Admissions of Wrongdoing Back in Vogue: SEC Enforcement Pendulum Swings
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently announced its intention to avoid “neither admit nor deny” settlements in some cases and instead return to an Obama-era policy requiring more individuals and companies to admit wrongdoing when settling civil enforcement actions.
That policy was something of an innovation. Previously, the SEC had a general practice of allowing settlements without admissions of wrongdoing, and under the Trump administration, the SEC had reverted to that past practice. The Wall Street Journal has now reported that, at a prominent SEC conference, Sanjay Wadhwa, the deputy director of enforcement at the SEC, stated that the SEC would seek admissions “in cases involving egregious misconduct” and where “a large number of investors were harmed or where defendants obstructed the SEC’s investigation.” At the same conference, the SEC’s enforcement chief, Gurbir Grewal, stated that the SEC would also use other remedial tools as appropriate, including officer and director bars, conduct-based injunctions, and undertakings such as a company’s agreement to hire an independent compliance consultant. Grewal framed the Commission’s goal as improving deterrence and boosting public trust in financial and government institutions.
The new policy brings with it new risks for companies, as admitting wrongdoing could have consequences in separate, private civil suits, such as class action lawsuits by shareholders or third parties. Admissions might also trigger “conduct” exclusions in D&O insurance policies that bar coverage for fraudulent conduct or intentional violations of the law. More dramatic still, admissions of wrongdoing could be used in parallel criminal proceedings.
For those reasons, a policy requiring admissions could increase the number of SEC cases that go to trial; litigants may be less willing to settle. If they do settle, they will have to focus on the precise language of the admissions.
However, it remains to be seen how the SEC will actually implement these policies, and how many cases those policies will actually affect.
©2023 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.