Financial Crimes Compliance

Non-US insurers with exposures to Iran-related business face a difficult six months to bring their business into compliance with US president Donald Trump’s newly reinstated snap-back sanctions

A government coverup of the Cohen reports “makes no sense,” said Aaron Wolfson, a lawyer who previously oversaw suspicious activity reporting for JPMorgan Chase. “I find that laughable.”

Mr. Francos* was quoted in the article saying, “If someone received a bribe, then someone had to have paid the bribe,” he said. “Companies should be well prepared [to be investigated].” He continued to say, many Argentinian companies that are contracted by the state do not have established policies in terms of compliance and integrity, and will likely rush to put together new compliance programmes. Francos said “this shock could be good” to improve standards quickly.  “This [scenario] creates a problem for companies, but also an opportunity that will bring change to Argentina’s business culture,” he said.

*Mr. Francos is admitted to practice only in Buenos Aires; not engaged in the practice of law in the District of Columbia. 

It would not be out of the ordinary, then, for a VEB official to have brief courtesy meetings with New York bankers about continuing business, though they would not be allowed to discuss new bond deals, said Aaron Wolfson, a partner at Lewis Baach who previously worked at JPMorgan and prosecuted banks for skirting sanctions.

On Monday, Dec. 12, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision clarifying subsection 1 of the bank fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1344, in Shaw v. United States. Notwithstanding a veritable ocean of case law, regulations and statutes that delineate the difference between a bank’s property and that of its customers, the court quickly pushed such technical arguments to the side, holding that — for the purposes of the bank fraud statute — there is no practical difference between targeting a bank customer’s funds and targeting the bank’s own funds.

“The court’s decision is in keeping with the long-standing principle that a fraud can be prosecuted under the criminal law even if the victim does not suffer a loss — which is an important distinction between criminal fraud and civil fraud,” said A. Katherine Toomey, a partner at Lewis Baach PLLC.

Next week, for the second time in two years, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument in a case for the purpose of resolving a split in the circuits concerning the scope of the bank fraud statute — 18 U.S.C. §1344. 

In this exclusive Of Counsel piece, Julie Copeland and Mirella deRose, take a look at the “ABCs” of compliance.

A U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Virginia imposed a below-Guidelines sentence for a Syrian-born U.S.citizen who pleaded guilty to providing equipment to forces opposing the Syrian regime in violation of U.S. sanctions laws.

*Mr. Francos contributing author and is admitted to practice only in Buenos Aires; not engaged in the practice of law in the District of Columbia. 

Eric Lewis focuses on three key areas: (1) the widening of the net from sanctioned individuals to their families; (2) the application of the evasion provisions to foreign persons; (3) the bringing of new classes within existing sanctions.