguards
based upon the individual's particular circumstances.
Note to Sec. 202.12. Before the Commission evaluates an
individual's cooperation, it analyzes the unique facts and
circumstances of the case. The above principles are not listed in
order of importance nor are they intended to be all-inclusive or to
require a specific determination in any particular case.
Furthermore, depending upon the facts and circumstances of each
case, some of the principles may not be applicable or may deserve
greater weight than others. Finally, neither this statement, nor the
principles set forth herein creates or recognizes any legally
enforceable rights for any person.
Dated: January 13, 2010.
By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-843 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P