The arrest of Tigran Gambaryan, Binance‘s Head of Financial Crime Compliance, by Nigerian authorities in Feb 2024 highlights the increasing risks faced by compliance officers at major global corporations. Gambaryan, a former U.S. law enforcement officer with extensive experience in crypto-related investigations, now finds himself in a perilous legal battle, raising critical questions about the personal accountability of compliance executives. Background: Gambaryan’s career began in U.S. law enforcement, where he specialized in investigating financial crimes and played a key role in dismantling criminal marketplaces such as Silk Road and AlphaBay. After joining Binance in September 2021, he was tasked with strengthening the crypto exchange’s compliance and anti-money laundering frameworks. Despite his efforts to support international authorities, freezing over $2.2 billion in illicit assets, Gambaryan now faces charges in Nigeria related to money laundering and alleged regulatory violations by Binance. Read more about the Tigran Gambaryan Case here. His arrest underscores a troubling trend: compliance officers are increasingly being held personally accountable for their companies’ actions, particularly in industries like cryptocurrency where regulatory frameworks are still evolving. Jim Lee, Global Head of Capacity Building at Chainalysis and former Chief of the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, recently told Forbes that Gambaryan’s situation is deeply concerning. According to Lee, “Tigran is being unjustly held responsible for actions tied to Binance that were beyond his control as a compliance officer. It is troubling to see him punished for issues he had no involvement in.” Legal and Regulatory Context: The rise in personal accountability for compliance executives is part of a broader shift in regulatory enforcement. Regulators worldwide are cracking down on perceived corporate misconduct, particularly in industries prone to money laundering, fraud, or other financial crimes. In November 2023, Binance settled in the U.S. for $4.3 billion for violations of the Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Act. Changpeng Zhao (CZ), then-CEO of Binance, pled guilty and was sentenced to four months in prison. These regulatory actions demonstrate the severity of compliance failures in global companies, but they also raise questions about the extent to which individual executives like Gambaryan are responsible for corporate misconduct. Lee’s concerns are echoed by other compliance experts, who note that individuals in these roles must walk a tightrope. On the one hand, they are tasked with ensuring that the company complies with complex and ever-evolving regulatory requirements. On the other hand, they are often constrained by the internal culture and operational decisions of their companies, which may not always align with regulatory best practices. This situation is further complicated in cases like Binance, which maintains an offshore headquarters, making it more difficult for law enforcement authorities to enforce regulations or hold executives accountable. Increased Risk for Compliance Executives: Gambaryan’s case is not an isolated one. As global companies, especially in the tech and financial sectors, face more intense regulatory scrutiny, their executives are increasingly at risk of being held responsible for corporate missteps. A parallel can be drawn to the arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov in Paris, who is also being personally held responsible for the company’s alleged role in facilitating financial crimes. These cases illustrate the growing personal liability that compliance officers and executives face in today’s regulatory environment. Read more about the Telegram Case here. The arrest of Gambaryan has sparked diplomatic tensions between the U.S. and Nigeria. U.S. lawmakers have introduced resolutions calling for his release, and his continued detention has become a matter of international concern. His health has severely deteriorated during his detention, adding urgency to the situation. Conclusion: As the role of executives in general and compliance executives in particular grows more critical in global firms, so too does the personal risk they face. The arrest and detention of Tigran Gambaryan demonstrate the high stakes of these positions, particularly in industries subject to rapid regulatory change like cryptocurrency. While regulatory compliance remains essential, global companies must ensure that their compliance officers are not unjustly penalized for corporate misconduct that may be beyond their control. In Jim Lee’s words, “It is troubling to see compliance officers punished for actions they had no involvement in.” As regulatory bodies continue to escalate enforcement actions, executives’ personal liability must be carefully scrutinized to ensure a fair balance between corporate accountability and individual responsibility. Report Financial Wrongdoing If you have information about financial wrongdoing or compliance misconduct, please report it to us through Whistle42, our whistleblower system. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesLaw Enforcement Money LaunderingTagsBinanceChainalysisChangpeng ZhaoCZJim LeePavel Durov

The U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Whistleblower Program is undeniably effective and lucrative, but recent criticisms from two SEC Commissioners over the lack of transparency in awards raise significant concerns. With nearly $2 billion already paid out, it’s time for the SEC to address these transparency challenges to ensure that the program maintains its integrity. Key Points: SEC Whistleblower Program has awarded nearly $2 billion since 2011. Recent $122 million awards were criticized for their lack of transparency. Two SEC Commissioners have raised concerns over excessive redactions and lack of transparency. Legal specialization in whistleblower cases is on the rise, creating lucrative opportunities. Short Narrative: The SEC Whistleblower Program, launched in 2011, has evolved into a pivotal tool for exposing securities law violations. To date, the program has paid out nearly $2 billion in awards, drawing widespread attention from whistleblowers and lawyers alike. Yet, with the program’s growth comes recurring criticism over its lack of transparency, particularly regarding how awards are determined. On September 19, 2024, SEC Commissioners Hester M. Peirce and Mark T. Uyeda publicly criticized the excessive redactions in two large award determinations, highlighting the difficulty in scrutinizing the rationale behind such high payouts. This criticism is not new, but it underscores a growing concern about the balance between confidentiality and transparency in the award process. Actionable Insight: The SEC must address these transparency concerns before they erode public trust in the whistleblower program. Clear guidelines on how and why awards are determined are crucial for maintaining integrity. Moreover, the program should not become solely a billion-dollar business benefiting lawyers and whistleblowers without appropriate oversight. Compliance Insight: Whistleblower programs, particularly those as large as the SEC’s, need to strike a delicate balance between protecting whistleblowers and ensuring transparency. Without clarity on why certain awards are granted and in what amounts, the program risks manipulation and misaligned incentives. As whistleblower programs continue to expand, this transparency will become even more critical for public trust and accountability. In the US, law firms specialize in SEC whistleblower cases. The existence of these specialized firms and the large awards mentioned suggest that this has become a significant area of legal practice. Networks have already formed around the whistleblower program with these specialized law firms, and former SEC executives have also joined these law firms. Call for Information: If you have information about financial wrongdoing or information about specific awards of whistleblower prizes, please share it with us through the Whistleblower Program, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesSEC Whistleblower

The SEC has requested a court order to compel Elon Musk to testify about his $44 billion Twitter acquisition, investigating potential securities law violations. Musk’s legal team claims the SEC is harassing him, but the agency insists new evidence necessitates further questioning. This case highlights the growing scrutiny on executives’ use of social media to communicate material information. Key Points: The SEC has requested a federal judge compel Elon Musk to testify in an investigation related to his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter (now X). Musk allegedly failed to appear for scheduled testimony in September, despite agreeing to do so earlier. The investigation centers on whether Musk violated federal securities laws during his purchase of Twitter shares and his related public statements. Short Narrative: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is pushing for Elon Musk to provide further testimony regarding his acquisition of Twitter, now known as X. The agency is investigating whether Musk misled the market during the $44 billion deal and whether his SEC filings and public statements were compliant with securities laws. The SEC’s inquiry also ties back to a 2018 agreement that requires Musk to have certain tweets pre-approved, stemming from his infamous “funding secured” tweet about taking Tesla private. Musk’s legal team has accused the SEC of harassment, claiming that Musk has already been interviewed twice in the matter and alleging that the SEC had agreed not to seek further testimony. However, the SEC disputes these claims, insisting that new information has emerged since Musk’s previous interviews and that additional testimony is necessary. This legal battle is part of a broader, ongoing conflict between Musk and the SEC, raising questions about corporate executives’ responsibility to ensure transparency in their social media communications, especially when those statements could significantly impact markets. Compliance Insight: The SEC’s actions underline the importance of accurate disclosures and regulatory compliance, particularly for high-profile executives like Musk. The use of social media to make market-moving statements requires strict adherence to securities laws to avoid misleading investors. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how regulators handle public statements by executives on social media, further tightening disclosure requirements. Blow the Whistle: If you have any information about organizations or individuals violating compliance regulations, please share it with us via our whistleblower system, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesSEC tickerTagsElon MuskTwitterX

Alex Karp co-founded Palantir Technologies about 20 years ago with early backing from the CIA’s investment arm, In-Q-Tel. With one foot in the world of covert operations and another in the boardrooms of Fortune 500 companies, Palantir embodies the complex intersection of technology, privacy, and power. As Palantir ascends to the pantheon of the S&P 500, it carries with it the weight of controversy and the promise of revelation. Company Overview Palantir Technologies (website), founded in 2003 and headquartered in Denver, Colorado, is a leading software company specializing in big data analytics. The company’s name is inspired by the “seeing-stones” from J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings,” reflecting its mission to provide powerful data visualization and analysis tools. The key business areas are: Palantir Gotham: An intelligence and defense tool used by militaries and counter-terrorism analysts. Palantir Foundry: A platform for data integration and analysis used by corporate clients. Palantir Apollo: A continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) platform. Palantir‘s clientele spans government agencies, including the U.S. Intelligence Community and Department of Defense, as well as major corporations like Morgan Stanley, Airbus, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The Share Palantir reported second-quarter solid results for 2024, with revenue increasing 27% year-over-year to $678.13 million, exceeding analyst estimates. The company’s adjusted operating margins improved to 37% in Q2 2024, up from 25% a year ago. The company’s growth is primarily attributed to the high demand for its artificial intelligence platform, AIP. According to YCharts data, Palantir‘s market cap was $83.31 billion as of September 20, 2024 S&P Global announced on Sep 8, 2024, that Palantir will be added to the S&P 500 index starting on September 23, 2024. Following the announcement, Palantir‘s stock price surged by approximately 13-14% on the next trading day. The Individuals Alex Karp – Co-Founder and CEO Alex Karp, born and raised in Philadelphia, co-founded Palantir in 2003 with Peter Thiel and Stephen Cohen. Known for his unconventional approach, Karp’s leadership style emphasizes ethical considerations and social responsibility. His background in social theory informs his views on technology’s role in society and the need for stringent regulatory oversight in the tech industry. Alex Karp: In the past you shaped the world through ideas and words. I really came to believe now that the world will be shaped through the embodiment of ideas and words in software platforms. These platforms are so levered that in fact they will shape our life in a way that words used to. Karp is recognized for his hands-on involvement in employee well-being, including leading meditation sessions at the company. His personal commitment to practices like qigong and tai chi is reflected in Palantir‘s corporate culture, which values balance and mindfulness. According to Forbes, Karp’s net worth is estimated at $4 billion as of 2024. Peter Thiel – Co-Founder and Chairman Peter Thiel, a prominent figure in Silicon Valley, is another key co-founder of Palantir. While less involved in day-to-day operations, Thiel remains a significant shareholder and influential figure in the company’s strategic direction. Key Shareholders As of the latest available data: Individual Investors: The general public holds the largest stake, owning about 46-47% of shares. Institutional Investors: They own approximately 39-42% of shares. Vanguard Group: The largest institutional shareholder, owning about 8.8-9.4% of shares. BlackRock: The second-largest institutional shareholder, owning about 5.1-5.6% of shares. Peter Thiel: Co-founder and Chairman, owning about 5.3-10% of shares. Alex Karp: CEO and co-founder, owning about 2.48-2.5% of shares. Individual Insiders: Collectively owning about 13.4% of shares. Palantir’s inclusion in the S&P 500 marks a significant milestone for the company, reflecting its growth and increasing importance in the tech sector. With its focus on data analytics and AI-driven solutions, Palantir continues to play a crucial role in both government and commercial sectors, addressing complex data challenges in an increasingly digital world. Share Information: If you have information about interesting companies and their key people in the cyber environment, please share it with us through our whistleblower system, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCompanies Markets TechnologyTagsAlex KarpPalantirPalantir TechnologiesPeter Thiel

Elon Musk’s social network X has reversed its defiance of Brazil’s Supreme Court, complying with orders to remove accounts threatening the country’s democracy. After weeks of resisting, Musk’s sudden shift marks a significant victory for the Brazilian court and raises questions about how tech giants navigate content regulation worldwide. Key Points: Elon Musk’s social network X, blocked in Brazil for non-compliance, reverses its stance and begins following Supreme Court orders. X had been defying court orders for three weeks before complying, removing accounts deemed a threat to Brazil’s democracy. Brazil’s Supreme Court could lift the block on X within the next week, pending further documentation. Short Narrative: After three weeks of defiance, Elon Musk’s social network X has reversed its stance and complied with Brazil’s Supreme Court orders. Musk, who had previously vowed to resist what he called “illegal” censorship demands, now finds his company forced to take down accounts that the Court deemed a threat to Brazil’s democracy. X also paid fines and appointed a new formal representative in Brazil. This abrupt about-face marks a significant defeat for Musk’s advocacy of free speech and a victory for Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has been leading efforts to regulate online content in Brazil. The court had blocked X across Brazil last month after Musk refused to comply with its rulings. X’s sudden compliance follows the appointment of new lawyers in Brazil, signaling a shift in the company’s strategy. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the company’s steps, it demanded further documentation, delaying X’s potential return to the country. Compliance Insight: This case illustrates the power struggle between tech giants and national governments over content regulation. Musk’s compliance in Brazil, following similar concessions in India and Turkey, highlights how global legal frameworks can override even the staunchest free speech advocates. The blocking of X shows that nation-states can force compliance through legal and financial pressure, particularly in critical international markets like Brazil, where X has over 20 million users. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram invites anyone with knowledge of X’s operations and legal strategies in Brazil or other jurisdictions to come forward. Insight into how tech companies navigate compliance in different countries can help shed light on their broader strategies. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesBrazil Court CasesTagsAlexandre de MoraesElon MuskX

In a major strike against digital money laundering, German authorities have shut down 47 illegal exchange platforms used by cybercriminals to launder funds through anonymous cryptocurrency transactions. This operation has crippled key infrastructure in the global underground economy, seizing critical user and transaction data for ongoing investigations. Key Points: German law enforcement has shut down 47 illegal exchange services used for criminal activities, including money laundering and ransomware payments. The platforms allowed anonymous cryptocurrency exchanges without KYC (Know Your Customer) verification. Extensive user and transaction data have been secured for further investigations into cybercriminal networks. Short Narrative: In a law enforcement action against cybercrime, the German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) and the Public Prosecutor’s Central Office for Combating Internet Crime (ZIT) have dismantled 47 exchange services operating illegally in Germany. These platforms were widely used by cybercriminals, including ransomware groups, darknet dealers, and botnet operators, to launder proceeds of crime by anonymously exchanging cryptocurrencies without going through KYC verification. The exchange services enabled users to convert crypto assets quickly and anonymously, facilitating the introduction of illicit funds into the legal financial system. The operators of these platforms are now facing charges for money laundering and operating illegal trading platforms, violating key anti-money laundering laws. Among the most significant users of these platforms were organized cybercrime groups who utilized them to convert extorted ransom money into usable assets. This strike represents a substantial disruption of the financial infrastructure supporting the global underground economy. During the operation, the BKA secured vast amounts of user and transaction data, providing valuable leads for ongoing investigations into cybercrime networks. Compliance Insight: The takedown of these anonymous exchange services highlights the critical role of KYC/AML procedures in combating cybercrime. The lack of KYC compliance enabled criminals to launder large sums of illicit funds, demonstrating the need for stricter oversight of crypto exchanges. This action emphasizes the importance of regulatory measures in preventing platforms from becoming tools for criminal networks. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram urges insiders or anyone with information about similar illegal exchange platforms or their users to come forward. Your insights could aid in further dismantling the infrastructure that supports global cybercrime. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesMoney Laundering ticker

Italian authorities have seized nearly €75 million in assets from the estate of Fiat legend Gianni Agnelli, as part of an ongoing investigation into tax evasion. The probe alleges that Agnelli’s wife, Marella Caracciolo, falsely claimed Swiss residency to avoid Italian inheritance taxes, despite evidence showing she lived in Italy from 2010. The seizure, executed by the Financial Police, is part of an ongoing investigation into alleged tax fraud and fraud against the State. Key Points: Italian authorities have announced the seizure of €74.8 million of assets from the inheritance of Fiat legend Gianni Agnelli amid accusations of tax evasion. The investigation targets Agnelli’s heirs, including John Elkann’s siblings, Lapo and Ginevra, and Swiss notary Urs von Grünigen. Juventus president Gianluca Ferrero is also under investigation, but all individuals maintain the presumption of innocence. Preliminary estimates suggest €42.8 million in evaded income tax and €32 million in evaded inheritance and gift taxes on an estate valued at over €800 million. Margherita Agnelli de Pahlen, Gianni Agnelli‘s only surviving child, is locked in a civil dispute over the inheritance with her own children. Short Narrative: Italian prosecutors in Turin have seized nearly €75 million from the inheritance of former Fiat CEO Gianni Agnelli as part of an ongoing investigation into tax evasion. Authorities allege that Agnelli’s wife, Marella Caracciolo, who passed away in 2019, falsely claimed to reside in Switzerland to avoid Italian inheritance and tax laws, despite evidence suggesting she lived in Italy from 2010. The investigation extends to several prominent figures, including Agnelli’s grandchildren, Lapo and Ginevra Elkann, and Juventus president Gianluca Ferrero. The case has sparked significant legal battles within the Agnelli family. Margherita Agnelli de Pahlen, Gianni Agnelli’s only surviving child, is engaged in a civil lawsuit against her own children, further complicating the family’s financial legacy. Despite the ongoing investigation, all parties involved are entitled to the presumption of innocence. Compliance Insight: This case highlights the complexity of tax compliance for high-net-worth individuals and family estates, particularly when dealing with cross-border assets and residency claims. The alleged use of false residency declarations to circumvent inheritance taxes underscores the importance of transparency and adherence to tax laws. Wealthy families and their advisors must ensure full compliance with both national and international tax regulations to avoid legal repercussions. Blow the Whistle: If you have any information about financial wrongdoing, tax evasion, or money laundering, please share it with us via our whistleblower system, Whistle42. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesFinTelegram

In the U.S., two individuals, Malone Lam and Jeandiel Serrano, have been arrested and charged with stealing over $230 million in cryptocurrency and laundering the funds through a complex web of mixers, peel chains, and VPNs. This case, led by the FBI and IRS-CI, shines a spotlight on the increasing sophistication of cybercriminals operating in the digital asset space. Key Points: Malone Lam (aka “Anne Hathaway” and “$$$”) and Jeandiel Serrano (aka “VersaceGod” and “@SkidStar”) were charged with conspiracy to steal and launder over $230 million in cryptocurrency. Lam and Serrano used sophisticated techniques, including mixers, peel chains, and VPNs, to launder stolen funds. They spent the proceeds on luxury items and travel across Los Angeles and Miami. The FBI and IRS-CI led the investigation, resulting in arrests in Florida and California. Short Narrative: On September 19, 2024, a U.S. federal indictment was unsealed, charging Malone Lam, 20, of Miami and Los Angeles, and Jeandiel Serrano, 21, of Los Angeles, with orchestrating a $230 million cryptocurrency theft and laundering scheme. Lam, who used online aliases “Anne Hathaway” and “$$$,” and Serrano, known as “VersaceGod” and “@SkidStar,” allegedly hacked into victim cryptocurrency accounts, transferring large sums of Bitcoin into their control. The duo then laundered the stolen funds through a web of peel chains, mixers, and pass-through wallets, hiding their identities through VPNs. The laundered funds were spent lavishly on luxury cars, nightclubs, designer goods, and rental properties in Miami and Los Angeles. Their scheme, which started in August 2024, defrauded a Washington, D.C. victim of over 4,100 Bitcoin (worth over $230 million at the time). The arrests were made in coordination with the FBI and IRS-Criminal Investigation teams in Washington, D.C., with operational support from their Los Angeles and Miami field offices. Compliance Insight: This case highlights the critical need for advanced monitoring of cryptocurrency transactions and the use of AML/KYC procedures by exchanges. Criminals continue to exploit decentralized networks and anonymizing technologies like mixers and VPNs to evade detection. As cryptocurrency theft and laundering schemes become more sophisticated, regulators and financial institutions must remain vigilant in tracking illicit activities. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram invites insiders with information about cryptocurrency laundering schemes or any operations involving peel chains, mixers, and VPNs to come forward. Your insights could help uncover further networks involved in laundering digital assets. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCourt Cases Crypto Schemes US DOJTagsJeandiel SerranoMalone Sam

Swiss regulator FINMA has seized $15 million from Geneva-based private bank Mirabaud & Cie for serious breaches of financial market law and money-laundering obligations. The bank failed to conduct proper due diligence on a deceased businessman accused of tax evasion, managing up to $1.7 billion in assets linked to him. Despite Mirabaud‘s efforts to keep the case private, a Swiss court has now made it public. Key Points: The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority FINMA has found that Mirabaud & Cie breached its anti-money laundering obligations and seriously violated financial market law. The bank managed assets of up to USD 1.7 billion for a deceased businessman identified by Hubbis as the U.S. national Robert Brockman. FINMA confiscated CHF 12.7 million of unlawfully generated profits in favor of the Swiss Federal Treasury and opened three proceedings against individuals. Pending full implementation of the measures ordered and restoration of compliance with the law, FINMA has prohibited the bank from accepting any new clients with increased money laundering risks. Short Narrative: Swiss financial regulator FINMA has imposed a significant penalty on Geneva-based private bank Mirabaud & Cie, seizing CHF 12.7 million in unlawfully generated profits. The case centers around Mirabaud’s business relationships with companies and financial structures linked to the deceased U.S. businessman Robert Brockman. In October 2020, Brockman was indicted in the U.S. on 39 counts of tax evasion, wire fraud, money laundering, and other offenses. Brockman died in August 2022 at the age of 81 before his case could go to trial. He was accused of hiding over $2 billion in income from the IRS over a 20-year period using secret offshore accounts, encrypted communications, and false documents. It was allegedly the largest tax evasion case in American history. Despite managing up to $1.7 billion in assets for this client, Mirabaud failed to conduct sufficient checks on these transactions. This case, concluded in 2023, highlights Mirabaud’s shortcomings in AML compliance. FINMA also mandated that Mirabaud review and re-document high-risk transactions from 2018 to 2022. The bank had attempted to keep the case private, but a Swiss court ruled it could be made public. While Mirabaud claims to have improved its compliance and risk management processes, the regulator’s findings underscore the need for heightened vigilance in preventing financial crimes. Compliance Insight: This case highlights the importance of robust AML/KYC measures, particularly for private banks handling high-net-worth clients and complex financial structures. Mirabaud’s failure to sufficiently scrutinize its client relationships and transactions allowed the facilitation of illicit activity, resulting in significant regulatory consequences. Private banks must implement stringent compliance policies to mitigate the risks of money laundering and protect the integrity of the financial system. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram urges insiders to come forward with information about Mirabaud’s past or current compliance failures. We are particularly interested in details about the bank’s relationships with high-risk clients and any gaps in its AML protocols. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesMoney Laundering Tax Crime tickerTagsMirabaudMirabaud & CieRobert Brockman

Sam Bankman-Fried’s legal team has filed an appeal to overturn his 25-year sentence, arguing that his trial was tainted by bias and public pressure. The appeal claims that crucial evidence, including the solvency of FTX, was withheld from the jury. However, legal experts consulted by CoinDesk are skeptical about the chances of success, given the high bar for overturning such convictions. Lesson to be learned: bankruptcies are dangerous for all concerned. Key Points: SBF’s new legal team, led by Alexandra Shapiro, has filed an appeal to overturn his 25-year sentence. The appeal argues SBF was unfairly treated during his trial, with claims of bias from both prosecutors and the judge. CoinDesk consulted legal experts who are skeptical of the chances for a retrial, citing the high bar for overturning convictions. Short Narrative: Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), founder of the collapsed FTX, is seeking to overturn his conviction on seven counts of fraud and conspiracy related to the exchange’s downfall. His new legal team, led by Alexandra Shapiro, filed an appeal with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, claiming SBF was unfairly convicted due to public pressure and a biased legal process. Shapiro argues that the jury was not presented with key evidence, including the claim that FTX had enough assets to repay customers and that the platform was not insolvent. SBF has long maintained that the bankruptcy was unnecessary and that FTX’s assets, including investments in companies like AI startup Anthropic, were sufficient to cover liabilities. However, legal experts contacted by CoinDesk express doubt that the appeal will succeed, given the high legal standard for overturning a trial outcome. They also point out that Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who presided over the trial, is known for being impartial and fair. The timing of the appeal is notable, coming just after Caroline Ellison’s sentencing memo, where U.S. prosecutors refrained from recommending jail time for her role in the FTX collapse. This contrasts sharply with SBF’s 25-year sentence, and his defense team may hope the public and courts will reassess the case as news emerges of FTX customers being repaid. Compliance Insight: The first lesson that every entrepreneur (including those in the crypto segment) should learn is that criminal consequences often accompany bankruptcies. As in the case of SBF. The appeal underscores the importance of ensuring fairness and impartiality in high-profile trials, particularly in the complex world of cryptocurrency. Courts must ensure that evidence—especially in cases involving financial crimes—is thoroughly examined, and all relevant facts are presented to the jury. The arguments put forth by SBF’s legal team highlight the need for balanced consideration of both sides, even when public sentiment is overwhelmingly against the defendant. However, the burden on appeals courts to prove judicial misconduct or bias is exceptionally high, which explains the skepticism surrounding SBF’s chances for success. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram invites insiders or legal professionals with insights into the appeal process of Sam Bankman-Fried or the collapse of FTX to come forward. Information about key individuals, evidence handling, or the bankruptcy process would be valuable as this case unfolds. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesFinTelegram

Connectum, once a key player in facilitating payments for cybercrime organizations, has seemingly vanished after voluntarily restricting its business operations following FCA audits. The payment institution, now controlled by Cambodian PEP Sokha Heng, stopped offering services as of May 22, 2024, and its email address is no longer functional—raising concerns about the company’s current status. Connectum is wanted by fund recovery organization EFRI for victim compensation payments. Key Points: Connectum, an FCA-regulated payment institution, voluntarily restricts business operations as of May 22, 2024. Change of ownership structure: Cambodian Sokha Heng, a politically exposed person (PEP), now controls over 75% of the company. Connectum historically facilitated payments for cybercrime organizations, including Gal Barak’s E&G Bulgaria. Short Narrative: Connectum’s deep involvement in laundering millions of dollars for fraud schemes, including those run by convicted Israeli cybercriminal Gal Barak, underscores the importance of robust compliance in the cyberfinance space. FinTelegram continues to investigate Connectum and its links to Walletto, another financial institution involved in questionable activities. Founded in 2014 by Latvian Edgars Lasmanis, Connectum was massively involved in facilitating payment processing for fraudulent Israeli brokerages and cybercrime organizations, most notably the criminal enterprise led by Gal Barak. As a payment processor, Connectum played a critical role in laundering millions of dollars in fraudulent proceeds, transferring them to offshore accounts between 2017 and 2019. Under Lasmanis’ leadership, Connectum maintained bank accounts with Deutsche Handelsbank and Latvia’s JSC Rietumu Banka, enabling these illegal transactions. In October 2020, Sokha Heng from Cambodia, the wife of former Secretary of State Ing Bun Hoaw, acquired more than 75% of Connectum, as reported by the UK Companies House. Despite the change in ownership, the business continued to thrive, reporting a turnover of GBP 33.7 million with a profit of GBP 7.5 million for the year ending March 31, 2023 (screenshot left). However, following discussions with the FCA in May 2024, Connectum entered into a voluntary commitment to cease offering regulated payment services and began refunding customer funds. Wanted by EFRI The European Fund Recovery Initiative (EFRI) aims to hold Connectum and its executives accountable for the financial harm inflicted on the victims of its fraudulent clients. Elfriede Sixt asserts that there is clear evidence indicating that Connectum was fully aware of the illicit activities conducted by its clients. Despite this knowledge, Connectum knowingly processed transactions and facilitated the laundering of funds paid by these victims. This highlights a severe lapse in compliance and raises serious concerns about the institution’s adherence to AML/KYC standards. Compliance Insight: Edgars Lasmanis, the founder of Connectum, also established Walletto, an e-money institution (EMI)regulated by the Bank of Lithuania. Walletto, a VISA principal member, offers payment card services and acts as an acquirer. Recent investigations by FinTelegram revealed that Walletto facilitated payments for RoboForex, an offshore broker illegally offering services in the EEA. This raises concerns about Walletto’s compliance with identity verification and transaction monitoring procedures. For the fast-growing cyberfinance sector, it is crucial that payment processors and financial institutions like Connectum and Walletto implement robust AML/KYC protocols to prevent money laundering and the facilitation of illegal operations. Weak compliance measures can result in significant regulatory consequences and pose risks to the integrity of the financial system. Key Data Trading nameConnectumBusiness activitiesHigh-risk payment processorVisa and MasterCard AcquirerDomainhttps://connectum.euLegal entityConnectum LimitedJurisdictionUnited KingdomAuthorizationFCA (reference no 624117)Related individualsEdgars Lasmanis (former director and owner)Sokha Heng (controlling person)Dmitry GololobovIvan LeonidovPhilip ZimmerConnected schemesHawex, HoneyPayEnforcement actionsVoluntary restriction after FCA audit Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram invites insiders to come forward with information on Connectum, Walletto, or their key individuals. We are particularly interested in details regarding their AML/KYC procedures, high-risk clientele, and any connections to illegal schemes. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesEFRI FCA Money Laundering tickerTagsConnectumDeutsche HandelsbankDmitry GololobovEdgars LasmanisGal BarakHawexHoneyPayIng Bun HoawIvan LeonidovPhilip ZimmerRietumu BankaSokha Heng

In a coordinated international crackdown, authorities have dismantled the Ghost encrypted communication platform, which criminal organizations had used for activities including drug trafficking, money laundering, and violent crime. Over 50 arrests were made globally, and drugs, cash, and encrypted devices were significantly seized. Europol led the operation, which involved law enforcement from nine countries. Key Points: Over 50 arrests were made globally in the dismantling of the Ghost encrypted communication platform. Ghost platforms are used for serious crimes, including drug trafficking, money laundering, and violent offenses. Massive seizures of drugs, cash, and encrypted devices in coordinated international operations across Ireland, Australia, Italy, and Canada. Significant Irish law enforcement action leads to arrests and seizures of €15.2 million worth of cocaine and multiple encrypted devices. Short Narrative: In a major international law enforcement operation coordinated by Europol and Eurojust, authorities dismantled the Ghost platform, a secure communication network favored by criminal organizations for its advanced encryption features. The platform enabled illegal activities, including drug trafficking and money laundering, while offering features like message self-destruction to evade detection. Over 50 individuals have been arrested across multiple countries, with significant seizures of drugs, cash, and encrypted devices. In Ireland, the Gardaí led an extensive operation that targeted four organized crime groups, resulting in the seizure of €15.2 million in cocaine, 42 Ghost ECC encrypted devices, and over €300,000 in cash. Actionable Insight: The term “Ghost platform” refers to an encrypted communication network designed to facilitate cybercrime and serious organized crime. Ghost platforms allow users to communicate securely, evade forensic analysis, and coordinate criminal activities without leaving behind digital traces. These platforms employ multiple layers of encryption and message self-destruction mechanisms, making it difficult for law enforcement to intercept communications. Criminal organizations rely on such platforms to orchestrate illegal operations, including drug trafficking, money laundering, and violent crimes, often across borders. The dismantling of Ghost is a significant blow to transnational crime groups that depend on such encryption tools to evade law enforcement. Compliance Insight: In combating cybercrime and illegal activities, especially those facilitated by encrypted communication networks, it is essential for businesses, particularly in the technology and payment processing sectors, to implement rigorous Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures. High-risk schemes like Ghost platforms thrive on anonymity and non-compliance. By adopting strict AML/KYC measures, companies can help prevent the facilitation of illegal activities, from money laundering to terrorism financing. Cooperation with law enforcement is critical to identifying and dismantling these networks before they expand their operations. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram urges insiders with knowledge about the Ghost platform, its resellers, and key individuals involved in its operation to come forward. Information regarding the platform’s network, its users, and financial facilitators can help law enforcement continue to dismantle the remaining operations. Individuals with insight into similar encrypted platforms used by organized crime are encouraged to provide intelligence that may assist in the global fight against cybercrime. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesFinTelegram

Anything is possible in Cyprus. Especially when it comes to cyber finance and illegal gambling and financial platforms. Cyprus was the global hub for illegal and fraudulent binary options. Providers of crypto services have also found a home there. The island is also home to the Dream Hill real estate company, which now offers the purchase of apartments via cryptocurrencies. The partner for this is CryptoProcessing. Here is the most important thing in Telegram style. Key Points: Cyprus-based real estate developer Dream Hill now supports cryptocurrency payments. CryptoProcessing, operated by CoinsPaid facilitates these transactions. CryptoProcessing is massively involved in high-risk sectors, including illegal online casinos, as revealed by FinTelegram. CryptoProcessing claims to process over €800 million in crypto monthly. Short Narrative: Dream Hill, a Cyprus-based real estate firm, has partnered with CryptoProcessing by CoinsPaid to enable cryptocurrency payments for property purchases. CryptoProcessing is a sister scheme of CoinsPaid, both run under the leadership of Ukrainian CEO Max Krupyshev and the Austrian Alexander Horst Riedinger. These schemes are operated via companies based in Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland, with Krupyshev holding his shares through Cyprus-based Skylock Investments Ltd. As reported by FinTelegram, CryptoProcessing has been heavily involved in facilitating payments for illegal online casinos, raising significant concerns about its operations. Due to its involvement in the high-risk and illegal gambling sectors, the cyber rating agency PayRate42 has placed CryptoProcessing on its Orange Compliance list. Go to the CryptoProcessing profile on PayRate42. Background Information: CoinsPaid and CryptoProcessing are operated through legal entities with “Dream” in their names, including Dream Finance OÜ in Estonia, Dream Finance UAB in Lithuania, and Dream Payments Sp. z o.o. in Poland. Interestingly, the Cyprus-based real estate firm involved in this partnership is named Dream Hill, suggesting a potential connection between these entities. While it is not yet confirmed whether the owners of CryptoProcessing and CoinsPaid are also behind Dream Hill, the naming similarities raise questions about possible links between the companies. This is supported by the fact that the address of Krupyshev’s Skylock Investments Ltd is the same as that of Dream Hill Ltd: on the 3rd floor of the Magnum Business Center in Limassol. Savvas Savva‘s Revera Corporate Services Ltd (website) is also located there. He is also a director of Dream Hill. Additionally, 2Plus Audit Ltd (website), another company of Savva, is located in 3rd floor of the business center. It’s a small world, indeed. Or maybe it’s only a coincidence. Further investigation is needed to determine if there is a shared ownership structure or a deeper relationship between the real estate and payment processing operations. Compliance Insight: The press release states that the first crypto transactions with apartments have already been made and that the necessary AML/KYC checks have been applied. Hopefully, with more care than CryptoProcessing takes with its customers in the illegal casino operator segment. The first transactions have already taken place. After all necessary AML checks on the buyer and the seller, CryptoProcessing facilitated the transaction, accepting cryptocurrency from their accounts and delivering Dream Hill with a usual EUR transfer to their bank account (Source: press release) For payment processors, particularly those dealing with high-risk sectors like CryptoProcessing, adhering to proper Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) policies is critical. Failure to do so opens the door to the facilitation of illegal activities, including money laundering and the movement of illicit funds. Real estate firms and other businesses using crypto payment processors must ensure their partners comply with global AML/KYC standards to protect themselves from regulatory scrutiny and legal repercussions. Blow the Whistle: FinTelegram urges insiders with knowledge of CoinsPaid, CryptoProcessing, and their key figures, such as Max Krupyshev and Alexander Horst Riedinger, to come forward. We seek detailed information regarding their operations, involvement in illegal businesses, and activities in the high-risk payment processing sector. Any information could help expose the risks posed by these schemes. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCrypto Payments tickerTags2Plus AuditAlexander Horst RiedingerCoinsPaidCryptoprocessingDream FinanceDream HillDream PaymentsMax Krupyshev

Disgraced Vietnamese real estate tycoon Truong My Lan and 33 associates are facing fresh money laundering charges in a month-long trial after orchestrating one of the largest fraud schemes in Vietnam’s history, with over 36,000 victims impacted. The ongoing anti-corruption drive has targeted high-profile individuals across sectors, with Lan’s case being a centerpiece of this effort. Key Points: Truong My Lan, Vietnamese property tycoon and chair of Van Thinh Phat, is on trial for money laundering and cross-border cash trafficking. Previously sentenced to death for $27 billion fraud involving Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB). Over 36,000 victims were identified in SCB fraud; protests erupt in Hanoi. Allegations of $1.5 billion transferred abroad, $3 billion received from overseas. Trial expected to last one month in Ho Chi Minh City. Read our reports on Truong My Lan here. Short Narrative: Truong My Lan, head of Van Thinh Phat, faces new charges of money laundering in connection with her previous conviction for defrauding SCB of $27 billion. Along with 33 co-defendants, she is accused of illegally transferring $1.5 billion abroad and laundering funds via fake contracts and debt settlements. The trial follows nationwide protests from victims demanding their stolen funds back, with accusations that Lan funneled billions through SCB between 2018 and 2022. Lan’s conviction and death penalty for embezzling $12.5 billion in April 2024 remain under appeal. Actionable Insight: Monitor this trial closely for developments, especially regarding cross-border financial movements and potential exposure to international sanctions or asset recovery efforts. Investigate potential overseas financial institutions involved in receiving the laundered funds. Blow the Whistle If you have any information about money laundering activities or compliance failures by financial institutions and payment processors, please share it with FinTelegram. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCorruption Court Cases Money Laundering tickerTagsSaigon Commercial BankSCBTruong My LanVan Thin Phat

The SEC’s case against the crypto DeFi firm Rari Capital is a clear warning that DeFi platforms offering unregistered securities and misleading investors will face regulatory consequences, regardless of their claims of autonomy or decentralization. Rari Capital offered two investment products, which functioned like crypto asset investment funds, allowing investors to deposit crypto assets in lending pools. Key Points Rari Capital and its co-founders, Jai Bhavnani, Jack Lipstone, and David Lucid, have been charged by the SEC for misleading investors and acting as unregistered brokers. The charges relate to two crypto investment platforms that once held over $1 billion in assets. Rari Capital also conducted unregistered securities offerings tied to its crypto investment pools and governance token, RGT. Short Narrative The SEC has filed charges against the founders of Rari Capital, a DeFi platform, for misleading investors and engaging in unregistered broker activities. Rari offered two products, the Earn and Fuse pools, which functioned as crypto asset investment funds. Investors were promised high yields through these pools, but the SEC found that many investors actually lost money, while the automatic rebalancing of assets often required manual intervention, contrary to Rari’s claims. Additionally, Rari Capital conducted unregistered offerings of its governance token (RGT) and sold interests in these pools without proper registration. The SEC has also charged Rari Capital Infrastructure LLC, which took over operations in 2022, for continuing these unregistered activities. Compliance Insight The case highlights how labeling a DeFi platform as “decentralized” or “autonomous” does not exempt it from U.S. securities laws. The SEC continues to scrutinize the economic realities behind crypto products, holding individuals and companies accountable for misleading investors and violating federal securities laws. Call for Information FinTelegram encourages insiders, compliance officers, and market participants to report any similar cases of unregistered broker activity or misleading practices in the crypto industry. Your insights can help protect investors and maintain the integrity of the DeFi space. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCrypto Schemes SECTagsDavid LucidJack LipstoneJai BhavnaniRari Capital

The CFTC’s crackdown on Polymarket and other offshore crypto platforms signals a new phase of enforcement in the prediction market space, where the intersection of derivatives and elections raises complex compliance challenges. With over $930 million in bets placed on Polymarket’s “2024 Presidential Election Winner” market, regulators are taking notice. Key Points The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is intensifying its scrutiny of Polymarket (website) and other offshore crypto betting platforms offering derivatives contracts to U.S. customers. CFTC Chair Rostin Behnam has warned that any platform with a significant U.S. footprint must register its derivative contracts or face enforcement actions. Polymarket previously settled with the CFTC for $1.4 million in 2022 for offering unregistered binary options. Short Narrative As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, the CFTC is sharpening its focus on crypto-based prediction markets like Polymarket. Platforms offering derivatives contracts to U.S. customers must operate within the bounds of the law or risk penalties, according to CFTC Chair Rostin Behnam. Speaking at the Georgetown Psaros Center for Financial Markets, Behnam made it clear that the CFTC would use its civil enforcement authority to stop illegal activities. Polymarket, which settled with the CFTC in 2022, has already drawn attention for hosting event-based binary options without registration. With over $930 million in bets placed on Polymarket’s “2024 Presidential Election Winner” market, regulators are taking notice. The growing popularity of these blockchain-based betting platforms has made them a target for regulation as election-related activity surges. Compliance Insight The CFTC’s warning signals a broader regulatory push against unregistered offshore platforms that operate in the U.S. market without following proper derivatives regulations. In this climate of heightened scrutiny, crypto betting platforms must ensure compliance with U.S. laws to avoid enforcement actions. The case of Kalshi, where the CFTC overstepped its authority, highlights the delicate legal framework in regulating blockchain-based prediction markets. Call for Information FinTelegram urges insiders, compliance officers, and market participants to share information about crypto betting platforms or prediction markets that may be offering unregistered derivatives contracts. Your insights are critical in helping regulators enforce compliance in the rapidly evolving digital finance space. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCFTCTagsPolymarketRostin Behnam

SEC and DOJ cracked down on fraudulent financial reporting at the tech company Kubient. The company’s top executives were misleading investors about revenue, which was central to raising millions. Former CEO Paul Roberts faces up to 20 years for orchestrating this scheme. Kubient is a digital advertising technology whose shares were publicly traded on the Nasdaq between August 2020 and November 2023 under the ticker “KBNT.” Key Points Paul D. Roberts, former CEO of Kubient, along with Joshua A. Weiss (former CFO) and Grainne M. Coen (former audit committee chair), charged by the SEC for fraud and misleading auditors in a scheme related to falsified revenue reports during Kubient’s public stock offerings. Kubient overstated $1.3 million in fraudulent revenue connected to a proprietary ad fraud detection software, misleading investors and auditors. In a parallel DOJ case, Paul Roberts pled guilty to securities fraud and faces sentencing in December 2024. Short Narrative Former executives of Kubient, including CEO Paul Roberts, CFO Joshua Weiss, and audit chair Grainne Coen, are embroiled in a legal storm for orchestrating a fraud scheme that misrepresented $1.3 million in revenue. This fake revenue, generated by falsified reports on Kubient’s AI ad fraud detection tool, allowed the company to mislead investors during two public stock offerings, raising $33 million. Roberts, along with Weiss and Coen, allegedly lied to Kubient’s auditors, perpetuating the fraudulent scheme by manipulating financial data and issuing false reports. The SEC has filed charges for fraud, and in a parallel case, Roberts has already pled guilty to securities fraud, facing up to 20 years in prison. Compliance Insight This case serves as a case in point for the critical role of auditors and corporate governance in preventing financial misconduct. The failure of Kubient’s CFO and audit committee chair to act on the fraudulent activity highlights the risks of internal compliance breakdowns. For companies in the tech and digital advertising sectors, ensuring accurate financial reporting is vital to maintaining investor trust and legal compliance. Call for Information FinTelegram encourages insiders and whistleblowers within tech firms to share any information regarding fraudulent financial practices or misleading revenue reports. Your insights are essential to preventing further corporate fraud. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesSEC US DOJTagsGrainne M CoenJoshua A WeissKubientPaul D Roberts

Regulators in the EU are steadily increasing pressure on U.S. tech companies, hitting them with billions in fines for antitrust violations and data privacy breaches. This regulatory offensive is reshaping how these companies operate, especially as new laws like the DMA and DSA come into play. While the U.S. has also taken action against tech giants, the largest monetary penalties have come from European regulators. Key Points In the last three years, U.S. tech giants have faced substantial fines from European regulators, mainly due to violations of data privacy, antitrust, and consumer protection laws. Major companies like Google, Meta (Facebook), Amazon, and Apple have been hit with multi-billion-euro penalties. The EU’s stringent regulatory framework, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), is reshaping how these tech companies operate within the European market. Summary of Recent Penalties Imposed on U.S. Tech Companies Google Fines: €4.1 billion (2022) for antitrust violations related to its Android operating system, following a ruling by the EU Court of Justice. Google was accused of forcing manufacturers to pre-install Google apps on Android devices, thereby abusing its dominant market position and limiting competition. Fines: €1.49 billion (2019) for AdSense practices, where Google imposed restrictive clauses preventing third-party websites from running ads from competitors. This remains the EU’s largest antitrust fine to date. Fines: €2,4 billion (2017) for how it favored its own shopping search results over rival services. Read about a recent court win against Google regarding an EU fine. Meta (Facebook) Fines: €1.2 billion (2023) for violations of the GDPR in transferring EU user data to the U.S. without proper safeguards. This is the largest GDPR fine to date. Fines: €265 million (2022) for a data leak that exposed the personal information of over 533 million users. Meta failed to implement adequate security measures to protect user data, violating GDPR rules. Fines: €405 million (2022) for Instagram’s handling of children’s data, where it was found that personal data of minors was being made public. Amazon Fines: €746 million (2021) for GDPR violations related to targeted advertising without proper user consent. Reason: Regulators found that Amazon had breached privacy laws by failing to obtain valid consent from EU citizens before processing their data for personalized ads. Apple Fines: $14.8 billion (2016) The European Commission ordered Apple to pay $14.8 billion to Ireland for illegal tax benefits. While technically not an antitrust fine, this was a massive penalty related to state aid rules. Fines: €1.2 billion (2020) for anti-competitive practices in France. Apple was found guilty of creating price-fixing schemes with distributors, unfairly dominating the supply chain to disadvantage competition. Compliance Insight: Key EU Regulations Targeting U.S. Tech Giants The European Union has established a comprehensive legal framework aimed at regulating the activities of Big Tech companies and protecting consumer rights. The GDPR and DMA are the cornerstone regulations that are reshaping how tech companies operate. 1. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) The GDPR, which took effect in 2018, regulates the processing of personal data within the EU. It imposes strict conditions on how companies collect, store, and process data, requiring transparent user consent and strong data security measures. Companies can be fined up to 4% of their global revenue for violations. Major U.S. companies have been penalized for failing to comply with data transfer rules, mishandling user data, and improper consent mechanisms. 2. Digital Markets Act (DMA) Adopted in 2022, the DMA seeks to prevent large tech companies, referred to as “gatekeepers,” from abusing their market dominance. It imposes restrictions on anti-competitive practices such as forcing developers to use specific payment systems, self-preferencing of products, and unfair advertising practices. Failure to comply can lead to fines of up to 10% of global revenue or even a breakup of business units. 3. Digital Services Act (DSA) The DSA, set to come into full effect in 2024, focuses on the responsibility of online platforms to monitor and control illegal content, fake news, and harmful material. It enforces greater transparency around algorithms and advertising and requires platforms to conduct risk assessments to ensure user safety. How EU Regulators are Pushing Back Against U.S. Tech Dominance EU regulators have aggressively targeted U.S. tech companies with increasing scrutiny and penalties in an effort to curb monopolistic behavior and protect consumer privacy. By leveraging a strict regulatory framework, European authorities are setting the standard for Big Tech accountability, often leading to global ramifications. This regulatory pressure is forcing companies to alter their business models, strengthen compliance programs, and allocate significant resources toward data privacy and consumer protection. These actions reflect the EU’s resolve to rein in the dominance of tech giants, ensuring a level playing field in the digital economy and reinforcing the sovereignty of European legal standards over global tech operations. Call for Information FinTelegram invites insiders, compliance officers, and whistleblowers to provide further insights into compliance lapses or regulatory violations by tech companies operating in the European market. Your insights could shed light on ongoing abuses or inefficiencies in enforcement. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesCompliance Regulatory CasesTagsAmazonAppleGoogleMETA

Google’s legal win against the €1.49 billion fine sets a new precedent in Big Tech’s battle with EU regulators, but the scrutiny is far from over as antitrust challenges mount on multiple fronts. Last week, the EU’s top court upheld a fine of €2.42 billion imposed on Google for abusing its dominant position by favoring its comparison shopping service. The war of EU regulators against the dominating U.S. tech companies is far from over. Key Points The EU General Court has annulled the €1.49 billion ($1.66 billion) fine imposed on Google by the European Commission over its AdSense advertising practices. The court ruled that the European Commission “committed errors” in its assessment of Google’s contracts and failed to prove that Google’s actions deterred innovation, strengthened its market dominance, or harmed consumers. Google changed the contracts in question back in 2016, before the Commission’s decision. Short Narrative In a significant legal victory for Google, the EU General Court overturned the European Commission’s €1.49 billion fine, originally imposed for anti-competitive practices related to Google’s AdSense business. The Commission had accused Google of including exclusivity clauses in contracts with third-party websites, preventing them from displaying competitors’ ads. However, the General Court found that the Commission made errors in assessing the scope and impact of these clauses, ruling that the Commission failed to demonstrate that Google’s practices harmed the market or consumers. This ruling marks a rare setback for EU competition chief Margrethe Vestager, who has been a formidable figure in regulating Big Tech. The ruling can be appealed to the EU’s highest court, the Court of Justice, but only on points of law. Compliance Insight While this ruling represents a win for Google, the tech giant remains under intense scrutiny. Just last week, it lost a final challenge against a €2.42 billion fine related to its comparison shopping service. Meanwhile, Google is also facing antitrust challenges in the U.S., where the Department of Justice is pursuing allegations of monopoly in internet display ads, and in the UK, where regulators accuse Google of abusing its dominance in the digital ad market. The EU has not ruled out breaking up Google as a potential remedy for its ongoing competition issues. This case underscores the high stakes for tech companies navigating global antitrust regulations. Call for Information FinTelegram invites whistleblowers and insiders to share information on Google’s competitive practices in the digital ad market. How are exclusivity agreements impacting competition, and are there ongoing practices that could further harm the market? Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesEU Court of Justice tickerTagsGoogle

Auditor firm Prager Metis’s negligence in auditing FTX stripped investors of crucial protections, ultimately exposing them to the collapse of one of the biggest crypto frauds in history. The firm agreed to pay $1.95 million to settle charges related to the FTX audits and separate auditor independence violations. The U.S. SEC’s action underscores auditors’ vital role as financial gatekeepers. Key Points Audit firm Prager Metis (website) agrees to pay $1.95 million to settle SEC charges over negligent audits of FTX and violations of auditor independence rules. Prager issued false audit reports for FTX, claiming compliance with GAAS, but failed to assess the risks linked to FTX and Alameda Research. The firm is now required to undergo remedial actions, including hiring an independent consultant to review its auditing policies. Short Narrative Audit firm Prager Metis has settled with the SEC for $1.95 million following allegations of negligence in its audits of the collapsed crypto exchange FTX. According to the SEC, Prager issued two audit reports between 2021 and 2022 that falsely claimed compliance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS). Prager failed to recognize the heightened risks associated with the relationship between FTX and Alameda Research, the crypto hedge fund controlled by FTX’s CEO. The firm agreed to pay penalties and undergo remedial measures, including retaining an independent consultant to oversee its audit and quality control procedures. This settlement also limits Prager’s ability to accept new clients, with further investigations into the firm’s FTX audits ongoing. Compliance Insight This case underscores the critical role of auditors in maintaining market integrity, particularly in the volatile world of crypto assets. The FTX collapse highlighted the dangers of inadequate auditing, where failures can leave investors exposed to fraud and mismanagement. The SEC sends a strong message to audit professionals that independence and diligence are non-negotiable, especially when dealing with high-risk industries like crypto. Call for Information FinTelegram calls on insiders and whistleblowers in the auditing and financial sectors to provide further information on negligent auditing practices, particularly in the crypto space. Your insights could play a key role in uncovering additional misconduct and protecting investor interests. Share Information with FinTelegram CategoriesAuditors SECTagsAlameda ResearchFTXPrager Metis