Global Government Solutions 2010: The Year Ahead

Contacts: Diane E. Ambler, Michael J. Missal, Matt T. Morley, Mark D. Perlow

2009 brought a further transformation in the relationship between business and government. Regardless of political systems or philosophies, governments around the world became more dynamic and intrusive in response to the financial crisis.

This 2010 Annual Report, prepared by members of the K&L Gates Global Government Solutions initiative, contains concise articles that seek to forecast likely government actions and priorities regarding a broad spectrum of topics.

To view the report, click here.

 

Administration Creates Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, Seeking Nationwide Coordination of Law Enforcement Efforts

Matt T. Morley, Richard A. Kirby, and Andrew Edwin Porter

The Obama Administration has recently announced the formation of a task force designed to coordinate federal, state and local efforts to investigate and prosecute fraud and other financial misconduct. The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force (FFETF) expands and supplants an earlier task force created to combat corporate fraud in the wake of the Enron scandal.

While the simple reconstitution of a task force is unlikely to dramatically alter the law enforcement landscape, this development may be one part of a more sweeping set of changes that could result in considerable increases in the magnitude, focus and efficiency of efforts to pursue financial wrongdoing. 

Continue Reading...

SEC/CFTC Report on Harmonization of Regulation and How it May Affect Investment Advisers

By: Lawrence B. Patent, Mary C. Moynihan

On October 16, 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued “A Joint Report of the SEC and the CFTC on Harmonization of Regulation” (Report). The Report was issued in response to a request in the Administration White Paper on Financial Regulatory Reform.

The Report contains 20 recommendations. This Alert will focus upon the recommendations in the Report that may be of greatest interest to investment advisers: (1) the potential “uniform” standards of “fiduciary” duties for persons providing investment and commodity trading advice for securities and futures; (2) aiding and abetting liability under the Securities Act and the Investment Company Act; and (3) aligning the reporting requirements for private funds. The Alert also discusses the other recommendations, some of which may indicate enhanced opportunities for portfolio margining across markets and the prospect of greater clarity and expedited judicial review of new products that straddle jurisdictional lines. 

To view the complete alert online, click here.

FTC Consent Decree Alleges Mortgage Lender Failed to Ensure the Protection of Consumer Information Provided to a Third Party

By: David A. Tallman

A recent Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) action highlights the need for renewed focus, particularly by mortgage lenders, on the protection of borrowers’ personal financial information, including information made available to strategic partners.  On December 16, 2008, the FTC issued a final consent decree against a mortgage lender, Premier Capital Lending, Inc., alleging that the lender failed to adequately protect the non-public personal financial information of borrowers that it had provided to a third party.  The FTC claimed that by permitting a strategic partner to access consumer credit reports without verifying the third party's data security policies and procedures, the lender failed to comply with the FTC's Safeguards Rule.  The FTC also alleged that the lender committed a deceptive act in violation of the FTC Act, because boilerplate language in its privacy policy contained "false or misleading" statements regarding its information security practices. 

The consent decree concerned a company that finances the acquisition of manufactured homes.  In March 2006, the lender permitted the principal of a manufactured home seller to use a company log-in to obtain consumer reports for prospective home purchasers that could be referred to the company for mortgage financing.  The manufactured home seller obtained credit reports on eighty-three consumers using these credentials.  In July 2006, an unauthorized person hacked into the manufactured home seller’s computer.  The hacker used the log-in credentials to obtain over three hundred new consumer reports on individuals who were not customers of either the lender or the manufactured home seller.  The hacker was also able to access all of the eighty-three consumer reports that the seller had legitimately obtained.  While the lender promptly notified the three hundred non-customers of the data security breach, it allegedly did not realize that the hacker had accessed the eighty-three additional consumer reports until more than a year later.  These customers were not notified of the breach until September 2007.

According to the FTC, the lender failed to maintain reasonable and appropriate information security procedures.   Among other allegations, the FTC claimed that the lender never visited the seller’s workplace, performed a security audit on the seller’s computer network, or assessed the seller’s data security policies.  Further, the FTC alleged that the lender never reviewed its own account for obvious signs of unauthorized activity, such as an unusual number of consumer report requests or blatant irregularities in the information used to make the requests.  The FTC also claimed that after the breach occurred, the lender failed to maintain adequate procedures to assess the full scope and nature of the data security breach.

In the current market environment, financial institutions are increasingly permitting third parties to access borrower information in order to provide loss mitigation services, offer refinancing opportunities to distressed borrowers, track loan portfolio performance, or explore new business opportunities.  The settlement suggests that the FTC may continue to aggressively enforce the financial privacy protections contained in Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act against lenders and other financial institutions.  Mortgage lenders and servicers should consider developing and implementing information security programs that include robust auditing and oversight, both internally and with respect to strategic partners and third-party service providers.

For more information, please see: http://www.klgates.com/newsstand/Detail.aspx?publication=5226.  Copies of the consent decree and related documents are available from the FTC at: http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0723004/index.shtm.

Proposed FTC Anti-Manipulation Rule Could Affect Energy Businesses and Futures Traders

By Charles R. Mills and Lawrence B. Patent

Energy businesses and traders in energy futures markets should be aware that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), acting under authority granted in last year’s energy bill, proposed a new anti-manipulation rule in August that would prohibit the use of manipulative or deceptive devices or contrivances in wholesale crude oil, gasoline or petroleum distillate markets. The FTC states in the Federal Register notice announcing the proposals that its rules in this area are modeled on SEC Rule 10b-5. The FTC thus would become part of the posse of federal agencies searching for villains to blame for the run-up in energy prices earlier this year. The FTC is taking this action despite the fact that, in response to its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this area, even very few consumer commenters supported an FTC anti-manipulation rule.

No safe harbor for futures traders. Despite comments on an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that a safe harbor provision or other explicit exemption for the futures markets is necessary to avoid overlap with CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) jurisdiction over futures markets, the FTC does not believe that a safe harbor or exemption is warranted. Although the FTC points to its prior practice of coordinating enforcement efforts with other agencies, the CFTC has continued to urge the FTC to reconsider its opposition to a carve-out of the futures markets from the FTC’s rule. The extended comment period on the FTC’s proposed rule closed on October 17, 2008, and the FTC has scheduled a public workshop on the proposals for November 6, 2008.

Are three heads better than one? Energy businesses and futures traders may need to be mindful of the FTC in addition to the CFTC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The CFTC and FERC continue to debate their respective jurisdictions over energy futures markets, which has been highlighted by the agencies separately bringing competing enforcement actions against the now-defunct hedge fund Amaranth Advisors, LLC with respect to its trading in the natural gas futures market.