As the SEC Continues to Ramp Up Enforcement, it is Important to Train Your Employees About Insider Trading to Avoid Liability
Regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have stepped up enforcement of insider trading in recent years, with New York Rep. Chris Collins the latest big name to face charges. According to prosecutors, Collins, who served as an independent director of Innate Immunotherapeutics Ltd., tipped his son, Cameron Collins, after receiving confidential information about negative clinical trial results.
While big names like Rep. Collins make the news, “regular” people are most often the targets of SEC enforcement. The majority of cases involve executives or employees of public companies who trade in anticipation of market-moving news (positive or negative) or provide nonpublic information to friends and family members (“tipper”). Because companies can sometimes be held liable for their employee’s misdeeds, it is essential to have comprehensive policies and procedures in place to monitor trading compliance.
Insider Trading Basics
Insider trading is the trading of a public company’s stock or other securities based on material nonpublic information about the company. Specifically, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Rule 10b–5 prohibit trading on inside corporate information by persons bound by a duty of trust and confidence not to exploit that information for their personal advantage. Corporate insiders are also prohibited from sharing inside information to others for trading. An individual who receives such information (often called a “tippee”) with the knowledge that disclosure breached the tipper’s duty may be liable for securities fraud for undisclosed trading on the information.
Liability for Insider Trading
Insider trading violations can lead to costly liability. Individuals who violate insider trading laws may be forced to disgorge any profits gained or losses avoided. They may also be subject to a civil penalty in an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. Criminal prosecution is also possible. The maximum prison sentence for an insider trading violation is now 20 years, while the maximum criminal fine is $5,000,000.
Companies can also face liability. Section 15(f) of the Exchange Act and Section 204 of the Investment Advisors Act impose affirmative obligations on broker-dealers and investment advisors to adopt, maintain, and enforce policies and procedures intended to prevent illegal insider trading. Public companies may be subject to insider trading penalties for violations by persons deemed to have direct or indirect control.
Entities who are deemed to be “controlling persons” of the violator face a civil penalty not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000 or three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the violation. However, liability may only be imposed if the company knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that the controlled person was likely to engage in the acts constituting the insider trading violation and failed to take appropriate steps to prevent the acts before they occurred.
While prosecutions under the control person theory of liability are rare, insider trading can nonetheless cause significant harm to a company’s reputation. Accordingly, it is imperative to have a compliance plan in place.
Insider Trading Policies and Procedures
Companies should have policies and procedures in place that educate all employees about what constitutes material, nonpublic information and how to handle it. With regard to trading in the company, it should be clear that directors, officers and employees of the company may not pursue any transaction in the company’s securities if they possess material, nonpublic information about the company.
Given the intense scrutiny on insider trading by both state and federal authorities, corporate insiders should make sure that they understand what types of conduct cross the line after receiving access to significant, confidential corporate developments. At the same time, businesses should ensure that they have insider trading policies and training programs in place to monitor trading compliance.
Finally, it is important to emphasize that insider trading policies and procedures are not one-size-fits-all. They must be tailored to a company’s industry, operations, and employee structure.
If you have questions, please contact us
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Paul Lieberman, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-806-3364.
Business Mediation: An Overview and Practical Tips
Business mediation is a confidential, voluntary process in which a neutral third party helps companies negotiate a resolution to a commercial dispute without going to trial. Because working with a mediator is very different from litigating in the courtroom, it is important to understand how commercial mediation works, when it makes sense for your dispute, […]
Top 5 Causes Leading to Construction Defect Litigation
The five most common causes of construction defect litigation are design defects, substandard materials, workmanship defects, code violations, and subsurface defects. Because these flaws can compromise a building’s integrity, functionality, or safety, they frequently lead to disputes involving multiple parties and high financial stakes. Key takeaways: What is Construction Defect Litigation? Construction litigation is complex, […]
How to Protect Your New Jersey Business When Going through a Divorce
The most effective ways to protect your business in a divorce are put in place before one begins: a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, clean separation of business and personal finances, and divorce contingencies built into your operating or buy-sell agreements. If divorce is already underway, the priorities shift to establishing how the business is classified […]
The most common franchise disputes involve breach of contract, franchise termination and non-renewal, intellectual property rights, territorial encroachment, royalty and fee payments, franchisor support obligations, and violations of state franchise laws such as the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act. Franchisors and franchisees can often resolve these conflicts by providing written notice detailing the dispute and […]
Reputational Risk and Legal Exposure: Why New Jersey Businesses Must Manage Them Together
New Jersey businesses must manage legal and reputational risk together because modern disputes play out on two fronts at once: the legal proceeding itself and the court of public opinion, where customers, employees, investors, and business partners often reach conclusions long before a judge or jury has had the opportunity to evaluate the facts. Success […]
Eviction Is Not Always the End: Understanding Post-Possession Rent Claims in New Jersey and New York
No. An eviction does not automatically end a tenant’s obligation to pay rent. Post-eviction rent claims are common because recovering possession resolves who has the right to occupy the premises, but it does not extinguish the tenant’s contractual obligations under the lease. Whether unpaid or future rent remains owed depends on three factors: the lease’s […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
