FROM: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the largest-ever monetary sanction for Rule 105 short selling violations as a Long Island-based proprietary trading firm and its owner agreed to pay $7.2 million to settle charges.
Rule 105 prohibits short selling of an equity security during a restricted period – generally five business days before a public offering – and the subsequent purchase of that same security through the offering. The rule applies regardless of the trader’s intent, and promotes offering prices that are set by natural forces of supply and demand rather than manipulative activity. The rule therefore prevents short selling from interfering with offering prices.
According to the SEC’s order instituting settled administrative proceedings, Jeffery W. Lynn created Worldwide Capital for the purpose of investing and trading his own money. Lynn’s principal investment strategy focused primarily on new shares of public issuers coming to market through secondary and follow-on public offerings. Through traders he engaged to trade on his behalf, Lynn sought allocations of additional shares soon to be publicly offered, usually at a discount to the market price of the company’s already publicly trading shares. He and his traders would then sell those shares short in advance of the offerings. Lynn and Worldwide Capital improperly profited from the difference between the price paid to acquire the offered shares and the market price on the date of the offering.
“Rule 105 is an important safeguard designed to protect the market against manipulative trading, and we will continue to aggressively pursue violators,” said Andrew M. Calamari, director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office.
According to the SEC’s order Lynn participated in 60 public stock offerings covered by Rule 105 after selling short those same securities during the pre-offering restricted period. The violations occurred from October 2007 to February 2012. Worldwide Capital traders purchased the offering shares through numerous accounts at multiple broker-dealers involved in the offering, and sold the stock through an account in Worldwide Capital’s name at other broker-dealers. All of the trades – the purchases of offering shares and short sales – cleared and settled in a Worldwide Capital master account at the firm’s prime broker.
“The trading conducted by Lynn and Worldwide Capital disregarded the markets’ independent pricing mechanisms,” said Amelia A. Cottrell, associate director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. “Their use of multiple accounts in obtaining offering shares and short selling did not satisfy the separate accounts exception to Rule 105.”
To settle the SEC’s charges, Worldwide Capital and Lynn agreed to jointly pay disgorgement of $4,212,797, prejudgment interest of $526,358, and a penalty of $2,514,571. Lynn and his firm agreed to cease and desist from violating Rule 105 without admitting or denying the findings in the SEC’s order.
The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by Leslie Kazon, Joseph P. Ceglio, Karen M. Lee, Richard G. Primoff, Elzbieta Wraga, and Elizabeth Baier of the New York Regional Office. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and the New York Stock Exchange.
Monday, March 10, 2014
TESTIMONY OF CFTC ACTING CHAIRMAN WETJEN REGARDING BUDGET AND OVERSIGHT
FROM: COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Testimony of Acting Chairman Mark P. Wetjen Before the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food And Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
March 6, 2014
Good morning, Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member Farr and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to today’s hearing on the FY 2015 President’s Budget request for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”).
Under the Commodity Exchange Act, the Commission has oversight responsibilities for the derivatives markets. These markets, which have been in existence for centuries, have taken on particular importance to the U.S. economy in recent decades and as a consequence have become enormously vast, measuring hundreds of trillions of dollars in notional value. They are critical to the effective functioning of the U.S. and global economies.
At their core, the derivatives markets exist to help farmers, producers, small businesses, manufacturers and lenders focus on what they do best: providing goods and services and allocating capital to reduce risk and meet main street demand. Well-regulated derivatives markets facilitate job creation and the growth of the economy by providing a means for managing and assuming prices risks and broadly disseminating, and discovering, pricing information.
Stated more simply, through the derivatives marketplace, a farmer can lock in a price for his crop; a small business can lock in an interest rate that would otherwise fluctuate, perhaps raising its costs; a global manufacturer can lock in a currency value, allowing it to better plan and grow its global business; and a lender can manage its assets and balance sheet to ensure it can continue lending, fueling the economy in the process.
Essentially, these complex markets facilitate the assumption and distribution of risk throughout the financial system, and for that reason alone, it is critical that these markets are subject to appropriate governmental oversight.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Committee members, I do not intend the testimony that follows to sound alarmist, or to overstate the case for additional resources, but I do want to be sure that Congress, and this committee in particular, have a clear picture of the potential risks posed by the continued state of funding for the agency. When not overseen properly, irregularities in these markets, or failures of firms intermediating in them, can severely and negatively impact the economy as a whole and cause dramatic losses for individual participants. The stakes, therefore, are high.
The CFTC’s Responsibilities have Grown Substantially in Recent Years
The unfortunate reality is that, at current funding levels, the Commission is unable to adequately fulfill the mission given to it by Congress: to prevent disruptions to market integrity, protect customer assets, monitor and reduce the build-up of systemic risk, and ensure to the greatest extent possible that the derivatives markets are free of fraud and manipulation.
Recent increases in the agency’s funding have been essential and appreciated. They have not, however, kept pace with the growth of the Commission’s responsibilities, including those given to it under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”).
Various statistics have been used to measure this increase in responsibilities. One often-cited measure is the increase in the gross notional size of the marketplace now under the Commission’s oversight. Other measures, though, are equally and perhaps more illustrative.
For instance, the trading volume of CFTC-regulated futures and options contracts was 3,060 million contracts in 2010 and rose to 3,477 million in 2013. Similarly, the volume of interest rate swap trading activity by the 15 largest dealers averaged 249,564 swap events each in 2010, and by 2012, averaged 332,484 each (according to International Swaps and Derivatives Association (“ISDA”) data). Those transactions, moreover, can be executed in significantly more trading venues, and types of trading venues, both here and abroad. In addition, the complexity of the markets, its products and sophistication of the market tools, such as high frequency trading techniques, has increased greatly over the years.
The notional value of derivatives centrally cleared by clearinghouses was $124 trillion in 2010 (according to ISDA data), and is now approximately $223 trillion (according to CFTC data from swap data repositories (“SDRs”)). That is nearly a 100 percent increase. The expanded use of clearinghouses is significant in this context because, among other things, it means that the Commission must ensure through appropriate oversight that these entities continue to properly manage the various types of risks that are incident to a market structure dependent on central clearing. A clearinghouse’s failure to follow international guidelines and the Commission’s regulations, now more than ever, could have significant economic consequences.
The amount of customer funds held by clearinghouses and futures commission merchants (“FCMs”) was $177 billion in 2010 and is now over $225 billion, another substantial increase. These are customer funds in the form of cash and securities deposited at firms to be used for margin payments made by the end-users of the markets, like farmers, to support their trading activities. Again, Commission rules are designed to ensure customer funds are safely kept by these market intermediaries, and a failure to provide the proper level of oversight increases the risk of certain practices by firms, including perhaps operational risks or fraud. In fact, recent events in the FCM community have led to the temporary or permanent loss of more than a billion dollars of customer funds.
The total number of registrants and registered entities overseen directly by the Commission, depending on the measure, has increased by at least 40 percent in the last four years. This includes 99 swap dealers, two major swap participants (“MSPs”), FCMs, clearinghouses, trading venues and SDRs.
In addition, the CFTC oversees more than 4,000 advisers and operators of managed funds, some of which have significant outward exposures in and across financial markets. It is conceivable that the failure of some of these funds could have spill-over effects on the financial system. In all cases, investors in these funds are entitled to know their money is being appropriately held and invested.
The Commission also directly or indirectly supervises another approximately 64,000 registrants, mostly associated persons that solicit or accept customer orders or participate in certain managed funds, or that invest customer funds through discretionary accounts. Although it leverages the resources of the self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”), the Commission itself must oversee these registrants in certain areas and provide guidance and interpretations to the SROs with a total staff of only 644 employees currently onboard, less than 10 percent of the number of registrants under its purview.
By almost any measure, in fact, the portfolio of entities that the Commission is charged with overseeing has expanded in size and risk dramatically over the last half decade. The intermediaries in the derivatives markets are by and large well-run firms that perform important services in the markets and for their customers. But as a collective whole, these firms can potentially pose risks, even significant risks, to the financial system and the individuals operating within it. Those relying upon these firms deserve assurances that such firms are supervised by an agency capable of meaningful oversight.
The FY15 Request Prioritizes Examinations, Technology and Market Integrity, and Enforcement
The FY 2014 appropriation of $215 million was a modest budgetary increase for the Commission, lifting the agency’s appropriations above the sequestration level of $195 million that has posed significant challenges for the agency’s orderly operation. As directed by Congress, the agency has submitted to Congress a FY 2014 Spend Plan outlining the agency’s allocation of current resources, which reflects an increased emphasis on examinations and technology-related staff.
The President’s FY 2015 budget request also reflects these priorities and highlights both the importance of the Commission’s mission and the potential effects of continuing to operate under difficult budgetary constraints.
The request is a significant step towards the longer-term funding level that is necessary to fully and responsibly fulfill the agency’s core mission: protecting the safety and integrity of the derivatives markets. It recognizes the immediate need for an appropriation of $280 million and approximately 920 staff years (“FTEs”) for the agency, an increase of $65 million and 253 FTEs over the FY 2014 levels, heavily weighted towards examinations, surveillance, and technology functions.
In this regard, the request balances the need for more technological tools to monitor the markets, detect fraud and manipulation, and identify risk and compliance issues, with the need for staff with the requisite expertise to analyze the data collected through technology and determine how to use the results of that analysis to fulfill the Commission’s mission as the regulator of the derivatives markets. Both are essential to carrying out the agency’s mandate. Technology, after all, is an important means for the agency to effectively carry out critical oversight work; it is not an end in itself.
In light of technological developments in the markets today, the agency has committed to an increased focus on technology and is requesting a 17 percent increase in technology funding, or approximately $7 million, over FY 2014 solely for IT investments. The Commission’s FY 2014 Congressional Spending Plan already reflects that priority. The agency, in fact, reprogrammed $7.9 million from salaries and expenses to enhance technology investments.
In my remaining testimony, I will review three of the primary mission priorities for FY 2015.
Examinations
The President’s request would provide $38 million and 158 FTEs for examinations, which also covers the compliance activities of the Commission. As compared to FY 2014, this request is an increase of $15 million and 63 FTEs.
I noted earlier that the Commission has seen substantial growth in, among other things, trading volumes, customer monies held by intermediaries in the derivatives markets, and margin and risk held by clearinghouses. Examinations and legal compliance oversight are perhaps the best deterrents to fraud and improper or insufficient risk management and, as such, remain essential to compliance with the Commission’s customer protection and risk management rules.
The Commission has a direct examinations program for clearinghouses and designated contract markets, and it will soon directly examine swap execution facilities (“SEFs”) and SDRs. However, the agency does not at this time have the resources to place full-time staff on site at these registered entities, even systemically-important clearing organizations, unlike a number of other financial regulators that have on-the-ground staff at the significant firms they oversee. The Divisions of Market Oversight and Clearing and Risk collectively have 47 total examinations positions in FY 2014 to monitor, review, and report on some of the most complex financial markets and operations in the world.
The Commission today also performs only high-level, limited-scope reviews of the nearly 100 FCMs and 99 swap dealers holding over $225 billion in customer funds. In fact, the Commission has a staff of only 35 examiners to review these firms and analyze, among other things, over 1,200 financial filings each year. This staff level is less than the number the Commission had in 2010, yet the number of firms requiring its attention has almost doubled. Additionally, although it has begun legal compliance oversight of swap dealers and MSPs, the Commission has been able to allocate only 14 FTEs for this purpose. This number is insufficient to perform the necessary level of oversight of the newly registered swap dealer entities.
In FY2014, the Commission overall will have a mere 103 staff positions dedicated to examinations of the thousands of different registrants that should be subject to thorough oversight and examinations. The reality is that the agency has fallen far short of performance goals for its examinations activities, and it will continue to do so in the absence of additional funding from Congress. For example, as detailed in the Annual Performance Review for FY 2013, the Commission failed to meet performance targets for system safeguard examinations and for conducting direct examinations of FCM and non-FCM intermediaries. The President’s budget request appropriately calls on Congress to bolster the examinations function at the agency, and it would protect the public, and money deposited by customers, by enhancing the examinations program staff by more than 66 percent in FY 2015.
Moreover, if Congress fully funds the President’s request, the Commission can move toward annual reviews of all significant clearinghouses and trading platforms and perform more effective monitoring of market participants and intermediaries. Partially funding the request will mean accepting a certain amount of operational risk in the derivatives markets as the Commission is forced to forego more in-depth financial, operational and risk reviews of the firms within its jurisdiction and as such be reactive and not proactive to firm or industry risk issues.
Technology and Market Integrity
The FY 2015 request also supports a substantial increase in technology investments relative to FY 2014, roughly a 17 percent increase to supplement the more than 62 percent overall increase in data acquisition, analytics, and surveillance staff to make use of these investments. The $50 million investment in technology will provide millions of dollars of new and sophisticated analytical systems that will assist the Commission in its efforts to ensure market integrity.
The President’s FY 2015 budget request supports, in addition, 103 data-analytics and surveillance-related positions in the Division of Market Oversight alone, an increase of more than 98 percent over the FY 2014 staffing levels. Market surveillance is a core Commission mission, and it is an area that depends heavily on technology. As trading across the world has moved almost entirely to electronic systems, the Commission must make the technology investments required to collect and make sense of market data and handle the unprecedented volumes of transaction-level data provided by financial markets.
Effective market surveillance, though, equally depends on the Commission’s ability to hire and retain experienced market professionals who can analyze extremely complex and voluminous data from multiple trading markets and develop sophisticated analytics and models to respond to and identify trading activity that warrants investigation. The FY 2015 investment in high-performance hardware and software therefore must be paired with investments in personnel that can employ technology investments effectively.
In addition to the agency’s direct oversight responsibilities, the CFTC continues to prioritize the data and technology infrastructure needs across the Commission. The President’s FY 2015 Budget requests significant increases in both dollars and staff dedicated to these needs. Data, and the ability to analyze and report data, are more important than ever in the derivatives markets, and in the CFTC’s ability to oversee these markets. The CFTC must aggregate various types of data from multiple industry sources and across the futures and swaps markets. The increasing complexity and volume of this incoming data, moreover, requires significantly more powerful hardware, such as massively parallel processing systems to support analytics. Moving forward, the Commission will continue to improve information technology and management capabilities in the areas of data management to support analytics, statistical processing, and market research.
Enforcement
The President’s FY 2015 request would provide $62 million and 200 FTEs for enforcement, an increase of $16 million and 51 FTEs over FY 2014.
In its role as a law enforcement agency, the Commission’s enforcement arm protects market participants and other members of the public from fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices in the futures, options, cash and swaps markets, and prosecutes those who engage in such conduct. In FY 2013, the Commission filed 82 enforcement actions, bringing the total over the past three fiscal years to 283, and obtained orders in FY 2013 imposing more than $1.7 billion in sanctions.
The cases the agency pursues range from sophisticated manipulative and disruptive trading schemes in markets the Commission regulates, including financial instruments, oil, gas, precious metals and agricultural products, to quick strike actions against Ponzi schemes that victimize investors. The agency also is engaged in complex litigations related to issues of financial market integrity and customer protection. By way of example, in FY 2013, the CFTC filed and settled charges against three financial institutions for engaging in manipulation, attempted manipulation and false reporting of LIBOR and other benchmark interest rates.
Such investigations continue to be a significant and important part of the Division of Enforcement’s docket. Preventing manipulation is critical to the Commission’s mission to help protect taxpayers and the markets, but manipulation investigations, in particular, strain resources and time. And once a case is filed, the priority must shift to the litigation. In addition to drawing time and resources at the Commission, litigation requires additional resources, such as the retention of costly expert witnesses.
In 2002, when the Commission was responsible for the futures and options markets alone, the Division of Enforcement had approximately 154 people. Today, the CFTC also has anti-fraud and anti-manipulation authority over the vast swaps market, and it oversees a host of new market participants. In addition, the agency is also now responsible for pursuing cases under our enhanced Dodd-Frank authority that prohibits the reckless use of manipulative or deceptive schemes. Notwithstanding these additional responsibilities, there are currently only 149 members of the enforcement staff. The President’s budget request brings this number to 200, and more cops on the beat means the public is better assured that the rules of the road are being followed.
In addition to the need for additional enforcement staff and resources, the CFTC also believes technology investments will make our enforcement staff more efficient. For instance, the FY 2015 request would support developing and enhancing forensic analysis capabilities to assist in the development of analytical evidence for enforcement cases.
A full increase for enforcement means that the agency can pursue more investigations and better protect the public and the markets. A less than full increase means that the CFTC will continue to face difficult choices. It is not clear that we could maintain the current volume and types of cases, as well as ensure timely responses to market events.
Other FY 2015 Priorities: International Policy Coordination & Economic and Legal Analysis
The President’s FY 2015 request would provide $4.2 million and 15 FTEs that would be dedicated to international policy, a decrease of $41,000 and no increase in FTE over FY 2014. This allocation should not be misconstrued to mean that international coordination is not a priority for the Commission.
The global nature of the swaps and futures markets makes it imperative that the United States consult and coordinate with international authorities. For example, the Commission recently announced significant progress towards harmonizing a regulatory framework for CFTC-regulated SEFs and EU-regulated multilateral trading facilities (“MTFs”). The Commission is working internationally to promote robust and consistent standards, to avoid or minimize potentially conflicting or duplicative requirements, and to engage in cooperative supervision, wherever possible.
Over the past two years, the CFTC, Securities and Exchange Commission, European Commission, European Securities and Markets Authority, and market regulators from around the globe have been meeting regularly to discuss and resolve issues with the goal of harmonizing financial reform. The Commission also participates in numerous international working groups regarding derivatives. The Commission’s international efforts directly support global consistency in the oversight of the derivatives markets. In addition, the Commission anticipates a significant need for ongoing international policy coordination related to both market participants and infrastructure in the swaps markets. The Commission also anticipates a need for ongoing international work and coordination in the development of data and reporting standards under Dodd-Frank rules. Dodd-Frank further provided a framework for foreign trading platforms to seek registration as a foreign board of trade, and 24 applications have been submitted.
A full increase for international policy means the Commission will be able to increase our coordination efforts with financial regulators and market participants from around the globe. A less than full increase means we will be less able to engage in cooperative work with our international counterparts, respond to requests, and provide staffing for various standard-setting projects.
In addition, for FY 2015, the President’s budget would support $24 million and 92 FTEs to invest in robust economic analysis teams and Commission-wide legal analysis. Compared to the FY 2014 Spending Plan, this request is an increase of $4 million and 18 FTEs. Both of these teams support all of the Commission’s divisions.
The CFTC’s economists analyze innovations in trading technology, developments in trading instruments and market structure, and interactions among various market participants in the futures and swaps markets. Economics staff with particular expertise and experience provides leverage to dedicated staff in other divisions to anticipate and address significant regulatory, surveillance, clearing, and enforcement challenges. Economic analysis plays an integral role in the development, implementation, and review of financial regulations to ensure that the regulations are economically sound and subjected to a careful consideration of potential costs and benefits. Economic analysis also is critical to the public transparency initiatives of the Commission, such as the Weekly Swaps Report. Moving into FY 2015, the CFTC’s economists will be working to integrate large quantities of swaps market data with data from designated contract markets and SEFs and large swaps and futures position data held by the Commission to provide a more comprehensive view of the derivatives markets.
The legal analysis team provides interpretations of Commission statutory and regulatory authority and, where appropriate, provides exemptive, interpretive, and no-action letters to CFTC registrants and market participants. In FY 2013, the Commission experienced a significant increase in the number and complexity of requests from market participants for written interpretations and no-action letters, and this trend is expected to increase into FY 2015.
A full increase for the economics and legal analysis mission means the Commission will be able to support each of the CFTC’s divisions with economic and legal analysis. Funding short of this full increase or flat funding means an increasingly strained ability to integrate and analyze vast amounts of data the Commission is receiving on the derivatives markets, thus impacting our ability to detect problems that could be detrimental to the economy. Flat funding also means the Commission’s legal analysis team will continue to be constrained in supporting front-line examinations, adding to the delays in responding to market participants and processing applications, and hampering the team’s ability to support enforcement efforts.
Conclusion
Effective oversight of the futures and swaps markets requires additional resources for the Commission. This means investing in both personnel and information technology. We need staff to analyze the vast amounts of data we are receiving on the swaps and futures markets. We need staff to regularly examine firms, clearinghouses and trading platforms. We need staff to bring enforcement actions against perpetrators of fraud and manipulation. The agency’s ability to appropriately oversee the marketplace hinges on securing additional resources.
Thank you again for inviting me today, and I look forward to your questions.
Testimony of Acting Chairman Mark P. Wetjen Before the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food And Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
March 6, 2014
Good morning, Chairman Aderholt, Ranking Member Farr and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to today’s hearing on the FY 2015 President’s Budget request for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”).
Under the Commodity Exchange Act, the Commission has oversight responsibilities for the derivatives markets. These markets, which have been in existence for centuries, have taken on particular importance to the U.S. economy in recent decades and as a consequence have become enormously vast, measuring hundreds of trillions of dollars in notional value. They are critical to the effective functioning of the U.S. and global economies.
At their core, the derivatives markets exist to help farmers, producers, small businesses, manufacturers and lenders focus on what they do best: providing goods and services and allocating capital to reduce risk and meet main street demand. Well-regulated derivatives markets facilitate job creation and the growth of the economy by providing a means for managing and assuming prices risks and broadly disseminating, and discovering, pricing information.
Stated more simply, through the derivatives marketplace, a farmer can lock in a price for his crop; a small business can lock in an interest rate that would otherwise fluctuate, perhaps raising its costs; a global manufacturer can lock in a currency value, allowing it to better plan and grow its global business; and a lender can manage its assets and balance sheet to ensure it can continue lending, fueling the economy in the process.
Essentially, these complex markets facilitate the assumption and distribution of risk throughout the financial system, and for that reason alone, it is critical that these markets are subject to appropriate governmental oversight.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Committee members, I do not intend the testimony that follows to sound alarmist, or to overstate the case for additional resources, but I do want to be sure that Congress, and this committee in particular, have a clear picture of the potential risks posed by the continued state of funding for the agency. When not overseen properly, irregularities in these markets, or failures of firms intermediating in them, can severely and negatively impact the economy as a whole and cause dramatic losses for individual participants. The stakes, therefore, are high.
The CFTC’s Responsibilities have Grown Substantially in Recent Years
The unfortunate reality is that, at current funding levels, the Commission is unable to adequately fulfill the mission given to it by Congress: to prevent disruptions to market integrity, protect customer assets, monitor and reduce the build-up of systemic risk, and ensure to the greatest extent possible that the derivatives markets are free of fraud and manipulation.
Recent increases in the agency’s funding have been essential and appreciated. They have not, however, kept pace with the growth of the Commission’s responsibilities, including those given to it under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”).
Various statistics have been used to measure this increase in responsibilities. One often-cited measure is the increase in the gross notional size of the marketplace now under the Commission’s oversight. Other measures, though, are equally and perhaps more illustrative.
For instance, the trading volume of CFTC-regulated futures and options contracts was 3,060 million contracts in 2010 and rose to 3,477 million in 2013. Similarly, the volume of interest rate swap trading activity by the 15 largest dealers averaged 249,564 swap events each in 2010, and by 2012, averaged 332,484 each (according to International Swaps and Derivatives Association (“ISDA”) data). Those transactions, moreover, can be executed in significantly more trading venues, and types of trading venues, both here and abroad. In addition, the complexity of the markets, its products and sophistication of the market tools, such as high frequency trading techniques, has increased greatly over the years.
The notional value of derivatives centrally cleared by clearinghouses was $124 trillion in 2010 (according to ISDA data), and is now approximately $223 trillion (according to CFTC data from swap data repositories (“SDRs”)). That is nearly a 100 percent increase. The expanded use of clearinghouses is significant in this context because, among other things, it means that the Commission must ensure through appropriate oversight that these entities continue to properly manage the various types of risks that are incident to a market structure dependent on central clearing. A clearinghouse’s failure to follow international guidelines and the Commission’s regulations, now more than ever, could have significant economic consequences.
The amount of customer funds held by clearinghouses and futures commission merchants (“FCMs”) was $177 billion in 2010 and is now over $225 billion, another substantial increase. These are customer funds in the form of cash and securities deposited at firms to be used for margin payments made by the end-users of the markets, like farmers, to support their trading activities. Again, Commission rules are designed to ensure customer funds are safely kept by these market intermediaries, and a failure to provide the proper level of oversight increases the risk of certain practices by firms, including perhaps operational risks or fraud. In fact, recent events in the FCM community have led to the temporary or permanent loss of more than a billion dollars of customer funds.
The total number of registrants and registered entities overseen directly by the Commission, depending on the measure, has increased by at least 40 percent in the last four years. This includes 99 swap dealers, two major swap participants (“MSPs”), FCMs, clearinghouses, trading venues and SDRs.
In addition, the CFTC oversees more than 4,000 advisers and operators of managed funds, some of which have significant outward exposures in and across financial markets. It is conceivable that the failure of some of these funds could have spill-over effects on the financial system. In all cases, investors in these funds are entitled to know their money is being appropriately held and invested.
The Commission also directly or indirectly supervises another approximately 64,000 registrants, mostly associated persons that solicit or accept customer orders or participate in certain managed funds, or that invest customer funds through discretionary accounts. Although it leverages the resources of the self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”), the Commission itself must oversee these registrants in certain areas and provide guidance and interpretations to the SROs with a total staff of only 644 employees currently onboard, less than 10 percent of the number of registrants under its purview.
By almost any measure, in fact, the portfolio of entities that the Commission is charged with overseeing has expanded in size and risk dramatically over the last half decade. The intermediaries in the derivatives markets are by and large well-run firms that perform important services in the markets and for their customers. But as a collective whole, these firms can potentially pose risks, even significant risks, to the financial system and the individuals operating within it. Those relying upon these firms deserve assurances that such firms are supervised by an agency capable of meaningful oversight.
The FY15 Request Prioritizes Examinations, Technology and Market Integrity, and Enforcement
The FY 2014 appropriation of $215 million was a modest budgetary increase for the Commission, lifting the agency’s appropriations above the sequestration level of $195 million that has posed significant challenges for the agency’s orderly operation. As directed by Congress, the agency has submitted to Congress a FY 2014 Spend Plan outlining the agency’s allocation of current resources, which reflects an increased emphasis on examinations and technology-related staff.
The President’s FY 2015 budget request also reflects these priorities and highlights both the importance of the Commission’s mission and the potential effects of continuing to operate under difficult budgetary constraints.
The request is a significant step towards the longer-term funding level that is necessary to fully and responsibly fulfill the agency’s core mission: protecting the safety and integrity of the derivatives markets. It recognizes the immediate need for an appropriation of $280 million and approximately 920 staff years (“FTEs”) for the agency, an increase of $65 million and 253 FTEs over the FY 2014 levels, heavily weighted towards examinations, surveillance, and technology functions.
In this regard, the request balances the need for more technological tools to monitor the markets, detect fraud and manipulation, and identify risk and compliance issues, with the need for staff with the requisite expertise to analyze the data collected through technology and determine how to use the results of that analysis to fulfill the Commission’s mission as the regulator of the derivatives markets. Both are essential to carrying out the agency’s mandate. Technology, after all, is an important means for the agency to effectively carry out critical oversight work; it is not an end in itself.
In light of technological developments in the markets today, the agency has committed to an increased focus on technology and is requesting a 17 percent increase in technology funding, or approximately $7 million, over FY 2014 solely for IT investments. The Commission’s FY 2014 Congressional Spending Plan already reflects that priority. The agency, in fact, reprogrammed $7.9 million from salaries and expenses to enhance technology investments.
In my remaining testimony, I will review three of the primary mission priorities for FY 2015.
Examinations
The President’s request would provide $38 million and 158 FTEs for examinations, which also covers the compliance activities of the Commission. As compared to FY 2014, this request is an increase of $15 million and 63 FTEs.
I noted earlier that the Commission has seen substantial growth in, among other things, trading volumes, customer monies held by intermediaries in the derivatives markets, and margin and risk held by clearinghouses. Examinations and legal compliance oversight are perhaps the best deterrents to fraud and improper or insufficient risk management and, as such, remain essential to compliance with the Commission’s customer protection and risk management rules.
The Commission has a direct examinations program for clearinghouses and designated contract markets, and it will soon directly examine swap execution facilities (“SEFs”) and SDRs. However, the agency does not at this time have the resources to place full-time staff on site at these registered entities, even systemically-important clearing organizations, unlike a number of other financial regulators that have on-the-ground staff at the significant firms they oversee. The Divisions of Market Oversight and Clearing and Risk collectively have 47 total examinations positions in FY 2014 to monitor, review, and report on some of the most complex financial markets and operations in the world.
The Commission today also performs only high-level, limited-scope reviews of the nearly 100 FCMs and 99 swap dealers holding over $225 billion in customer funds. In fact, the Commission has a staff of only 35 examiners to review these firms and analyze, among other things, over 1,200 financial filings each year. This staff level is less than the number the Commission had in 2010, yet the number of firms requiring its attention has almost doubled. Additionally, although it has begun legal compliance oversight of swap dealers and MSPs, the Commission has been able to allocate only 14 FTEs for this purpose. This number is insufficient to perform the necessary level of oversight of the newly registered swap dealer entities.
In FY2014, the Commission overall will have a mere 103 staff positions dedicated to examinations of the thousands of different registrants that should be subject to thorough oversight and examinations. The reality is that the agency has fallen far short of performance goals for its examinations activities, and it will continue to do so in the absence of additional funding from Congress. For example, as detailed in the Annual Performance Review for FY 2013, the Commission failed to meet performance targets for system safeguard examinations and for conducting direct examinations of FCM and non-FCM intermediaries. The President’s budget request appropriately calls on Congress to bolster the examinations function at the agency, and it would protect the public, and money deposited by customers, by enhancing the examinations program staff by more than 66 percent in FY 2015.
Moreover, if Congress fully funds the President’s request, the Commission can move toward annual reviews of all significant clearinghouses and trading platforms and perform more effective monitoring of market participants and intermediaries. Partially funding the request will mean accepting a certain amount of operational risk in the derivatives markets as the Commission is forced to forego more in-depth financial, operational and risk reviews of the firms within its jurisdiction and as such be reactive and not proactive to firm or industry risk issues.
Technology and Market Integrity
The FY 2015 request also supports a substantial increase in technology investments relative to FY 2014, roughly a 17 percent increase to supplement the more than 62 percent overall increase in data acquisition, analytics, and surveillance staff to make use of these investments. The $50 million investment in technology will provide millions of dollars of new and sophisticated analytical systems that will assist the Commission in its efforts to ensure market integrity.
The President’s FY 2015 budget request supports, in addition, 103 data-analytics and surveillance-related positions in the Division of Market Oversight alone, an increase of more than 98 percent over the FY 2014 staffing levels. Market surveillance is a core Commission mission, and it is an area that depends heavily on technology. As trading across the world has moved almost entirely to electronic systems, the Commission must make the technology investments required to collect and make sense of market data and handle the unprecedented volumes of transaction-level data provided by financial markets.
Effective market surveillance, though, equally depends on the Commission’s ability to hire and retain experienced market professionals who can analyze extremely complex and voluminous data from multiple trading markets and develop sophisticated analytics and models to respond to and identify trading activity that warrants investigation. The FY 2015 investment in high-performance hardware and software therefore must be paired with investments in personnel that can employ technology investments effectively.
In addition to the agency’s direct oversight responsibilities, the CFTC continues to prioritize the data and technology infrastructure needs across the Commission. The President’s FY 2015 Budget requests significant increases in both dollars and staff dedicated to these needs. Data, and the ability to analyze and report data, are more important than ever in the derivatives markets, and in the CFTC’s ability to oversee these markets. The CFTC must aggregate various types of data from multiple industry sources and across the futures and swaps markets. The increasing complexity and volume of this incoming data, moreover, requires significantly more powerful hardware, such as massively parallel processing systems to support analytics. Moving forward, the Commission will continue to improve information technology and management capabilities in the areas of data management to support analytics, statistical processing, and market research.
Enforcement
The President’s FY 2015 request would provide $62 million and 200 FTEs for enforcement, an increase of $16 million and 51 FTEs over FY 2014.
In its role as a law enforcement agency, the Commission’s enforcement arm protects market participants and other members of the public from fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices in the futures, options, cash and swaps markets, and prosecutes those who engage in such conduct. In FY 2013, the Commission filed 82 enforcement actions, bringing the total over the past three fiscal years to 283, and obtained orders in FY 2013 imposing more than $1.7 billion in sanctions.
The cases the agency pursues range from sophisticated manipulative and disruptive trading schemes in markets the Commission regulates, including financial instruments, oil, gas, precious metals and agricultural products, to quick strike actions against Ponzi schemes that victimize investors. The agency also is engaged in complex litigations related to issues of financial market integrity and customer protection. By way of example, in FY 2013, the CFTC filed and settled charges against three financial institutions for engaging in manipulation, attempted manipulation and false reporting of LIBOR and other benchmark interest rates.
Such investigations continue to be a significant and important part of the Division of Enforcement’s docket. Preventing manipulation is critical to the Commission’s mission to help protect taxpayers and the markets, but manipulation investigations, in particular, strain resources and time. And once a case is filed, the priority must shift to the litigation. In addition to drawing time and resources at the Commission, litigation requires additional resources, such as the retention of costly expert witnesses.
In 2002, when the Commission was responsible for the futures and options markets alone, the Division of Enforcement had approximately 154 people. Today, the CFTC also has anti-fraud and anti-manipulation authority over the vast swaps market, and it oversees a host of new market participants. In addition, the agency is also now responsible for pursuing cases under our enhanced Dodd-Frank authority that prohibits the reckless use of manipulative or deceptive schemes. Notwithstanding these additional responsibilities, there are currently only 149 members of the enforcement staff. The President’s budget request brings this number to 200, and more cops on the beat means the public is better assured that the rules of the road are being followed.
In addition to the need for additional enforcement staff and resources, the CFTC also believes technology investments will make our enforcement staff more efficient. For instance, the FY 2015 request would support developing and enhancing forensic analysis capabilities to assist in the development of analytical evidence for enforcement cases.
A full increase for enforcement means that the agency can pursue more investigations and better protect the public and the markets. A less than full increase means that the CFTC will continue to face difficult choices. It is not clear that we could maintain the current volume and types of cases, as well as ensure timely responses to market events.
Other FY 2015 Priorities: International Policy Coordination & Economic and Legal Analysis
The President’s FY 2015 request would provide $4.2 million and 15 FTEs that would be dedicated to international policy, a decrease of $41,000 and no increase in FTE over FY 2014. This allocation should not be misconstrued to mean that international coordination is not a priority for the Commission.
The global nature of the swaps and futures markets makes it imperative that the United States consult and coordinate with international authorities. For example, the Commission recently announced significant progress towards harmonizing a regulatory framework for CFTC-regulated SEFs and EU-regulated multilateral trading facilities (“MTFs”). The Commission is working internationally to promote robust and consistent standards, to avoid or minimize potentially conflicting or duplicative requirements, and to engage in cooperative supervision, wherever possible.
Over the past two years, the CFTC, Securities and Exchange Commission, European Commission, European Securities and Markets Authority, and market regulators from around the globe have been meeting regularly to discuss and resolve issues with the goal of harmonizing financial reform. The Commission also participates in numerous international working groups regarding derivatives. The Commission’s international efforts directly support global consistency in the oversight of the derivatives markets. In addition, the Commission anticipates a significant need for ongoing international policy coordination related to both market participants and infrastructure in the swaps markets. The Commission also anticipates a need for ongoing international work and coordination in the development of data and reporting standards under Dodd-Frank rules. Dodd-Frank further provided a framework for foreign trading platforms to seek registration as a foreign board of trade, and 24 applications have been submitted.
A full increase for international policy means the Commission will be able to increase our coordination efforts with financial regulators and market participants from around the globe. A less than full increase means we will be less able to engage in cooperative work with our international counterparts, respond to requests, and provide staffing for various standard-setting projects.
In addition, for FY 2015, the President’s budget would support $24 million and 92 FTEs to invest in robust economic analysis teams and Commission-wide legal analysis. Compared to the FY 2014 Spending Plan, this request is an increase of $4 million and 18 FTEs. Both of these teams support all of the Commission’s divisions.
The CFTC’s economists analyze innovations in trading technology, developments in trading instruments and market structure, and interactions among various market participants in the futures and swaps markets. Economics staff with particular expertise and experience provides leverage to dedicated staff in other divisions to anticipate and address significant regulatory, surveillance, clearing, and enforcement challenges. Economic analysis plays an integral role in the development, implementation, and review of financial regulations to ensure that the regulations are economically sound and subjected to a careful consideration of potential costs and benefits. Economic analysis also is critical to the public transparency initiatives of the Commission, such as the Weekly Swaps Report. Moving into FY 2015, the CFTC’s economists will be working to integrate large quantities of swaps market data with data from designated contract markets and SEFs and large swaps and futures position data held by the Commission to provide a more comprehensive view of the derivatives markets.
The legal analysis team provides interpretations of Commission statutory and regulatory authority and, where appropriate, provides exemptive, interpretive, and no-action letters to CFTC registrants and market participants. In FY 2013, the Commission experienced a significant increase in the number and complexity of requests from market participants for written interpretations and no-action letters, and this trend is expected to increase into FY 2015.
A full increase for the economics and legal analysis mission means the Commission will be able to support each of the CFTC’s divisions with economic and legal analysis. Funding short of this full increase or flat funding means an increasingly strained ability to integrate and analyze vast amounts of data the Commission is receiving on the derivatives markets, thus impacting our ability to detect problems that could be detrimental to the economy. Flat funding also means the Commission’s legal analysis team will continue to be constrained in supporting front-line examinations, adding to the delays in responding to market participants and processing applications, and hampering the team’s ability to support enforcement efforts.
Conclusion
Effective oversight of the futures and swaps markets requires additional resources for the Commission. This means investing in both personnel and information technology. We need staff to analyze the vast amounts of data we are receiving on the swaps and futures markets. We need staff to regularly examine firms, clearinghouses and trading platforms. We need staff to bring enforcement actions against perpetrators of fraud and manipulation. The agency’s ability to appropriately oversee the marketplace hinges on securing additional resources.
Thank you again for inviting me today, and I look forward to your questions.
STATE DEPT. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS T PARLIAMENTARIANS FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION AND DISARMAMENT
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Parliamentarians for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament
Remarks
Anita Friedt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear and Strategic Policy
Washington, DC
February 26, 2014
Thank you, Daryl, for that kind introduction. I would like to thank the Parliamentarians for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament for organizing this event and for your ongoing engagement on this important set of issues. As the panel is titled, “Steps and Measures by Nuclear-Armed States,” I would like to provide an update on our work implementing the agenda laid out nearly five years ago by President Obama in Prague, when he committed the United States to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons, a goal that he reaffirmed in his speech in Berlin this past June.
As President Obama noted in Prague and repeated in Berlin, this will not be easy. It will require persistence and patience, and may not happen in his lifetime. Still, over the last four years we have succeeded in moving closer to this goal.
In 2010, the Administration concluded a Nuclear Posture Review, or NPR, which outlines the President’s agenda for reducing nuclear dangers, as well as advancing the broader security interests of the United States and its allies. As the NPR states, the international security environment has changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War: the threat of global nuclear war has become remote, but the risk of nuclear attack has increased. Concerted action by all states to uphold their NPT obligations – including those related to disarmament – is important for building a sense of common purpose that helps maintain support from partners around the world to uphold and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
Russia has been a key partner in our efforts to secure or eliminate these materials. For instance, the downblending of highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low enriched uranium (LEU) by Russia under the 1993 U.S.-Russia HEU Purchase Agreement has now been completed. The final delivery of the resultant LEU to the United States took place in December. Under this agreement, 500 metric tons of HEU from dismantled Russian weapons has been converted into LEU and delivered to the United States to fuel U.S. commercial nuclear power plants. The HEU that was converted by downblending was equivalent to approximately 20,000 nuclear warheads – instead, it has provided nuclear power plant fuel that has been used to generate nearly 10 percent of all U.S. electricity for the past 15 years.
In the United States, an additional 374 metric tons of U.S. HEU has been declared excess to nuclear weapons needs; most of which will be downblended or used as fuel in naval or research reactors. In 2011, the United States and Russia brought into force the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement and its 2006 and 2010 protocols, which require each side to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium – enough in total for about 17,000 nuclear weapons – and thus permanently remove this material from military programs. Russia has also been an essential partner in the U.S. Global Threat Reduction Initiative efforts to convert research reactors worldwide from HEU to LEU and repatriate those reactors’ HEU to the country of origin. These efforts have now converted or verified the shutdown of over 88 research and test reactors and isotope production facilities, and removed over 5,017 kg of HEU for secure storage, downblending and disposition.
In addition to reducing excess stocks of fissile material, we have taken steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy. We are not developing new nuclear weapons or pursuing new nuclear missions; we have committed not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear weapon states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations; and mindful of the devastating humanitarian consequences of nuclear war, we have clearly stated that it is in the U.S. interest and that of all other nations that the nearly 70-year record of nonuse of nuclear weapons be extended forever.
In June of 2013, in conjunction with his Berlin speech, President Obama issued new guidance that aligns U.S. nuclear policies to the 21st century security environment. This was the latest concrete step the President has taken to advance his Prague agenda and the long-term goal of achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. After a comprehensive review, the President determined that we can ensure the security of the United States and our allies and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent while safely pursuing up to a one-third reduction in deployed strategic nuclear weapons below the limits established in the New START Treaty.
Let me now address what we believe our next steps should be.
The United States and Russia still possess the vast majority of nuclear weapons in the world, and we have a shared responsibility to continue the process of reducing our nuclear arms. The New START Treaty was the first step in that process. The implementation of New START, now in its fourth year, is going well. When New START is fully implemented, the United States and the Russian Federation will each have no more than 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads – the lowest levels since the 1950s. Our overall nuclear stockpile is 85% below the peak level during the Cold War.
Going forward, the United States has made it clear that we are committed to continuing a step-by-step process to further reduce nuclear arsenals.
To this end, we are engaged in a bilateral dialogue with Russia to promote strategic stability and increase transparency on a reciprocal basis. We are hopeful our dialogue will lead to greater reciprocal transparency and negotiation of even further nuclear weapons reductions.
In addition to bilateral engagement with Russia, We will also be working to expand our public outreach on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. As stated in the April 2010 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review: “Ratification of the CTBT is central to leading other nuclear weapons states toward a world of diminished reliance on nuclear weapons, reduced nuclear competition, and eventual nuclear disarmament.”
I want to be clear - we have no desire to rush up here for a vote. It’s been 15 years since the CTBT was on the front pages of newspapers and whether we are talking to a Senator or a staffer, a schoolteacher or a student– we know that it is our job to make the case for this Treaty. Together, we can work through questions and concerns about the Treaty and explosive nuclear testing. In particular, the dangerous health effects of nuclear testing is a specific topic that can and should be addressed both here at home and abroad. Once we’ve brought the Treaty back to people’s attention, we can move on to discussion and debate – just like we did with the New START Treaty. We will not be setting timeframes for moving forward. We are going to be patient, but we will also be persistent. Above all, the CTBT is good for American national security and that is why we will continue educating the country on the treaty’s merits.
There are still further initiatives that are part of this Administration’s nuclear agenda. In Berlin, President Obama called on all nations to begin negotiations on a treaty that ends the production of fissile materials for use in nuclear weapons. A Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty or FMCT would codify an end to the production of weapons-grade fissile material needed to create nuclear weapons, cap stockpiles of fissile material worldwide, place sensitive nuclear facilities around the world under international verification, and provide the basis for further, deeper, reductions in nuclear arsenals.
Beginning multilateral negotiations on the FMCT is a priority objective for the United States and for the vast majority of states, and we have been working to initiate such negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. An overwhelming majority of nations support the immediate commencement of FMCT negotiations. The United States is consulting with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, as well as others, including India and Pakistan, to find a way to commence negotiations of an FMCT. And we will, of course, participate in the upcoming Group of Government Experts, which will begin its work this Spring.
In 2009, the five nuclear-weapon states, or “P5,” began to meet regularly for discussions on issues of transparency, mutual confidence, and verification. Since the 2010 NPT Review Conference, these discussions have expanded to address P5 implementation of our commitments under the NPT and the Action Plan adopted at the 2010 Review Conference. Russia hosted the most recent P5 conference in Geneva, Switzerland in April 2013, where the P5 reviewed progress towards fulfilling the commitments made at the 2010 NPT Review Conference, and continued discussions on issues related to all three pillars of the NPT: nonproliferation, disarmament, and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including confidence-building, transparency, and verification experiences. We are looking forward to continued discussions at a fifth P5 conference in April in Beijing. In addition to providing a senior level policy forum for discussion and coordination among the P5, this process has spawned a series of discussions among policymakers and government experts on a variety of issues. China is leading a P5 working group on nuclear definitions and terminology. The P5 have agreed to a common format for NPT reporting, and we are also beginning to engage at expert levels on some important verification and transparency issues. As we proceed, we would like the P5 conferences and intersessional meetings of experts to develop further practical transparency measures that build confidence and predictability.
None of this will be easy, but the policies the Administration is pursuing are suited for our security needs and tailored for the global security threats of the 21st century. By maintaining and supporting a safe, secure and effective stockpile — sufficient to deter any adversary and guarantee the defense of our allies — at the same time that we pursue responsible verifiable reductions through arms control, we will make this world a safer place.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Parliamentarians for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament
Remarks
Anita Friedt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear and Strategic Policy
Washington, DC
February 26, 2014
Thank you, Daryl, for that kind introduction. I would like to thank the Parliamentarians for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament for organizing this event and for your ongoing engagement on this important set of issues. As the panel is titled, “Steps and Measures by Nuclear-Armed States,” I would like to provide an update on our work implementing the agenda laid out nearly five years ago by President Obama in Prague, when he committed the United States to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons, a goal that he reaffirmed in his speech in Berlin this past June.
As President Obama noted in Prague and repeated in Berlin, this will not be easy. It will require persistence and patience, and may not happen in his lifetime. Still, over the last four years we have succeeded in moving closer to this goal.
In 2010, the Administration concluded a Nuclear Posture Review, or NPR, which outlines the President’s agenda for reducing nuclear dangers, as well as advancing the broader security interests of the United States and its allies. As the NPR states, the international security environment has changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War: the threat of global nuclear war has become remote, but the risk of nuclear attack has increased. Concerted action by all states to uphold their NPT obligations – including those related to disarmament – is important for building a sense of common purpose that helps maintain support from partners around the world to uphold and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
Russia has been a key partner in our efforts to secure or eliminate these materials. For instance, the downblending of highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low enriched uranium (LEU) by Russia under the 1993 U.S.-Russia HEU Purchase Agreement has now been completed. The final delivery of the resultant LEU to the United States took place in December. Under this agreement, 500 metric tons of HEU from dismantled Russian weapons has been converted into LEU and delivered to the United States to fuel U.S. commercial nuclear power plants. The HEU that was converted by downblending was equivalent to approximately 20,000 nuclear warheads – instead, it has provided nuclear power plant fuel that has been used to generate nearly 10 percent of all U.S. electricity for the past 15 years.
In the United States, an additional 374 metric tons of U.S. HEU has been declared excess to nuclear weapons needs; most of which will be downblended or used as fuel in naval or research reactors. In 2011, the United States and Russia brought into force the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement and its 2006 and 2010 protocols, which require each side to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium – enough in total for about 17,000 nuclear weapons – and thus permanently remove this material from military programs. Russia has also been an essential partner in the U.S. Global Threat Reduction Initiative efforts to convert research reactors worldwide from HEU to LEU and repatriate those reactors’ HEU to the country of origin. These efforts have now converted or verified the shutdown of over 88 research and test reactors and isotope production facilities, and removed over 5,017 kg of HEU for secure storage, downblending and disposition.
In addition to reducing excess stocks of fissile material, we have taken steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy. We are not developing new nuclear weapons or pursuing new nuclear missions; we have committed not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear weapon states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations; and mindful of the devastating humanitarian consequences of nuclear war, we have clearly stated that it is in the U.S. interest and that of all other nations that the nearly 70-year record of nonuse of nuclear weapons be extended forever.
In June of 2013, in conjunction with his Berlin speech, President Obama issued new guidance that aligns U.S. nuclear policies to the 21st century security environment. This was the latest concrete step the President has taken to advance his Prague agenda and the long-term goal of achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. After a comprehensive review, the President determined that we can ensure the security of the United States and our allies and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent while safely pursuing up to a one-third reduction in deployed strategic nuclear weapons below the limits established in the New START Treaty.
Let me now address what we believe our next steps should be.
The United States and Russia still possess the vast majority of nuclear weapons in the world, and we have a shared responsibility to continue the process of reducing our nuclear arms. The New START Treaty was the first step in that process. The implementation of New START, now in its fourth year, is going well. When New START is fully implemented, the United States and the Russian Federation will each have no more than 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads – the lowest levels since the 1950s. Our overall nuclear stockpile is 85% below the peak level during the Cold War.
Going forward, the United States has made it clear that we are committed to continuing a step-by-step process to further reduce nuclear arsenals.
To this end, we are engaged in a bilateral dialogue with Russia to promote strategic stability and increase transparency on a reciprocal basis. We are hopeful our dialogue will lead to greater reciprocal transparency and negotiation of even further nuclear weapons reductions.
In addition to bilateral engagement with Russia, We will also be working to expand our public outreach on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. As stated in the April 2010 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review: “Ratification of the CTBT is central to leading other nuclear weapons states toward a world of diminished reliance on nuclear weapons, reduced nuclear competition, and eventual nuclear disarmament.”
I want to be clear - we have no desire to rush up here for a vote. It’s been 15 years since the CTBT was on the front pages of newspapers and whether we are talking to a Senator or a staffer, a schoolteacher or a student– we know that it is our job to make the case for this Treaty. Together, we can work through questions and concerns about the Treaty and explosive nuclear testing. In particular, the dangerous health effects of nuclear testing is a specific topic that can and should be addressed both here at home and abroad. Once we’ve brought the Treaty back to people’s attention, we can move on to discussion and debate – just like we did with the New START Treaty. We will not be setting timeframes for moving forward. We are going to be patient, but we will also be persistent. Above all, the CTBT is good for American national security and that is why we will continue educating the country on the treaty’s merits.
There are still further initiatives that are part of this Administration’s nuclear agenda. In Berlin, President Obama called on all nations to begin negotiations on a treaty that ends the production of fissile materials for use in nuclear weapons. A Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty or FMCT would codify an end to the production of weapons-grade fissile material needed to create nuclear weapons, cap stockpiles of fissile material worldwide, place sensitive nuclear facilities around the world under international verification, and provide the basis for further, deeper, reductions in nuclear arsenals.
Beginning multilateral negotiations on the FMCT is a priority objective for the United States and for the vast majority of states, and we have been working to initiate such negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. An overwhelming majority of nations support the immediate commencement of FMCT negotiations. The United States is consulting with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, as well as others, including India and Pakistan, to find a way to commence negotiations of an FMCT. And we will, of course, participate in the upcoming Group of Government Experts, which will begin its work this Spring.
In 2009, the five nuclear-weapon states, or “P5,” began to meet regularly for discussions on issues of transparency, mutual confidence, and verification. Since the 2010 NPT Review Conference, these discussions have expanded to address P5 implementation of our commitments under the NPT and the Action Plan adopted at the 2010 Review Conference. Russia hosted the most recent P5 conference in Geneva, Switzerland in April 2013, where the P5 reviewed progress towards fulfilling the commitments made at the 2010 NPT Review Conference, and continued discussions on issues related to all three pillars of the NPT: nonproliferation, disarmament, and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including confidence-building, transparency, and verification experiences. We are looking forward to continued discussions at a fifth P5 conference in April in Beijing. In addition to providing a senior level policy forum for discussion and coordination among the P5, this process has spawned a series of discussions among policymakers and government experts on a variety of issues. China is leading a P5 working group on nuclear definitions and terminology. The P5 have agreed to a common format for NPT reporting, and we are also beginning to engage at expert levels on some important verification and transparency issues. As we proceed, we would like the P5 conferences and intersessional meetings of experts to develop further practical transparency measures that build confidence and predictability.
None of this will be easy, but the policies the Administration is pursuing are suited for our security needs and tailored for the global security threats of the 21st century. By maintaining and supporting a safe, secure and effective stockpile — sufficient to deter any adversary and guarantee the defense of our allies — at the same time that we pursue responsible verifiable reductions through arms control, we will make this world a safer place.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
NSA ADVISOR RICE IN UAE AND DJIBOUTI
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
Readout of National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice’s Travel to the United Arab Emirates and Djibouti
National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice traveled to the United Arab Emirates and Djibouti from March 6-8. In the UAE, she held highly productive bilateral discussions with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed and other senior Emirati officials, including the Foreign Minister and Deputy Chief of National Security. They exchanged views on a wide range of regional issues, including Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Middle East Peace, as well as U.S. partnership with the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Ambassador Rice visited the new campus of NYU Abu Dhabi, one of the three major U.S.-UAE long-term legacy partnership projects. She met with a diverse and talented group of American, Emirati and international students from NYU Abu Dhabi and the Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Scholarship Program and expressed support for the major investments the UAE has made in world class liberal arts and STEM higher education programs.
In Djibouti, Ambassador Rice met with senior leaders and U.S. troops from the Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA) at Camp Lemonnier to discuss CJTF operations in the region. She thanked the troops for their extraordinary work to build counterpart capacity in the region, conduct crisis response, and execute vital counter-terror operations that help keep the American people safe. Ambassador Rice met with Djiboutian President Guelleh to renew our robust strategic partnership with the government and people of Djibouti. She thanked him for Djiboutian leadership on a range of issues, including countering terrorism and piracy, and responding to humanitarian emergencies. In her meeting with President Guelleh and with Foreign Minister Youssouf and a delegation of senior Djiboutian ministers and officials, she discussed ways to deepen and enhance our bilateral cooperation, including in ways that will tangibly benefit the economic well-being of the Djiboutian people and address shared security challenges. They discussed ways that Camp Lemonnier and the U.S. military presence in Djibouti can have a more direct and positive impact on the local economy, and ways that American assistance can lead to further sustainable development and improved regional security.
Readout of National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice’s Travel to the United Arab Emirates and Djibouti
National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice traveled to the United Arab Emirates and Djibouti from March 6-8. In the UAE, she held highly productive bilateral discussions with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed and other senior Emirati officials, including the Foreign Minister and Deputy Chief of National Security. They exchanged views on a wide range of regional issues, including Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Middle East Peace, as well as U.S. partnership with the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Ambassador Rice visited the new campus of NYU Abu Dhabi, one of the three major U.S.-UAE long-term legacy partnership projects. She met with a diverse and talented group of American, Emirati and international students from NYU Abu Dhabi and the Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Scholarship Program and expressed support for the major investments the UAE has made in world class liberal arts and STEM higher education programs.
In Djibouti, Ambassador Rice met with senior leaders and U.S. troops from the Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA) at Camp Lemonnier to discuss CJTF operations in the region. She thanked the troops for their extraordinary work to build counterpart capacity in the region, conduct crisis response, and execute vital counter-terror operations that help keep the American people safe. Ambassador Rice met with Djiboutian President Guelleh to renew our robust strategic partnership with the government and people of Djibouti. She thanked him for Djiboutian leadership on a range of issues, including countering terrorism and piracy, and responding to humanitarian emergencies. In her meeting with President Guelleh and with Foreign Minister Youssouf and a delegation of senior Djiboutian ministers and officials, she discussed ways to deepen and enhance our bilateral cooperation, including in ways that will tangibly benefit the economic well-being of the Djiboutian people and address shared security challenges. They discussed ways that Camp Lemonnier and the U.S. military presence in Djibouti can have a more direct and positive impact on the local economy, and ways that American assistance can lead to further sustainable development and improved regional security.
SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON ANNIVERSARY OF DISAPPEARANCE OF ROBERT LEVINSON
Seventh Anniversary of the Disappearance of Robert Levinson
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 9, 2014
Robert Levinson disappeared seven years ago from Kish Island, Iran, during a business trip. He is one of the longest held American citizens in history.
Nothing can bring those lost years – more than 2,500 days in all – back to all those who love him. Mr. Levinson’s disappearance has been heart-wrenching for his wife and children, who feel his absence especially deeply at the many family milestones missed these past seven years.
The United States remains committed to the safe return of Mr. Levinson to his family. We appreciate the support and assistance from our international partners as we work to end this awful separation. Given Mr. Levinson’s health, age, and length of time in captivity, we mark this anniversary with a special sense of urgency.
We respectfully ask the Government of Iran to work cooperatively with us on the investigation into his disappearance so we can ensure his safe return.
The FBI has announced a $1 million reward for any information that could lead to his safe return. We call on anyone with information about this case to contact the FBI.
This is the seventh year that Mr. Levinson has spent without his family. We remain committed to the hard work ahead to ensure that it’s his last.
Nothing can bring those lost years – more than 2,500 days in all – back to all those who love him. Mr. Levinson’s disappearance has been heart-wrenching for his wife and children, who feel his absence especially deeply at the many family milestones missed these past seven years.
The United States remains committed to the safe return of Mr. Levinson to his family. We appreciate the support and assistance from our international partners as we work to end this awful separation. Given Mr. Levinson’s health, age, and length of time in captivity, we mark this anniversary with a special sense of urgency.
We respectfully ask the Government of Iran to work cooperatively with us on the investigation into his disappearance so we can ensure his safe return.
The FBI has announced a $1 million reward for any information that could lead to his safe return. We call on anyone with information about this case to contact the FBI.
This is the seventh year that Mr. Levinson has spent without his family. We remain committed to the hard work ahead to ensure that it’s his last.
SECRETARY KERRY'S OP-ED TITLED "WOMEN KEY TO PEACE AND SECURITY"
Women Key to Peace and Security
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Secretary of State
DipNote Blog
Washington, DC
March 6, 2014
International Women's Day is more than a moment marked on a calendar. It is a day not just to renew our determination to make the world a more peaceful and prosperous place -- but to recognize that a world where opportunities for women grow, is a world where the possibilities for peace, prosperity, and stability grow even more.
I see it every single day as Secretary of State. Even as the Assad regime's barrel-bombing of Aleppo continues, showing the world a brutal regime's true colors, with every act of courage and perseverance, Syria’s women show the world their true colors, as well. We heard from some of these remarkable women in Montreux just last month.
Their stories spoke to the bravery of countless other Syrian women. One woman from Idlib worked with the Free Syrian Army to ensure that the people of her village could remain in their homes and till their own land. Another woman from Aleppo got restrictions on humanitarian access lifted by offering food to regime soldiers at the checkpoints. If that isn’t courage under fire, I don’t know what is.
It's not just in Syria that women offer us hope for resolution to conflict. Women are vital to our shared goals of prosperity, stability and peace. That’s as true when it comes to ending our battles as it is jumpstarting our economies. The fact is that women bear the greatest burden in war. But their voices are too rarely heard in negotiating peace.
That has to change.
Countries that value and empower women to participate fully in decision-making are more stable, prosperous, and secure. The opposite is also true. When women are excluded from negotiations, the peace that follows is more tenuous. Trust is eroded, and human rights and accountability are often ignored.
In too many countries, treaties are designed by combatants for combatants. It should come as no surprise, then, that more than half of all peace agreements fail within the first 10 years of signature. The inclusion of women in peace building and conflict prevention can reverse that trend.
So how do we get there?
Evidence from around the world has shown that deadly conflicts are more likely to be prevented, and peace best forged and protected, when women are included as equal partners.
That’s why we are working to support women in conflict and post-conflict areas around the world.
In Afghanistan, we are advocating for the inclusion and election of women at all levels of governance. Afghan women today are marching forward in ways unimaginable just 10 years ago. They’re starting companies. They’re serving as members of parliament. They’re teaching in schools and working as doctors and nurses. They are the foundation upon which Afghanistan's future is being built.
As the people of Burma work to resolve the conflict that has plagued their nation for decades, the United States is supporting the meaningful participation of women in the peace process and inter-communal peace initiatives.
We know that the security of women is essential to their participation in peace building. That’s why we are working to ensure women get equal access to humanitarian assistance and relief, wherever we work.
The United States is also leading by example. My sister has worked for many years at the United Nations, following in the State Department footsteps of our father many years before I did myself. She's a trailblazer. But she's not alone. It’s no coincidence that some of our top diplomats and peace negotiators are women -- from National Security Advisor Susan Rice, to U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, to Deputy Secretary of State Heather Higginbottom, to Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman. Today, all but one of the State Department's Regional Assistant Secretaries are women.
We celebrate their accomplishments not just because they are women, but because their work around the world will make all people -- men and women, boys and girls –- more secure.
Peace is not the absence of conflict. It is the presence of every member of society working together to promote stability and prosperity.
No country can succeed unless every citizen is empowered to contribute to its future. And no peace can endure if women are not afforded a central role. So today, we mark the miles women have traveled around the world -- but more importantly we commit to the next miles of the journey.
I see it every single day as Secretary of State. Even as the Assad regime's barrel-bombing of Aleppo continues, showing the world a brutal regime's true colors, with every act of courage and perseverance, Syria’s women show the world their true colors, as well. We heard from some of these remarkable women in Montreux just last month.
Their stories spoke to the bravery of countless other Syrian women. One woman from Idlib worked with the Free Syrian Army to ensure that the people of her village could remain in their homes and till their own land. Another woman from Aleppo got restrictions on humanitarian access lifted by offering food to regime soldiers at the checkpoints. If that isn’t courage under fire, I don’t know what is.
It's not just in Syria that women offer us hope for resolution to conflict. Women are vital to our shared goals of prosperity, stability and peace. That’s as true when it comes to ending our battles as it is jumpstarting our economies. The fact is that women bear the greatest burden in war. But their voices are too rarely heard in negotiating peace.
That has to change.
Countries that value and empower women to participate fully in decision-making are more stable, prosperous, and secure. The opposite is also true. When women are excluded from negotiations, the peace that follows is more tenuous. Trust is eroded, and human rights and accountability are often ignored.
In too many countries, treaties are designed by combatants for combatants. It should come as no surprise, then, that more than half of all peace agreements fail within the first 10 years of signature. The inclusion of women in peace building and conflict prevention can reverse that trend.
So how do we get there?
Evidence from around the world has shown that deadly conflicts are more likely to be prevented, and peace best forged and protected, when women are included as equal partners.
That’s why we are working to support women in conflict and post-conflict areas around the world.
In Afghanistan, we are advocating for the inclusion and election of women at all levels of governance. Afghan women today are marching forward in ways unimaginable just 10 years ago. They’re starting companies. They’re serving as members of parliament. They’re teaching in schools and working as doctors and nurses. They are the foundation upon which Afghanistan's future is being built.
As the people of Burma work to resolve the conflict that has plagued their nation for decades, the United States is supporting the meaningful participation of women in the peace process and inter-communal peace initiatives.
We know that the security of women is essential to their participation in peace building. That’s why we are working to ensure women get equal access to humanitarian assistance and relief, wherever we work.
The United States is also leading by example. My sister has worked for many years at the United Nations, following in the State Department footsteps of our father many years before I did myself. She's a trailblazer. But she's not alone. It’s no coincidence that some of our top diplomats and peace negotiators are women -- from National Security Advisor Susan Rice, to U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, to Deputy Secretary of State Heather Higginbottom, to Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman. Today, all but one of the State Department's Regional Assistant Secretaries are women.
We celebrate their accomplishments not just because they are women, but because their work around the world will make all people -- men and women, boys and girls –- more secure.
Peace is not the absence of conflict. It is the presence of every member of society working together to promote stability and prosperity.
No country can succeed unless every citizen is empowered to contribute to its future. And no peace can endure if women are not afforded a central role. So today, we mark the miles women have traveled around the world -- but more importantly we commit to the next miles of the journey.
U.S. EXPORTED OVER $192 BILLION IN JANUARY 2014
FROM: U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
U.S. Exports Reach $192.5 Billion in January
Ex-Im Bank Continues to Support U.S. Jobs by Financing U.S. Exports
Washington, D.C. – The United States exported $192.5 billion of goods and services in January 2014, according to data released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Commerce Department.
“U.S. exports are off to a great start for 2014.” said Export-Import Bank Chairman and President Fred P. Hochberg. “Sending our exports abroad is critical to creating jobs here at home. And the Export-Import Bank is a critical link in that chain, connecting America’s small businesses to the 95% of the world’s customers that live outside our borders. As today’s encouraging numbers show, the Ex-Im Bank will continue to explore new opportunities to boost U.S. exports and support American jobs.”
January’s total is smaller than November’s $194.7 billion figure, which was revised slightly downward for the second straight month, but remains the record high. A review was conducted of the 2013 trade data and the figures for each month were revised.
Exports of goods and services over the last twelve months totaled $2.3 trillion, which is 44.3 percent above the level of exports in 2009, and have been growing at an annualized rate of 9.4 percent when compared to 2009.
During the same time period among the major export markets (i.e., markets with at least $6 billion in annual imports of U.S. goods), the countries with the largest annualized increase in U.S. goods purchases, when compared to 2009, were Panama (24.5 percent), Russia (20.2 percent), Hong Kong (19.6 percent), Peru (19.3 percent), Colombia (18.4 percent), United Arab Emirates (18.1 percent), Ecuador (17.2 percent), Chile (17.0 percent), Argentina (16.3 percent), and Indonesia (15.2 percent).
U.S. Exports Reach $192.5 Billion in January
Ex-Im Bank Continues to Support U.S. Jobs by Financing U.S. Exports
Washington, D.C. – The United States exported $192.5 billion of goods and services in January 2014, according to data released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Commerce Department.
“U.S. exports are off to a great start for 2014.” said Export-Import Bank Chairman and President Fred P. Hochberg. “Sending our exports abroad is critical to creating jobs here at home. And the Export-Import Bank is a critical link in that chain, connecting America’s small businesses to the 95% of the world’s customers that live outside our borders. As today’s encouraging numbers show, the Ex-Im Bank will continue to explore new opportunities to boost U.S. exports and support American jobs.”
January’s total is smaller than November’s $194.7 billion figure, which was revised slightly downward for the second straight month, but remains the record high. A review was conducted of the 2013 trade data and the figures for each month were revised.
Exports of goods and services over the last twelve months totaled $2.3 trillion, which is 44.3 percent above the level of exports in 2009, and have been growing at an annualized rate of 9.4 percent when compared to 2009.
During the same time period among the major export markets (i.e., markets with at least $6 billion in annual imports of U.S. goods), the countries with the largest annualized increase in U.S. goods purchases, when compared to 2009, were Panama (24.5 percent), Russia (20.2 percent), Hong Kong (19.6 percent), Peru (19.3 percent), Colombia (18.4 percent), United Arab Emirates (18.1 percent), Ecuador (17.2 percent), Chile (17.0 percent), Argentina (16.3 percent), and Indonesia (15.2 percent).
HOME SECURITY COMPANY SETTLES DECEPTIVE ENDORSEMENTS CASE WITH FTC
FROM: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Home Security Company ADT Settles FTC Charges that Endorsements Deceived Consumers
Company’s Paid Spokespersons Failed to Disclose Their Connection to ADT
As part of its ongoing crackdown on misleading endorsements in advertising, the Federal Trade Commission has charged the home security company ADT LLC with misrepresenting that paid endorsements from safety and technology experts were independent reviews. Under an agreed-upon settlement, ADT is prohibited from misrepresenting paid endorsements as independent reviews in the future.
Boca Raton, Florida-based ADT manufactures and markets the ADT Pulse home security and monitoring system and various other security products and services. The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges that ADT paid spokespeople to demonstrate and review the ADT Pulse on NBC’s Today Show, as well as other television and radio news programs and talk shows across the country, and in blogs and other online material. ADT, the FTC alleges, misrepresented that the reviews were independent, and failed to disclose that the experts were being paid by ADT to promote the Pulse system.
“It’s hard for consumers to make good buying decisions when they think they’re getting independent expert advice as part of an impartial news segment and have no way of knowing they are actually watching a sales pitch,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “When a paid endorser appears in a news or talk show segment with the host of that program, the relationship with the advertiser must be clearly disclosed.”
ADT paid three spokespersons, including a child safety expert, a home security expert, and a technology expert, more than $300,000 to promote the ADT Pulse, with one spokesperson receiving more than $200,000. Two of those spokespersons also received a free ADT Pulse security system, valued at approximately $4,000, and free monthly monitoring service, according to the complaint. In exchange, the spokespersons appeared on more than 40 different television and radio programs nationwide and posted blogs and other material online.
ADT set up media interviews for the endorsers through its public relations firms and booking agents – often providing reporters and news anchors with suggested interview questions, and background video, also known as b-roll, according to the complaint. The paid ADT endorsers were introduced by program hosts as experts in child safety, home security, or technology, usually with no mention of any connection to ADT. The endorsers sometimes demonstrated child safety, home security, or technology products other than the ADT Pulse, adding to the impression that they were providing an impartial, expert review of the products.
The proposed order:
prohibits ADT from misrepresenting that any discussion or demonstration of a security or monitoring product or service is an independent review provided by an impartial expert;
requires ADT to clearly and prominently disclose, in connection with the advertising of a home security or monitoring product or service, a material connection, if one exists, between an endorser and the company; and
requires the company to promptly remove reviews and endorsements that have been misrepresented as independently provided by an impartial expert or that fail to disclose a material connection between ADT and an endorser.
The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to accept the agreement containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 4-0. The FTC will publish a description of the complaint and consent agreement in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through April 7, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments in electronic form should be submitted using the following Web link: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/adtconsent and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
NOTE: When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
Home Security Company ADT Settles FTC Charges that Endorsements Deceived Consumers
Company’s Paid Spokespersons Failed to Disclose Their Connection to ADT
As part of its ongoing crackdown on misleading endorsements in advertising, the Federal Trade Commission has charged the home security company ADT LLC with misrepresenting that paid endorsements from safety and technology experts were independent reviews. Under an agreed-upon settlement, ADT is prohibited from misrepresenting paid endorsements as independent reviews in the future.
Boca Raton, Florida-based ADT manufactures and markets the ADT Pulse home security and monitoring system and various other security products and services. The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges that ADT paid spokespeople to demonstrate and review the ADT Pulse on NBC’s Today Show, as well as other television and radio news programs and talk shows across the country, and in blogs and other online material. ADT, the FTC alleges, misrepresented that the reviews were independent, and failed to disclose that the experts were being paid by ADT to promote the Pulse system.
“It’s hard for consumers to make good buying decisions when they think they’re getting independent expert advice as part of an impartial news segment and have no way of knowing they are actually watching a sales pitch,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “When a paid endorser appears in a news or talk show segment with the host of that program, the relationship with the advertiser must be clearly disclosed.”
ADT paid three spokespersons, including a child safety expert, a home security expert, and a technology expert, more than $300,000 to promote the ADT Pulse, with one spokesperson receiving more than $200,000. Two of those spokespersons also received a free ADT Pulse security system, valued at approximately $4,000, and free monthly monitoring service, according to the complaint. In exchange, the spokespersons appeared on more than 40 different television and radio programs nationwide and posted blogs and other material online.
ADT set up media interviews for the endorsers through its public relations firms and booking agents – often providing reporters and news anchors with suggested interview questions, and background video, also known as b-roll, according to the complaint. The paid ADT endorsers were introduced by program hosts as experts in child safety, home security, or technology, usually with no mention of any connection to ADT. The endorsers sometimes demonstrated child safety, home security, or technology products other than the ADT Pulse, adding to the impression that they were providing an impartial, expert review of the products.
The proposed order:
prohibits ADT from misrepresenting that any discussion or demonstration of a security or monitoring product or service is an independent review provided by an impartial expert;
requires ADT to clearly and prominently disclose, in connection with the advertising of a home security or monitoring product or service, a material connection, if one exists, between an endorser and the company; and
requires the company to promptly remove reviews and endorsements that have been misrepresented as independently provided by an impartial expert or that fail to disclose a material connection between ADT and an endorser.
The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to accept the agreement containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 4-0. The FTC will publish a description of the complaint and consent agreement in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through April 7, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments in electronic form should be submitted using the following Web link: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/adtconsent and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
NOTE: When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
SEC CHARGES EXECUTIVES, FINANCE PROFESSIONALS FOR ROLES IN $150 MILLION FRAUD SCHEME
FROM: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged five executives and finance professionals with facilitating a $150 million fraudulent bond offering by Dewey & LeBoeuf, the international law firm where they worked.
The SEC alleges that the five turned to accounting fraud when the firm needed money to weather the economic recession and steep costs from a merger. Fearful that declining revenue might cause its bank lenders to cut off access to the firm’s credit lines, Dewey & LeBoeuf’s leading financial professionals combed through its financial statements line by line and devised ways to artificially inflate income and distort financial performance. Dewey & LeBoeuf then resorted to the bond markets to raise significant amounts of cash through a private offering that seized on the phony financial numbers.
“Investors were led to believe they were purchasing bonds issued by a prestigious law firm that had weathered the financial crisis and was poised for growth,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “Dewey & LeBoeuf’s senior-most finance personnel used a grab bag of accounting gimmicks to create that illusion, and top executives green-lighted the decision to sell $150 million in bonds to investors as a desperate grasp for cash on the basis of blatantly falsified financial results.”
The SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Manhattan charges the following executives at Dewey & LeBoeuf, which is no longer in business: chairman Steven Davis, executive director Stephen DiCarmine, chief financial officer Joel Sanders, finance director Frank Canellas, and controller Tom Mullikin.
In a parallel action, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office today announced criminal charges against Davis, DiCarmine, and Sanders.
According to the SEC’s complaint, the roots of the fraud date back to late 2008 when senior financial officers began to conjure up fake revenue by manipulating various entries in Dewey & LeBoeuf’s internal accounting system. The firm’s profitability was inflated by approximately $36 million (15 percent) in its 2008 financial results through this use of accounting tricks. For example, compensation for certain personnel was falsely reclassified as an equity distribution in the amount of $13.8 million when they in fact those personnel had no equity in the firm. The improper accounting also reversed millions of dollars of uncollectible disbursements, mischaracterized millions of dollars of credit card debt owed by the firm as bogus disbursements owed by clients, and inaccurately accounted for significant lease obligations held by the firm.
The SEC alleges that Dewey & LeBoeuf finance executives continued using these and other fraudulent techniques to prepare its 2009 financial statements, which were misstated by $23 million. The culture of accounting fraud was so prevalent at the firm that Canellas sent Sanders an e-mail with a schedule containing a list of suggested cost savings to the budget. Among them was a $7.5 million line item reduction entitled “Accounting Tricks.”
According to the SEC’s complaint, Sanders acknowledged in separate e-mail communications, “I don’t want to cook the books anymore. We need to stop doing that.” But he and other finance personnel continued to banter about ways to create fake income. For example, in the midst of a mad scramble at year-end 2008 to meet obligations to bank lenders, Sanders boasted to DiCarmine in an e-mail, “We came up with a big one: Reclass the disbursements.” DiCarmine responded, “You always do in the last hours. That’s why we get the extra 10 or 20% bonus. Tell [Sanders’ wife], stick with me! We’ll buy a ski house next.” DiCarmine later e-mailed Sanders, “You certainly cheered the Chairman up. I could use a dose.” Sanders answered, “I think we made the covenants and I’m shooting for 60%.” He cryptically added, “Don’t even ask – you don’t want to know.”
The SEC alleges that Dewey & LeBoeuf didn’t want investors in the bond offering to know either. The firm continued using and concealing improper accounting practices well after the offering closed in April 2010. The note purchase agreement governing the bond offering required Dewey & LeBoeuf to provide investors and lenders with quarterly certifications. The quarterly certifications made by the firm were all fraudulent.
“As Dewey & LeBoeuf’s revenue was falling and the firm was struggling to meet commitments, its top executives and finance professionals brazenly looked for ways to create fake income and retain their lucrative salaries and bonuses,” said Andrew M. Calamari, director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office.
The SEC’s complaint alleges that Davis violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5. The complaint alleges that DiCarmine, Sanders, Canellas, and Mullikin violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and aided and abetted Dewey LeBoeuf’s and Davis’ violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) pursuant to Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act. The SEC is seeking disgorgement and financial penalties as well as permanent injunctions against all five defendants, and officer and director bars against Davis, DiCarmine, and Sanders. The SEC also will separately seek to prohibit Davis and DiCarmine from practicing as lawyers on behalf of any publicly traded company or other entity regulated by the SEC.
The SEC's investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by William Finkel, Joseph Ceglio, Christopher Mele, and Michael Osnato. The case has been supervised by Sanjay Wadhwa. The litigation will be led by Howard Fischer. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged five executives and finance professionals with facilitating a $150 million fraudulent bond offering by Dewey & LeBoeuf, the international law firm where they worked.
The SEC alleges that the five turned to accounting fraud when the firm needed money to weather the economic recession and steep costs from a merger. Fearful that declining revenue might cause its bank lenders to cut off access to the firm’s credit lines, Dewey & LeBoeuf’s leading financial professionals combed through its financial statements line by line and devised ways to artificially inflate income and distort financial performance. Dewey & LeBoeuf then resorted to the bond markets to raise significant amounts of cash through a private offering that seized on the phony financial numbers.
“Investors were led to believe they were purchasing bonds issued by a prestigious law firm that had weathered the financial crisis and was poised for growth,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “Dewey & LeBoeuf’s senior-most finance personnel used a grab bag of accounting gimmicks to create that illusion, and top executives green-lighted the decision to sell $150 million in bonds to investors as a desperate grasp for cash on the basis of blatantly falsified financial results.”
The SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Manhattan charges the following executives at Dewey & LeBoeuf, which is no longer in business: chairman Steven Davis, executive director Stephen DiCarmine, chief financial officer Joel Sanders, finance director Frank Canellas, and controller Tom Mullikin.
In a parallel action, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office today announced criminal charges against Davis, DiCarmine, and Sanders.
According to the SEC’s complaint, the roots of the fraud date back to late 2008 when senior financial officers began to conjure up fake revenue by manipulating various entries in Dewey & LeBoeuf’s internal accounting system. The firm’s profitability was inflated by approximately $36 million (15 percent) in its 2008 financial results through this use of accounting tricks. For example, compensation for certain personnel was falsely reclassified as an equity distribution in the amount of $13.8 million when they in fact those personnel had no equity in the firm. The improper accounting also reversed millions of dollars of uncollectible disbursements, mischaracterized millions of dollars of credit card debt owed by the firm as bogus disbursements owed by clients, and inaccurately accounted for significant lease obligations held by the firm.
The SEC alleges that Dewey & LeBoeuf finance executives continued using these and other fraudulent techniques to prepare its 2009 financial statements, which were misstated by $23 million. The culture of accounting fraud was so prevalent at the firm that Canellas sent Sanders an e-mail with a schedule containing a list of suggested cost savings to the budget. Among them was a $7.5 million line item reduction entitled “Accounting Tricks.”
According to the SEC’s complaint, Sanders acknowledged in separate e-mail communications, “I don’t want to cook the books anymore. We need to stop doing that.” But he and other finance personnel continued to banter about ways to create fake income. For example, in the midst of a mad scramble at year-end 2008 to meet obligations to bank lenders, Sanders boasted to DiCarmine in an e-mail, “We came up with a big one: Reclass the disbursements.” DiCarmine responded, “You always do in the last hours. That’s why we get the extra 10 or 20% bonus. Tell [Sanders’ wife], stick with me! We’ll buy a ski house next.” DiCarmine later e-mailed Sanders, “You certainly cheered the Chairman up. I could use a dose.” Sanders answered, “I think we made the covenants and I’m shooting for 60%.” He cryptically added, “Don’t even ask – you don’t want to know.”
The SEC alleges that Dewey & LeBoeuf didn’t want investors in the bond offering to know either. The firm continued using and concealing improper accounting practices well after the offering closed in April 2010. The note purchase agreement governing the bond offering required Dewey & LeBoeuf to provide investors and lenders with quarterly certifications. The quarterly certifications made by the firm were all fraudulent.
“As Dewey & LeBoeuf’s revenue was falling and the firm was struggling to meet commitments, its top executives and finance professionals brazenly looked for ways to create fake income and retain their lucrative salaries and bonuses,” said Andrew M. Calamari, director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office.
The SEC’s complaint alleges that Davis violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5. The complaint alleges that DiCarmine, Sanders, Canellas, and Mullikin violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and aided and abetted Dewey LeBoeuf’s and Davis’ violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) pursuant to Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act. The SEC is seeking disgorgement and financial penalties as well as permanent injunctions against all five defendants, and officer and director bars against Davis, DiCarmine, and Sanders. The SEC also will separately seek to prohibit Davis and DiCarmine from practicing as lawyers on behalf of any publicly traded company or other entity regulated by the SEC.
The SEC's investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by William Finkel, Joseph Ceglio, Christopher Mele, and Michael Osnato. The case has been supervised by Sanjay Wadhwa. The litigation will be led by Howard Fischer. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
GRAND JURY INDICTS CEO IN STOCK SCAM CASE
FROM: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Federal Grand Jury Indicts CEO of Chicago-Area Company Accused of Defrauding Investors in Multi-Million Dollar Stock Scam
On February 28, 2014, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois announced that a federal grand jury returned an 11-count indictment against Gregory Webb, the CEO and President of InfrAegis, Inc., a Chicago-area company that claimed to make products for the homeland security market. According to the indictment, between 2007 and October 2013, Webb and InfrAegis obtained more than $9 million from investors through the offer and sale of InfrAegis stock by making false representations about the solvency and financial condition of InfrAegis, about contracts that the company allegedly expected to be awarded or had been awarded, and about the expected and actual return on investment investors would get from the company. For example, Webb falsely represented that the City of Chicago had agreed to install InfrAegis’ iaMedium ― a kiosk that purportedly could detect the presence of nuclear or biological weapons ― throughout the city and that the agreement would result in profits of more than $80 million a year. While InfrAegis engaged in some discussions with the city about the installation of the iaMedium kiosks, there was never any agreement or contract to install the system in Chicago. In another example, Webb falsely represented that the company had a contract with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to install iaMedium kiosks throughout the Washington, D.C., Metro train system. Again, there was never any agreement or contract beyond initial negotiations.
In October 2011, the SEC filed a civil enforcement action in U.S. District Court in Chicago against Webb and InfrAegis based, in part, on the conduct alleged in the criminal indictment. The SEC alleged that, from January 2005 through June 2010, Webb and InfrAegis orchestrated a fraudulent, unregistered offering of stock that raised more than $20 million from hundreds of investors across the country. The SEC claimed that, among other things, Webb and InfrAegis made false and misleading claims about the company’s commercial success and the existence of contracts for the installation of InfrAegis’ products, including the City of Chicago and WMATA contracts described in the criminal indictment. Based on their conduct, the SEC charged Webb and InfrAegis with violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [SEC v. Gregory E. Webb and InfrAegis, Inc., 1:11-cv-07152 (N.D. Ill.)] (LR-22122)
Webb, who currently lives in Dallas, Texas, will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in Chicago on a date to be determined. Webb faces eight counts of mail fraud and three counts of wire fraud, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Restitution is mandatory.
Federal Grand Jury Indicts CEO of Chicago-Area Company Accused of Defrauding Investors in Multi-Million Dollar Stock Scam
On February 28, 2014, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois announced that a federal grand jury returned an 11-count indictment against Gregory Webb, the CEO and President of InfrAegis, Inc., a Chicago-area company that claimed to make products for the homeland security market. According to the indictment, between 2007 and October 2013, Webb and InfrAegis obtained more than $9 million from investors through the offer and sale of InfrAegis stock by making false representations about the solvency and financial condition of InfrAegis, about contracts that the company allegedly expected to be awarded or had been awarded, and about the expected and actual return on investment investors would get from the company. For example, Webb falsely represented that the City of Chicago had agreed to install InfrAegis’ iaMedium ― a kiosk that purportedly could detect the presence of nuclear or biological weapons ― throughout the city and that the agreement would result in profits of more than $80 million a year. While InfrAegis engaged in some discussions with the city about the installation of the iaMedium kiosks, there was never any agreement or contract to install the system in Chicago. In another example, Webb falsely represented that the company had a contract with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to install iaMedium kiosks throughout the Washington, D.C., Metro train system. Again, there was never any agreement or contract beyond initial negotiations.
In October 2011, the SEC filed a civil enforcement action in U.S. District Court in Chicago against Webb and InfrAegis based, in part, on the conduct alleged in the criminal indictment. The SEC alleged that, from January 2005 through June 2010, Webb and InfrAegis orchestrated a fraudulent, unregistered offering of stock that raised more than $20 million from hundreds of investors across the country. The SEC claimed that, among other things, Webb and InfrAegis made false and misleading claims about the company’s commercial success and the existence of contracts for the installation of InfrAegis’ products, including the City of Chicago and WMATA contracts described in the criminal indictment. Based on their conduct, the SEC charged Webb and InfrAegis with violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. [SEC v. Gregory E. Webb and InfrAegis, Inc., 1:11-cv-07152 (N.D. Ill.)] (LR-22122)
Webb, who currently lives in Dallas, Texas, will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in Chicago on a date to be determined. Webb faces eight counts of mail fraud and three counts of wire fraud, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Restitution is mandatory.
Saturday, March 8, 2014
DEBT COLLECTORS BEWARE OF INCREASED ENFORCEMENT OF FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT
FROM: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC Increases Deterrence with Stepped Up Enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Over the last year, the Federal Trade Commission has continued aggressive enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by bringing or resolving nine debt collection cases, according to the agency’s annual summary of debt collection activities.
“When it comes to debt collection, the FTC has many tools in its arsenal, including research, enforcement, and consumer education,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “But in the years since the financial crisis hit, we have increased our emphasis on law enforcement.”
In 2013, the FTC obtained court orders stopping illegal debt collection activities in seven cases, and referred two other debt collection cases to the Department of Justice for civil penalties. In several of the cases, the FTC obtained temporary restraining orders halting the unlawful conduct, freezing the defendants’ assets, and appointing receivers to take over operations while court proceedings progressed (Asset & Capital Management Group and Goldman Schwartz Inc.). The Commission also brought its first enforcement action regarding text message debt collection (National Attorney Collection Services, Inc.), continued to pursue “phantom” debt collectors (Pinnacle Payment Services, LLC and Pro Credit Group, LLC), and placed the largest third-party debt collector under an order that includes the agency’s highest debt collection civil penalty (Expert Global Solutions). For the most egregious violators, the FTC obtained orders banning the responsible parties from ever participating in debt collection again (Forensic Case Management Services, Inc. and Goldman Schwartz Inc.).
The FTC also filed three amicus briefs in the last year. In its brief for the Seventh Circuit, the FTC argued that a payday lender’s mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses may be unconscionable, in part because they require alleged debtors to arbitrate in a remote tribal court, effectively pressuring those consumers to abandon their legal claims or defenses. The FTC joined the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in filing two other amicus briefs. The first, submitted to the Seventh Circuit, argued that a debt collector violates the law whenever its communications tend to deceive or mislead consumers into believing that a time-barred debt could be the subject of a collection suit. The second, submitted to the Second Circuit, argued that debt collectors whose process servers failed to notify consumers that they were being sued violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which broadly prohibits deceptive and unfair collection practices in any form.
Besides enforcement, the FTC’s debt collection program includes education and public outreach as well as research and policy initiatives. The FTC’s consumer education work in debt collection, includes the launch last year of its Financial Educators site. The site addresses personal finance topics, including credit and debt, among other things. The FTC also collaborated with ChildFocus, Inc. and the Annie E. Casey Foundation to help produce the free guide, Youth and Credit: Protecting the Credit of Youth in Foster Care, which discusses credit issues facing the more than 26,000 children in the United States who age out of foster care every year. Finally, as part of the FTC’s Legal Services Collaboration project, FTC staff met with legal services providers in cities around the nation to discuss various consumer protection issues, including the FTC’s work in the debt collection arena.
The FTC’s research and policy activities include the Life of a Debt Roundtable Event, which examined data integrity in debt collection and the flow of consumer data throughout the debt collection process.
Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the CFPB is required to submit annual reports to Congress on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The FTC shares federal jurisdiction for enforcing the act with the CFPB. The FTC’s summary of its own recent work on debt collection issues assists the CFPB in preparing the report to Congress.
The Commission vote approving the letter was 4-0.
FTC Increases Deterrence with Stepped Up Enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Over the last year, the Federal Trade Commission has continued aggressive enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by bringing or resolving nine debt collection cases, according to the agency’s annual summary of debt collection activities.
“When it comes to debt collection, the FTC has many tools in its arsenal, including research, enforcement, and consumer education,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “But in the years since the financial crisis hit, we have increased our emphasis on law enforcement.”
In 2013, the FTC obtained court orders stopping illegal debt collection activities in seven cases, and referred two other debt collection cases to the Department of Justice for civil penalties. In several of the cases, the FTC obtained temporary restraining orders halting the unlawful conduct, freezing the defendants’ assets, and appointing receivers to take over operations while court proceedings progressed (Asset & Capital Management Group and Goldman Schwartz Inc.). The Commission also brought its first enforcement action regarding text message debt collection (National Attorney Collection Services, Inc.), continued to pursue “phantom” debt collectors (Pinnacle Payment Services, LLC and Pro Credit Group, LLC), and placed the largest third-party debt collector under an order that includes the agency’s highest debt collection civil penalty (Expert Global Solutions). For the most egregious violators, the FTC obtained orders banning the responsible parties from ever participating in debt collection again (Forensic Case Management Services, Inc. and Goldman Schwartz Inc.).
The FTC also filed three amicus briefs in the last year. In its brief for the Seventh Circuit, the FTC argued that a payday lender’s mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses may be unconscionable, in part because they require alleged debtors to arbitrate in a remote tribal court, effectively pressuring those consumers to abandon their legal claims or defenses. The FTC joined the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in filing two other amicus briefs. The first, submitted to the Seventh Circuit, argued that a debt collector violates the law whenever its communications tend to deceive or mislead consumers into believing that a time-barred debt could be the subject of a collection suit. The second, submitted to the Second Circuit, argued that debt collectors whose process servers failed to notify consumers that they were being sued violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which broadly prohibits deceptive and unfair collection practices in any form.
Besides enforcement, the FTC’s debt collection program includes education and public outreach as well as research and policy initiatives. The FTC’s consumer education work in debt collection, includes the launch last year of its Financial Educators site. The site addresses personal finance topics, including credit and debt, among other things. The FTC also collaborated with ChildFocus, Inc. and the Annie E. Casey Foundation to help produce the free guide, Youth and Credit: Protecting the Credit of Youth in Foster Care, which discusses credit issues facing the more than 26,000 children in the United States who age out of foster care every year. Finally, as part of the FTC’s Legal Services Collaboration project, FTC staff met with legal services providers in cities around the nation to discuss various consumer protection issues, including the FTC’s work in the debt collection arena.
The FTC’s research and policy activities include the Life of a Debt Roundtable Event, which examined data integrity in debt collection and the flow of consumer data throughout the debt collection process.
Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the CFPB is required to submit annual reports to Congress on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The FTC shares federal jurisdiction for enforcing the act with the CFPB. The FTC’s summary of its own recent work on debt collection issues assists the CFPB in preparing the report to Congress.
The Commission vote approving the letter was 4-0.
LABOR SECRETARY PEREZ'S STATEMENT ON FEBRUARY EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
Statement of Labor Secretary Perez on February employment numbers
WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez issued the following statement about the February 2014 Employment Situation report released today:
"The nation's economic recovery continued in February, with the creation of 175,000 new jobs (162,000 of them in the private sector). For four years uninterrupted now — 48 consecutive months — private-sector employment has grown, to the tune of 8.7 million new jobs. The unemployment rate remained essentially unchanged from January, a full point lower than it was a year ago and below 7 percent for the third straight month following 60 straight months above it.
"February's numbers were resilient, despite the weather. We're moving in the right direction, but this recovery can and must move more quickly, changing more lives and helping more people realize their highest dreams. President Obama believes in opportunity for all — in giving everyone who's willing to work hard the chance to succeed. That's why, for example, he recently took action to launch two new manufacturing innovation hubs that will lead to good jobs. That's why he continues to fight for comprehensive immigration reform that will grow the economy by $1.4 trillion over the next decade. That's why he directed us at the Labor Department to issue $150 million in Ready to Work Partnership grants that will help the long-term unemployed find work.
"The president's budget for fiscal year 2015 provides a road map for accelerating economic growth and expanding opportunity. He proposes major new investments in infrastructure — because upgrading our roads, ports and power grids not only puts people to work right away, it facilitates long-term growth across the economy. The Labor Department budget empowers people, helping them acquire the skills they need, to ensure we're connecting ready-to-work Americans with ready-to-be-filled jobs. The president is also proposing a new Opportunity, Growth and Security Initiative that includes a multibillion-dollar effort to strengthen our community colleges and promote apprenticeship programs, which are a tried-and-true workforce development strategy.
"The president and I are eager to work with Congress on these initiatives and others. But absent leadership from Capitol Hill, the president will take action wherever and whenever possible to help more families secure their foothold in the middle class. This will be a year of action — to accelerate this recovery and create more opportunity for more people."
Statement of Labor Secretary Perez on February employment numbers
WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez issued the following statement about the February 2014 Employment Situation report released today:
"The nation's economic recovery continued in February, with the creation of 175,000 new jobs (162,000 of them in the private sector). For four years uninterrupted now — 48 consecutive months — private-sector employment has grown, to the tune of 8.7 million new jobs. The unemployment rate remained essentially unchanged from January, a full point lower than it was a year ago and below 7 percent for the third straight month following 60 straight months above it.
"February's numbers were resilient, despite the weather. We're moving in the right direction, but this recovery can and must move more quickly, changing more lives and helping more people realize their highest dreams. President Obama believes in opportunity for all — in giving everyone who's willing to work hard the chance to succeed. That's why, for example, he recently took action to launch two new manufacturing innovation hubs that will lead to good jobs. That's why he continues to fight for comprehensive immigration reform that will grow the economy by $1.4 trillion over the next decade. That's why he directed us at the Labor Department to issue $150 million in Ready to Work Partnership grants that will help the long-term unemployed find work.
"The president's budget for fiscal year 2015 provides a road map for accelerating economic growth and expanding opportunity. He proposes major new investments in infrastructure — because upgrading our roads, ports and power grids not only puts people to work right away, it facilitates long-term growth across the economy. The Labor Department budget empowers people, helping them acquire the skills they need, to ensure we're connecting ready-to-work Americans with ready-to-be-filled jobs. The president is also proposing a new Opportunity, Growth and Security Initiative that includes a multibillion-dollar effort to strengthen our community colleges and promote apprenticeship programs, which are a tried-and-true workforce development strategy.
"The president and I are eager to work with Congress on these initiatives and others. But absent leadership from Capitol Hill, the president will take action wherever and whenever possible to help more families secure their foothold in the middle class. This will be a year of action — to accelerate this recovery and create more opportunity for more people."
ANTIBIOTICS LINKED TO CHILDREN'S DIARRHEA
FROM: CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Severe diarrheal illness in children linked to antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices
CDC urges physicians to improve prescribing practices to reduce harm
The majority of pediatric Clostridium difficile infections, which are bacterial infections that cause severe diarrhea and are potentially life-threatening, occur among children in the general community who recently took antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices for other conditions, according to a new study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published this week in Pediatrics.
The study showed that 71 percent of the cases of C. difficile infection identified among children aged 1 through 17 years were community-associated—that is, not associated with an overnight stay in a healthcare facility. By contrast, two-thirds of C. difficile infections in adults are associated with hospital stays.
Among the community-associated pediatric cases whose parents were interviewed, 73 percent were prescribed antibiotics during the 12 weeks prior to their illness, usually in an outpatient setting such as a doctor’s office. Most of the children who received antibiotics were being treated for ear, sinus, or upper respiratory infections. Previous studies show that at least 50 percent of antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices for children are for respiratory infections, most of which do not require antibiotics.
Improved antibiotic prescribing is critical to protect the health of our nation’s children,” said CDC Director Tom Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “When antibiotics are prescribed incorrectly, our children are needlessly put at risk for health problems including C. difficile infection and dangerous antibiotic resistant infections.”
he FY 2015 President’s Budget requests funding for CDC to improve outpatient antibiotic prescribing practices and protect patients from infections, such as those caused by C. difficile. The CDC initiative aims to reduce outpatient prescribing by up to 20 percent and healthcare-associated C. difficile infections by 50 percent in five years. A 50 percent reduction in healthcare-associated C. difficile infections could save 20,000 lives, prevent 150,000 hospitalizations, and cut more than $2 billion in healthcare costs.
C. difficile, which causes at least 250,000 infections in hospitalized patients and 14,000 deaths every year among children and adults, remains at all-time high levels. According to preliminary CDC data, an estimated 17,000 children aged 1 through 17 years get C. difficile infections every year. The Pediatrics study found that there was no difference in the incidence of C. difficile infection among boys and girls, and that the highest numbers were seen in white children and those between the ages of 12 and 23 months.
Taking antibiotics is the most important risk factor for developing C. difficile infections for both adults and children. When a person takes antibiotics, beneficial bacteria that protect against infection can be altered or even eliminated for several weeks to months. During this time, patients can get sick from C. difficile picked up from contaminated surfaces or spread from a health care provider’s hands.
Although there have been significant improvements in antibiotic prescribing for certain acute respiratory infections in children, further improvement is greatly needed. In addition, it is critical that parents avoid asking doctors to prescribe antibiotics for their children and that doctors follow prescribing guidelines.
“As both a doctor and a mom, I know how difficult it is to see your child suffer with something like an ear infection,” said Lauri Hicks, DO, Adobe PDF file director of CDC’s Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work program. “Antibiotics aren’t always the answer. I urge parents to work with their child’s doctor to find the best treatment for the illness, which may just be providing symptom relief.”
Severe diarrheal illness in children linked to antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices
CDC urges physicians to improve prescribing practices to reduce harm
The majority of pediatric Clostridium difficile infections, which are bacterial infections that cause severe diarrhea and are potentially life-threatening, occur among children in the general community who recently took antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices for other conditions, according to a new study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published this week in Pediatrics.
The study showed that 71 percent of the cases of C. difficile infection identified among children aged 1 through 17 years were community-associated—that is, not associated with an overnight stay in a healthcare facility. By contrast, two-thirds of C. difficile infections in adults are associated with hospital stays.
Among the community-associated pediatric cases whose parents were interviewed, 73 percent were prescribed antibiotics during the 12 weeks prior to their illness, usually in an outpatient setting such as a doctor’s office. Most of the children who received antibiotics were being treated for ear, sinus, or upper respiratory infections. Previous studies show that at least 50 percent of antibiotics prescribed in doctor’s offices for children are for respiratory infections, most of which do not require antibiotics.
Improved antibiotic prescribing is critical to protect the health of our nation’s children,” said CDC Director Tom Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “When antibiotics are prescribed incorrectly, our children are needlessly put at risk for health problems including C. difficile infection and dangerous antibiotic resistant infections.”
he FY 2015 President’s Budget requests funding for CDC to improve outpatient antibiotic prescribing practices and protect patients from infections, such as those caused by C. difficile. The CDC initiative aims to reduce outpatient prescribing by up to 20 percent and healthcare-associated C. difficile infections by 50 percent in five years. A 50 percent reduction in healthcare-associated C. difficile infections could save 20,000 lives, prevent 150,000 hospitalizations, and cut more than $2 billion in healthcare costs.
C. difficile, which causes at least 250,000 infections in hospitalized patients and 14,000 deaths every year among children and adults, remains at all-time high levels. According to preliminary CDC data, an estimated 17,000 children aged 1 through 17 years get C. difficile infections every year. The Pediatrics study found that there was no difference in the incidence of C. difficile infection among boys and girls, and that the highest numbers were seen in white children and those between the ages of 12 and 23 months.
Taking antibiotics is the most important risk factor for developing C. difficile infections for both adults and children. When a person takes antibiotics, beneficial bacteria that protect against infection can be altered or even eliminated for several weeks to months. During this time, patients can get sick from C. difficile picked up from contaminated surfaces or spread from a health care provider’s hands.
Although there have been significant improvements in antibiotic prescribing for certain acute respiratory infections in children, further improvement is greatly needed. In addition, it is critical that parents avoid asking doctors to prescribe antibiotics for their children and that doctors follow prescribing guidelines.
“As both a doctor and a mom, I know how difficult it is to see your child suffer with something like an ear infection,” said Lauri Hicks, DO, Adobe PDF file director of CDC’s Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work program. “Antibiotics aren’t always the answer. I urge parents to work with their child’s doctor to find the best treatment for the illness, which may just be providing symptom relief.”
$200 MILLION TO BE SPENT BY COAL COMPANIES ON UPGRADES TO DECREASE WATER POLLUTION
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Coal Companies and Subsidiaries to Spend Estimated $200 Million on Treatment and System-wide Upgrades to Reduce Water Pollution
$27.5 Million Civil Penalty Is Largest in History Under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act
Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (Alpha), one of the nation’s largest coal companies, Alpha Appalachian Holdings (formerly Massey Energy), and 66 subsidiaries have agreed to spend an estimated $200 million to install and operate wastewater treatment systems and to implement comprehensive, system-wide upgrades to reduce discharges of pollution from coal mines in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today. Overall, the settlement covers approximately 79 active mines and 25 processing plants in these five states.
EPA estimates that the upgrades and advanced treatment required by the settlement will reduce discharges of total dissolved solids by over 36 million pounds each year, and will cut metals and other pollutants by approximately nine million pounds per year. The companies will also pay a civil penalty of $27.5 million for thousands of permit violations, which is the largest penalty in history under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
“The unprecedented size of the civil penalty in this settlement sends a strong deterrent message to others in this industry that such egregious violations of the nation's Clean Water Act will not be tolerated,” said Robert G. Dreher, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Today’s agreement is good news for communities across Appalachia, who have too often been vulnerable to polluters who disregard the law. It holds Alpha accountable and will bring increased compliance and transparency among Alpha and its many subsidiaries.”
“This settlement is the result of state and federal agencies working together to protect local communities from pollution by enforcing the law,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “By requiring reforms and a robust compliance program, we are helping to ensure coal mining in Appalachia follows environmental laws that protect public health.”
In addition to paying the penalty, the companies must build and operate treatment systems to eliminate violations of selenium and salinity limits, and also implement comprehensive, system-wide improvements to ensure future compliance with the CWA. These improvements, which apply to all of Alpha’s operations in Appalachia, include developing and implementing an environmental management system and periodic internal and third-party environmental compliance audits.
The companies must also maintain a database to track violations and compliance efforts at each outfall, significantly improve the timeliness of responding to violations, and consult with third party experts to solve problem discharges. In the event of future violations, the companies will be required to pay stipulated penalties, which may be increased and, in some cases, doubled for continuing violations.
The government complaint alleged that, between 2006 and 2013, Alpha and its subsidiaries routinely violated limits in 336 of its state-issued CWA permits, resulting in the discharge of excess amounts of pollutants into hundreds of rivers and streams in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. The violations also included discharge of pollutants without a permit.
In total, EPA documented at least 6,289 violations of permit limits for pollutants that include iron, pH, total suspended solids, aluminum, manganese, selenium, and salinity. These violations occurred at 794 different discharge points, or outfalls. Monitoring records also showed that multiple pollutants were discharged in amounts of more than twice the permitted limit on many occasions. Most violations stemmed from the company’s failure to properly operate existing treatment systems; install adequate treatment systems; and implement appropriate water handling and management plans.
Today’s settlement also resolves violations of a prior 2008 settlement with Massey Energy, and applies to the facilities and sites formerly owned by the company. Under the 2008 settlement, Massey paid a $20 million penalty to the federal government for similar CWA violations, in addition to over a million dollars in stipulated penalties over the course of the next two years. Alpha purchased Massey in June 2011 and, since taking over the company, has been working cooperatively with the government in developing the terms of today’s settlement.
CWA permits allow for the discharge of certain pollutants in limited amounts to rivers, streams, and other water bodies. Permit holders are required to monitor discharges regularly and report results to the respective state agencies.
Alpha, headquartered in Bristol, Va., is one of the largest coal companies in the nation. Alpha operates more than 79 active coal mines and 25 coal preparation plants located throughout Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The Wyoming operations are not included in today’s settlement.
The States of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky are co-plaintiffs in today’s settlement. The U.S. will receive half of the civil penalty and the other half will be divided between the co-plaintiffs based on the number of violations in each state, as follows: West Virginia ($8,937,500), Pennsylvania ($4,125,000), and Kentucky ($687,500).
The consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and approval by the federal court.
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Coal Companies and Subsidiaries to Spend Estimated $200 Million on Treatment and System-wide Upgrades to Reduce Water Pollution
$27.5 Million Civil Penalty Is Largest in History Under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act
Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (Alpha), one of the nation’s largest coal companies, Alpha Appalachian Holdings (formerly Massey Energy), and 66 subsidiaries have agreed to spend an estimated $200 million to install and operate wastewater treatment systems and to implement comprehensive, system-wide upgrades to reduce discharges of pollution from coal mines in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today. Overall, the settlement covers approximately 79 active mines and 25 processing plants in these five states.
EPA estimates that the upgrades and advanced treatment required by the settlement will reduce discharges of total dissolved solids by over 36 million pounds each year, and will cut metals and other pollutants by approximately nine million pounds per year. The companies will also pay a civil penalty of $27.5 million for thousands of permit violations, which is the largest penalty in history under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
“The unprecedented size of the civil penalty in this settlement sends a strong deterrent message to others in this industry that such egregious violations of the nation's Clean Water Act will not be tolerated,” said Robert G. Dreher, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Today’s agreement is good news for communities across Appalachia, who have too often been vulnerable to polluters who disregard the law. It holds Alpha accountable and will bring increased compliance and transparency among Alpha and its many subsidiaries.”
“This settlement is the result of state and federal agencies working together to protect local communities from pollution by enforcing the law,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “By requiring reforms and a robust compliance program, we are helping to ensure coal mining in Appalachia follows environmental laws that protect public health.”
In addition to paying the penalty, the companies must build and operate treatment systems to eliminate violations of selenium and salinity limits, and also implement comprehensive, system-wide improvements to ensure future compliance with the CWA. These improvements, which apply to all of Alpha’s operations in Appalachia, include developing and implementing an environmental management system and periodic internal and third-party environmental compliance audits.
The companies must also maintain a database to track violations and compliance efforts at each outfall, significantly improve the timeliness of responding to violations, and consult with third party experts to solve problem discharges. In the event of future violations, the companies will be required to pay stipulated penalties, which may be increased and, in some cases, doubled for continuing violations.
The government complaint alleged that, between 2006 and 2013, Alpha and its subsidiaries routinely violated limits in 336 of its state-issued CWA permits, resulting in the discharge of excess amounts of pollutants into hundreds of rivers and streams in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. The violations also included discharge of pollutants without a permit.
In total, EPA documented at least 6,289 violations of permit limits for pollutants that include iron, pH, total suspended solids, aluminum, manganese, selenium, and salinity. These violations occurred at 794 different discharge points, or outfalls. Monitoring records also showed that multiple pollutants were discharged in amounts of more than twice the permitted limit on many occasions. Most violations stemmed from the company’s failure to properly operate existing treatment systems; install adequate treatment systems; and implement appropriate water handling and management plans.
Today’s settlement also resolves violations of a prior 2008 settlement with Massey Energy, and applies to the facilities and sites formerly owned by the company. Under the 2008 settlement, Massey paid a $20 million penalty to the federal government for similar CWA violations, in addition to over a million dollars in stipulated penalties over the course of the next two years. Alpha purchased Massey in June 2011 and, since taking over the company, has been working cooperatively with the government in developing the terms of today’s settlement.
CWA permits allow for the discharge of certain pollutants in limited amounts to rivers, streams, and other water bodies. Permit holders are required to monitor discharges regularly and report results to the respective state agencies.
Alpha, headquartered in Bristol, Va., is one of the largest coal companies in the nation. Alpha operates more than 79 active coal mines and 25 coal preparation plants located throughout Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The Wyoming operations are not included in today’s settlement.
The States of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky are co-plaintiffs in today’s settlement. The U.S. will receive half of the civil penalty and the other half will be divided between the co-plaintiffs based on the number of violations in each state, as follows: West Virginia ($8,937,500), Pennsylvania ($4,125,000), and Kentucky ($687,500).
The consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and approval by the federal court.
SARAH SEWALL SPEAKS ON ATROCITY PREVENTION AT UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Atrocity Prevention is a Core National Security Interest for the United States
Remarks
Sarah Sewall
Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
25th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council
Geneva, Switzerland
March 4, 2014
(As delivered)
High-Level Dialogue With Relevant United Nations Entities on the Promotion of Preventative Approaches Within the UN System
I would like to focus my comments on an immense aspect of prevention with which the United States has long been concerned, and that is the prevention of mass atrocities. Atrocity prevention is a core national security interest for the United States. In 2012, our government formalized an institutional structure to bring together numerous government agencies and departments to address these issues, with the creation of the Atrocities Prevention Board. Since its creation, the Atrocities Prevention Board has helped U.S. government policymakers identify and address atrocity threats, while overseeing deeper institutional changes that will make us more nimble and effective in addressing, and in some cases responding to, these threats in the future. This work remains an ongoing effort, and one that, we increasingly understand, must be shared with other international actors in order to be effective.
Our key to atrocity prevention is a whole-of-government approach, bringing together a wide range of experts from different government departments. Whether through training or multilateral engagement, prevention is a guiding lens for much of our work in challenging situations and countries where conflicts and atrocities are taking place.
In our work we focus on the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information on early-warning indicators and trends of mass atrocity risks. Each agency has its own tools and trainings at its disposal, to ensure that all of our officers in Washington, as well as in the field, are prepared to gauge situations and identify risks well before they escalate to violence, or to react to conflicts immediately and effectively.
We believe a structured inner organizational framework and effective assessments of early warning signs and indicators will give us a better chance to spot problems early on, and allow us to use the tools we have available to influence the context and actors that could trigger violence. This may include sharing information about early warning, establishing national and multilateral focal points, and coordinating responses – be those in the form of deploying mediators or public diplomacy — to stress the importance of preventing a situation from escalating into a mass atrocity.
So therefore, we commend the United Nations for its Rights Up Front Plan. We support the approach of ensuring coherent strategies and information sharing and a “One UN approach.” We hope to work together with OHCHR and other member states to respond to situations in a timely fashion. The key is not to just mitigate the damage caused by situations as they happen, but to look at the early warning signs and preempt atrocities outside of conflict situations and, in places where conflict has begun, respond before violence escalates into mass atrocities.
In closing, I would like to pose a question. What role can member states and civil society organizations play in both New York and Geneva, as well as on the ground, to enhance the UN’s work on prevention and to advance the goals of “Rights Up Front”?
Atrocity Prevention is a Core National Security Interest for the United States
Remarks
Sarah Sewall
Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
25th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council
Geneva, Switzerland
March 4, 2014
(As delivered)
High-Level Dialogue With Relevant United Nations Entities on the Promotion of Preventative Approaches Within the UN System
I would like to focus my comments on an immense aspect of prevention with which the United States has long been concerned, and that is the prevention of mass atrocities. Atrocity prevention is a core national security interest for the United States. In 2012, our government formalized an institutional structure to bring together numerous government agencies and departments to address these issues, with the creation of the Atrocities Prevention Board. Since its creation, the Atrocities Prevention Board has helped U.S. government policymakers identify and address atrocity threats, while overseeing deeper institutional changes that will make us more nimble and effective in addressing, and in some cases responding to, these threats in the future. This work remains an ongoing effort, and one that, we increasingly understand, must be shared with other international actors in order to be effective.
Our key to atrocity prevention is a whole-of-government approach, bringing together a wide range of experts from different government departments. Whether through training or multilateral engagement, prevention is a guiding lens for much of our work in challenging situations and countries where conflicts and atrocities are taking place.
In our work we focus on the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information on early-warning indicators and trends of mass atrocity risks. Each agency has its own tools and trainings at its disposal, to ensure that all of our officers in Washington, as well as in the field, are prepared to gauge situations and identify risks well before they escalate to violence, or to react to conflicts immediately and effectively.
We believe a structured inner organizational framework and effective assessments of early warning signs and indicators will give us a better chance to spot problems early on, and allow us to use the tools we have available to influence the context and actors that could trigger violence. This may include sharing information about early warning, establishing national and multilateral focal points, and coordinating responses – be those in the form of deploying mediators or public diplomacy — to stress the importance of preventing a situation from escalating into a mass atrocity.
So therefore, we commend the United Nations for its Rights Up Front Plan. We support the approach of ensuring coherent strategies and information sharing and a “One UN approach.” We hope to work together with OHCHR and other member states to respond to situations in a timely fashion. The key is not to just mitigate the damage caused by situations as they happen, but to look at the early warning signs and preempt atrocities outside of conflict situations and, in places where conflict has begun, respond before violence escalates into mass atrocities.
In closing, I would like to pose a question. What role can member states and civil society organizations play in both New York and Geneva, as well as on the ground, to enhance the UN’s work on prevention and to advance the goals of “Rights Up Front”?
COMPANY AND INDIVIDUALS FOUND GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY TO SELL TRADE SECRETS TO CHINESE GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED COMPANIES
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Two Individuals and Company Found Guilty of Conspiracy to Sell Trade Secrets to Chinese Companies
First Federal Jury Conviction Under Economic Espionage Act of 1996
A federal jury in San Francisco has found two individuals and one company guilty of economic espionage, theft of trade secrets, bankruptcy fraud, tax evasion, and obstruction of justice for their roles in a long-running effort to obtain U.S. trade secrets for the benefit of companies controlled by the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), announced U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag; John P. Carlin, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice; David Johnson, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), San Francisco Division; and Jose Martinez, Special Agent in Charge of the Oakland Field Office, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Criminal Investigation.
The jury found that Walter Lian-Heen Liew (aka Liu Yuanxuan), his company, USA Performance Technology Inc. (USAPTI), and Robert Maegerle conspired to steal trade secrets from E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company regarding their chloride-route titanium dioxide production technology and sold those secrets for large sums of money to state-owned companies of the PRC. The purpose of their conspiracy was to help those companies develop large-scale chloride-route titanium dioxide production capability in the PRC, including a planned 100,000-ton titanium dioxide factory in Chongqing. This case marks the first federal jury conviction on charges brought under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996.
“Fighting economic espionage and trade secret theft is one of the top priorities of this Office and we will aggressively pursue anyone, anywhere who attempts to steal valuable information from the United States,” said U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag. “As today’s verdict demonstrates, foreign governments threaten our economic and national security by engaging in aggressive and determined efforts to steal U.S. intellectual property. I commend the efforts of the women and men of the FBI and the IRS in protecting America’s businesses and our national security.”
“The theft of America’s trade secrets for the benefit of a foreign government poses a substantial threat to our economic and national security” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John Carlin. “Today’s verdict clearly demonstrates that we take this threat seriously. This case shows that we will not hesitate to pursue and prosecute those who steal from American businesses.”
“The battle against economic espionage has become one of the FBI’s main fronts in its efforts to protect U.S. national security in the 21st century,” said Special Agent in Charge David Johnson.
"This is a case about lying, cheating, and stealing," said José M. Martínez, Special Agent in Charge, IRS Criminal Investigation. "The defendants stole secrets, lied to the bankruptcy court and cheated the IRS and creditors. In today's economic environment, it's more important than ever that the American people feel confident that everyone is playing by the rules and paying their fair share."
The jury also found that Liew, USAPTI, and Maegerle obstructed justice during the course of their conspiracy. The jury found that Liew filed false tax returns for USAPTI and Performance Group, a predecessor company to USAPTI, and made false statements and oaths in bankruptcy proceedings for Performance Group. The guilty verdicts followed a seven-week jury trial before the Honorable Jeffery S. White, U.S. District Court Judge.
Liew, 56, of Walnut Creek, Calif., was convicted of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted economic espionage, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, conspiracy to obstruct justice, witness tampering, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, false statements, filing false tax returns, false statements in bankruptcy proceedings, and false oath in bankruptcy proceedings. Liew was an owner and president of USAPTI, a company headquartered in Oakland, Calif., that offered consulting services. USAPTI was found guilty of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted economic espionage, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Evidence at trial showed that in the 1990s, Liew met with the government of the PRC and was informed that the PRC had prioritized the development of chloride-route titanium dioxide (TiO2) technology. TiO2 is a commercially valuable white pigment with numerous uses, including coloring paint, plastics, and paper. DuPont’s TiO2 chloride-route process also produces titanium tetrachloride, a material with military and aerospace uses. Liew was aware that DuPont had developed industry leading TiO2 technology over many years of research and development and assembled a team of former DuPont employees, including Robert Maegerle, to assist him in his efforts to convey DuPont's TiO2 technology to entities in the PRC. Liew executed contracts with state-owned entities of the PRC for chloride-route TiO2 projects that relied on the transfer of illegally obtained DuPont technology. Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI obtained and sold DuPont’s TiO2 trade secret to the Pangang Group companies for more than $20 million.
Robert Maegerle, 78, of Harbeson, Del., was found guilty of conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted theft of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Evidence at trial showed that Maegerle was employed by DuPont as an engineer from 1956 to 1991 where he had developed detailed knowledge of DuPont's TiO2 technology and expertise in building TiO2 production lines. He also had access to DuPont TiO2 trade secrets, including specific information regarding DuPont’s TiO2 facility at Kuan Yin, Taiwan. He provided these trade secrets to Liew and USAPTI in furtherance of their contracts with state-owned companies of the PRC for chloride-route TiO2 projects.
The jury also found Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI guilty of obstructing justice by causing an answer to be filed in a federal civil lawsuit in which they falsely claimed that no information from DuPont’s Kuan Yin plant was used in the USAPTI designs for the development of TiO2 manufacturing facilities. Liew was also found guilty of witness tampering for his efforts to influence a co-defendant’s testimony in the civil lawsuit. The jury also convicted Liew of conspiring with his wife, Christina Liew, to mislead the FBI by corruptly concealing records, documents, and other objects during the FBI’s investigation into their criminal activity.
Liew was also convicted of filing a false income tax return for his company, Performance Group, for calendar years 2006, 2007, and 2008 and for USAPTI in 2009 and 2010. The jury also found Liew guilty of making false statements and a false oath in connection with filing for bankruptcy for Performance Group in 2009.
Liew, as co-owner of USAPTI, entered into contracts worth in excess of $20 million to convey TiO2 trade secret technology to Pangang Group companies. The Liews received millions of dollars of proceeds from these contracts. The proceeds were wired through the United States, Singapore, and ultimately back into several bank accounts in the PRC in the names of relatives of Christina Liew.
DuPont is a company based in Wilmington, Del., that manufactures a wide variety of products, including TiO2. DuPont invented the chloride-route process for manufacturing TiO2 in the late-1940s and since then has invested heavily in research and development to improve that production process. The global titanium dioxide market has been valued at roughly $12 billion per year, and DuPont has the largest share of that market.
The chloride-route process is cleaner, more efficient, and produces a higher-quality product than the sulfate-route process prevalent in the PRC. The object of the defendants’ conspiracy was to convey DuPont’s secret chloride-route technology to the PRC companies for the purpose of building modern TiO2 production facilities in the PRC without investing in time-consuming, costly research and development.
The second superseding indictment also charges, Liew’s wife, Christina Hong Qiao Liew (aka Qiao Hong), with conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, witness tampering, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, and false statements. The charges against Ms. Liew were severed from those against Walter Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI. Ms. Liew will appear before the Honorable Jeffery S. White on Thursday, March 6, 2014, in San Francisco to set the date for her trial.
Tze Chao (aka Zhao Zhi), a former DuPont employee who was also charged in the second superseding indictment, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit economic espionage on March 1, 2012.
Hou Shengdong, the Vice Director of the Chloride Process TiO2 Project Department for the Pangang Group, was also charged in the second superseding indictment with conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, and attempted economic espionage. He is currently a fugitive.
Charges of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, and attempted economic espionage are also pending against the four PRC state-owned companies charged in the second superseding indictment.
The sentencing hearings for Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI are scheduled for June 10, 2014, before Judge White in Oakland, Calif. Liew was remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals pending sentencing. Maegerle remains out of custody on conditions of release. The maximum statutory penalties for each of the counts are listed below. However, any sentence will be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
The case is being prosecuted by the Special Prosecutions and National Security Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Francisco, the Counterespionage Section of the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., the FBI, Palo Alto Resident Agency, and Oakland Field Office, IRS Criminal Investigation.
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Two Individuals and Company Found Guilty of Conspiracy to Sell Trade Secrets to Chinese Companies
First Federal Jury Conviction Under Economic Espionage Act of 1996
A federal jury in San Francisco has found two individuals and one company guilty of economic espionage, theft of trade secrets, bankruptcy fraud, tax evasion, and obstruction of justice for their roles in a long-running effort to obtain U.S. trade secrets for the benefit of companies controlled by the government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), announced U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag; John P. Carlin, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice; David Johnson, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), San Francisco Division; and Jose Martinez, Special Agent in Charge of the Oakland Field Office, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Criminal Investigation.
The jury found that Walter Lian-Heen Liew (aka Liu Yuanxuan), his company, USA Performance Technology Inc. (USAPTI), and Robert Maegerle conspired to steal trade secrets from E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company regarding their chloride-route titanium dioxide production technology and sold those secrets for large sums of money to state-owned companies of the PRC. The purpose of their conspiracy was to help those companies develop large-scale chloride-route titanium dioxide production capability in the PRC, including a planned 100,000-ton titanium dioxide factory in Chongqing. This case marks the first federal jury conviction on charges brought under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996.
“Fighting economic espionage and trade secret theft is one of the top priorities of this Office and we will aggressively pursue anyone, anywhere who attempts to steal valuable information from the United States,” said U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag. “As today’s verdict demonstrates, foreign governments threaten our economic and national security by engaging in aggressive and determined efforts to steal U.S. intellectual property. I commend the efforts of the women and men of the FBI and the IRS in protecting America’s businesses and our national security.”
“The theft of America’s trade secrets for the benefit of a foreign government poses a substantial threat to our economic and national security” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John Carlin. “Today’s verdict clearly demonstrates that we take this threat seriously. This case shows that we will not hesitate to pursue and prosecute those who steal from American businesses.”
“The battle against economic espionage has become one of the FBI’s main fronts in its efforts to protect U.S. national security in the 21st century,” said Special Agent in Charge David Johnson.
"This is a case about lying, cheating, and stealing," said José M. Martínez, Special Agent in Charge, IRS Criminal Investigation. "The defendants stole secrets, lied to the bankruptcy court and cheated the IRS and creditors. In today's economic environment, it's more important than ever that the American people feel confident that everyone is playing by the rules and paying their fair share."
The jury also found that Liew, USAPTI, and Maegerle obstructed justice during the course of their conspiracy. The jury found that Liew filed false tax returns for USAPTI and Performance Group, a predecessor company to USAPTI, and made false statements and oaths in bankruptcy proceedings for Performance Group. The guilty verdicts followed a seven-week jury trial before the Honorable Jeffery S. White, U.S. District Court Judge.
Liew, 56, of Walnut Creek, Calif., was convicted of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted economic espionage, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, conspiracy to obstruct justice, witness tampering, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, false statements, filing false tax returns, false statements in bankruptcy proceedings, and false oath in bankruptcy proceedings. Liew was an owner and president of USAPTI, a company headquartered in Oakland, Calif., that offered consulting services. USAPTI was found guilty of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted economic espionage, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Evidence at trial showed that in the 1990s, Liew met with the government of the PRC and was informed that the PRC had prioritized the development of chloride-route titanium dioxide (TiO2) technology. TiO2 is a commercially valuable white pigment with numerous uses, including coloring paint, plastics, and paper. DuPont’s TiO2 chloride-route process also produces titanium tetrachloride, a material with military and aerospace uses. Liew was aware that DuPont had developed industry leading TiO2 technology over many years of research and development and assembled a team of former DuPont employees, including Robert Maegerle, to assist him in his efforts to convey DuPont's TiO2 technology to entities in the PRC. Liew executed contracts with state-owned entities of the PRC for chloride-route TiO2 projects that relied on the transfer of illegally obtained DuPont technology. Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI obtained and sold DuPont’s TiO2 trade secret to the Pangang Group companies for more than $20 million.
Robert Maegerle, 78, of Harbeson, Del., was found guilty of conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted theft of trade secrets, conveying trade secrets, and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Evidence at trial showed that Maegerle was employed by DuPont as an engineer from 1956 to 1991 where he had developed detailed knowledge of DuPont's TiO2 technology and expertise in building TiO2 production lines. He also had access to DuPont TiO2 trade secrets, including specific information regarding DuPont’s TiO2 facility at Kuan Yin, Taiwan. He provided these trade secrets to Liew and USAPTI in furtherance of their contracts with state-owned companies of the PRC for chloride-route TiO2 projects.
The jury also found Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI guilty of obstructing justice by causing an answer to be filed in a federal civil lawsuit in which they falsely claimed that no information from DuPont’s Kuan Yin plant was used in the USAPTI designs for the development of TiO2 manufacturing facilities. Liew was also found guilty of witness tampering for his efforts to influence a co-defendant’s testimony in the civil lawsuit. The jury also convicted Liew of conspiring with his wife, Christina Liew, to mislead the FBI by corruptly concealing records, documents, and other objects during the FBI’s investigation into their criminal activity.
Liew was also convicted of filing a false income tax return for his company, Performance Group, for calendar years 2006, 2007, and 2008 and for USAPTI in 2009 and 2010. The jury also found Liew guilty of making false statements and a false oath in connection with filing for bankruptcy for Performance Group in 2009.
Liew, as co-owner of USAPTI, entered into contracts worth in excess of $20 million to convey TiO2 trade secret technology to Pangang Group companies. The Liews received millions of dollars of proceeds from these contracts. The proceeds were wired through the United States, Singapore, and ultimately back into several bank accounts in the PRC in the names of relatives of Christina Liew.
DuPont is a company based in Wilmington, Del., that manufactures a wide variety of products, including TiO2. DuPont invented the chloride-route process for manufacturing TiO2 in the late-1940s and since then has invested heavily in research and development to improve that production process. The global titanium dioxide market has been valued at roughly $12 billion per year, and DuPont has the largest share of that market.
The chloride-route process is cleaner, more efficient, and produces a higher-quality product than the sulfate-route process prevalent in the PRC. The object of the defendants’ conspiracy was to convey DuPont’s secret chloride-route technology to the PRC companies for the purpose of building modern TiO2 production facilities in the PRC without investing in time-consuming, costly research and development.
The second superseding indictment also charges, Liew’s wife, Christina Hong Qiao Liew (aka Qiao Hong), with conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, attempted theft of trade secrets, possession of trade secrets, witness tampering, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, and false statements. The charges against Ms. Liew were severed from those against Walter Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI. Ms. Liew will appear before the Honorable Jeffery S. White on Thursday, March 6, 2014, in San Francisco to set the date for her trial.
Tze Chao (aka Zhao Zhi), a former DuPont employee who was also charged in the second superseding indictment, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit economic espionage on March 1, 2012.
Hou Shengdong, the Vice Director of the Chloride Process TiO2 Project Department for the Pangang Group, was also charged in the second superseding indictment with conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, and attempted economic espionage. He is currently a fugitive.
Charges of conspiracy to commit economic espionage, conspiracy to commit theft of trade secrets, and attempted economic espionage are also pending against the four PRC state-owned companies charged in the second superseding indictment.
The sentencing hearings for Liew, Maegerle, and USAPTI are scheduled for June 10, 2014, before Judge White in Oakland, Calif. Liew was remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals pending sentencing. Maegerle remains out of custody on conditions of release. The maximum statutory penalties for each of the counts are listed below. However, any sentence will be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
The case is being prosecuted by the Special Prosecutions and National Security Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Francisco, the Counterespionage Section of the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., the FBI, Palo Alto Resident Agency, and Oakland Field Office, IRS Criminal Investigation.
Friday, March 7, 2014
CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP ON TAX REFORM ACT OF 2014
FROM: CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP WEBSITE
Camp Releases Tax Reform Plan to Strengthen the Economy
and Make the Tax Code Simpler, Fairer and Flatter
Recently, Congressman Dave Camp (R-Midland) released draft legislation to fix America’s broken tax code by lowering tax rates while making the code simpler and fairer for families and job creators. Camp’s latest draft, the “Tax Reform Act of 2014,” spurs stronger economic growth, greater job creation and puts more money in the pockets of hardworking taxpayers.
Based on analysis by the independent, non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), without increasing the budget deficit, the Tax Reform Act of 2014:
Creates up to 1.8 million new private sector jobs.
Allows roughly 95 percent of filers to get the lowest possible tax rate by simply claiming the standard deduction (no more need to itemize and track receipts).
Strengthens the economy and increases Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by up to $3.4 trillion (the equivalent of 20 percent of today’s economy).
Based on calculations using data provided by JCT, the average middle-class family of four could have an extra $1,300 per year in its pocket from the combination of lower tax rates in the plan and higher wages due to a stronger economy.
Discussing the need to fix America’s broken tax code, Camp said, “It is no secret that Americans are struggling. Far too many families haven’t seen a pay raise in years. Many have lost hope and stopped looking for a job. And too many kids coming out of college are buried under a mountain of debt and have few prospects for a good-paying career. We’ve already lost a decade, and before we lose a generation, Washington needs to wake up to this reality and start offering concrete solutions and debating real policies that strengthen the economy and help hardworking taxpayers. Tax reform is one way we can do that.”
Camp Releases Tax Reform Plan to Strengthen the Economy
and Make the Tax Code Simpler, Fairer and Flatter
Recently, Congressman Dave Camp (R-Midland) released draft legislation to fix America’s broken tax code by lowering tax rates while making the code simpler and fairer for families and job creators. Camp’s latest draft, the “Tax Reform Act of 2014,” spurs stronger economic growth, greater job creation and puts more money in the pockets of hardworking taxpayers.
Based on analysis by the independent, non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), without increasing the budget deficit, the Tax Reform Act of 2014:
Creates up to 1.8 million new private sector jobs.
Allows roughly 95 percent of filers to get the lowest possible tax rate by simply claiming the standard deduction (no more need to itemize and track receipts).
Strengthens the economy and increases Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by up to $3.4 trillion (the equivalent of 20 percent of today’s economy).
Based on calculations using data provided by JCT, the average middle-class family of four could have an extra $1,300 per year in its pocket from the combination of lower tax rates in the plan and higher wages due to a stronger economy.
Discussing the need to fix America’s broken tax code, Camp said, “It is no secret that Americans are struggling. Far too many families haven’t seen a pay raise in years. Many have lost hope and stopped looking for a job. And too many kids coming out of college are buried under a mountain of debt and have few prospects for a good-paying career. We’ve already lost a decade, and before we lose a generation, Washington needs to wake up to this reality and start offering concrete solutions and debating real policies that strengthen the economy and help hardworking taxpayers. Tax reform is one way we can do that.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)