Home - Blank Rome LLP

Register to receive insights and analyses on breaking news and trends across varying industries.
<a class="link-primary mt-4" href="/subscribe">Subscribe</a>

Philadelphia, PA

New York, NY

Wilmington, DE

Cincinnati, OH

Princeton, NJ

Los Angeles, CA

Houston, TX

Tampa, FL

Shanghai

South Florida

Pittsburgh, PA

Washington, D.C.

Chicago, IL

Orange County, CA

Dallas, TX

Boston, MA

Welcome to The BR Investigations and Enforcement Forum (“B.R.I.E.F.”), Blank Rome’s monthly newsletter highlighting enforcement priorities and compliance risk issues impacting businesses domestically and abroad. B.R.I.E.F. delivers concise insights into boardroom resilience, regulatory and sanctions developments, internal investigations, enforcement trends, and evolving financial crime risks. We invite you to share this resource with colleagues and visit our&nbsp;<a href="https://www.blankrome.com/services-and-industries/white-collar-defense-investigations">White Collar Defense &amp; Investigations</a>&nbsp;webpage to learn more about our team.

core/paragraph

core/separator

core/heading

March and April 2026 have seen a recalibration, not a retreat, in U.S. white‑collar enforcement. While overall enforcement volume remains lower than prior administrations, federal agencies are concentrating resources on fraud involving government funds, market integrity, sanctions, anti-money laundering (“AML”) compliance, and digital‑asset‑related activity.&nbsp;

Attorney General Issues Memorandum on Creation of National Fraud Enforcement Division

On April 7, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1435311/dl?inline">memorandum</a>&nbsp;announcing the creation of the National Fraud Enforcement Division (the “Division”). The purpose of this division is to “zealously investigate and prosecute those who steal or fraudulently misuse taxpayer dollars.” The memorandum states that the Department of Justice (“DOJ” or the “Department”) will consolidate and realign relevant resources into the new division based on recommendations from the Office of Legal Policy. The Division will consider bringing in non-criminal related elements to the Division within four months of its creation.

Ten days later, DOJ&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/one-week-national-fraud-enforcement-division-announces-more-arrests-convictions-and">announced</a>&nbsp;that in one week, the Division publicized arrests, convictions, and sentences representing over $340 million in taxpayer fraud. These cases involved the fraudulent procurement and use of COVID-19 related funds, Medicare fraud, and Social Security benefit fraud. The loss or intended loss in each individual case ranged from $54,000 to over $100 million.

On&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-department-fraud-office-local-prosecutor-assignment/">April 22</a>, DOJ directed every U.S. Attorney’s Office to assign a line prosecutor to work in place for the newly created Division, reinforcing the Department’s emphasis on coordinated fraud prosecutions nationwide. According to an internal DOJ memorandum, these prosecutors will remain embedded in their home districts while supporting Washington‑based leadership, a structure designed to improve local execution of fraud cases involving government programs, healthcare, taxes, and corporate misconduct. DOJ leadership described the staffing model as central to a “nationwide strategy to eliminate fraud in every district.” The move coincides with DOJ’s rollout of substantial grant funding for state and local prosecutors to serve temporarily as federal fraud prosecutors.

Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Submits Notice of Proposed Rule to Pay Whistleblowers

On March 30, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”)&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fincen.gov/news/news-releases/fincen-proposes-rule-pay-whistleblowers">announced</a>&nbsp;that it had submitted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to the Federal Register to implement whistleblower incentives. The proposed rule focuses on violations of major financial crime laws, including the Bank Secrecy Act, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Trading with the Enemy Act, and the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/04/01/2026-06271/whistleblower-incentives-and-protections">proposed rule</a>&nbsp;requires a 120-day waiting period for whistleblowers who obtained the relevant information due to being in a management position. The purpose of this waiting period is to “help avoid any incentive for whistleblowers to undermine effective compliance programs while minimizing any potential harm from delayed reporting of tips to law enforcement.”&nbsp;

Any information provided must be “original information” and provided voluntarily. Whistleblowers are eligible for an award of 10 to 30 percent of the monetary penalties collected if their tip leads to a successful enforcement action by the Treasury or DOJ.

CFTC Sues Four States Over Attempts to Regulate Prediction Markets

On April 2, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ("CFTC")&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/9206-26">filed lawsuits</a>&nbsp;in federal district courts in Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois, seeking to invalidate the states' efforts to regulate online prediction markets. The lawsuits accuse the states of overstepping their authority by attempting to "outlaw, regulate and otherwise restrain" prediction markets and ask the courts to declare that all state gambling laws are "unconstitutional and invalid" as applied to prediction markets. In a parallel dispute, the CFTC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.law360.com/articles/2469906/cftc-sues-new-york-over-sports-event-contract-crackdown">sued New York</a>&nbsp;on April 24, alleging that state officials unlawfully moved to block sports-related event contracts, with Chairman Michael Selig asserting the agency’s “exclusive regulatory authority” over prediction markets.&nbsp;<a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/securities-law/cftc-sues-new-york-to-assert-prediction-market-jurisdiction">All four states</a>&nbsp;had previously taken action against prediction market companies, including issuing cease-and-desist letters to prediction market operators over the past year. Arizona had also filed criminal charges against executives of Kalshi, a leading prediction market.

CFTC Chairman Michael Selig stated that the commission has "exclusive regulatory authority over these markets" and criticized "overzealous state regulators." State officials pushed back sharply, with Connecticut Attorney General William Tong characterizing the contracts as "plainly unlicensed illegal gambling under time-worn state law." The suits represent the latest escalation in the ongoing legal battle between prediction markets and state gaming regulators and come on the heels of the CFTC’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/16/2026-05105/prediction-markets">advance notice of proposed rulemaking</a>&nbsp;on prediction market regulation.&nbsp;

The DOJ Brought the First-Ever Charges for Insider Trading in Online Prediction Markets&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-soldier-charged-using-classified-information-profit-prediction-market-betshttps:/www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-soldier-charged-using-classified-information-profit-prediction-market-betshttps:/www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-soldier-charged-using-classified-information-profit-prediction-market-bets">DOJ charged</a>&nbsp;Gannon Ken Van Dyke, an active-duty U.S. Army soldier, with various offenses stemming from allegations that he used classified information relating to the U.S. military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro to place wagers on Maduro- and Venezuela-related event contracts on Polymarket. After U.S. forces apprehended Maduro, Van Dyke earned approximately $409,881 in profits from roughly $33,000 in wagers. Van Dyke allegedly then took steps to conceal his identity and move his proceeds to a foreign cryptocurrency vault.

As the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wsj.com/finance/currencies/arrest-of-u-s-soldier-signals-polymarkets-wild-west-days-are-ending-5d31ea69?mod=hp_lead_pos3">Wall Street Journal</a>&nbsp;notes, the charges are "a watershed moment for prediction markets, heralding a new era of stricter government enforcement of the wildly popular betting platforms."&nbsp;

The DOJ is Focusing on Price Fixing Allegations in the Agricultural Industry

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/justice-department-nears-filing-antitrust-case-against-egg-producers-2a019fc3">DOJ is reportedly preparing to file</a>&nbsp;a civil antitrust lawsuit against some of the country's largest egg producers, including Cal-Maine Foods and Versova, over allegations that the companies coordinated pricing through an information service that compiles benchmark prices using sales data shared by competing producers. The egg companies have argued the price increases were driven by supply and demand. The investigation follows a pattern of cases targeting competitors for sharing sensitive pricing information through intermediaries, including prior suits against RealPage, a service used by apartment landlords, and Agri Stats, which assists poultry producers with pricing.

core/list-item

DOJ has also opened a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/justice-department-is-criminally-investigating-beef-companies-1f91a3c6">criminal probe</a>&nbsp;into whether large meatpackers engaged in anticompetitive conduct, following President Trump's call last year for an investigation into the companies. Criminal antitrust cases are typically reserved for allegations of price fixing, market collusion, or bid rigging. As part of the investigation, antitrust enforcers have examined how beef companies buy cattle from ranchers through contracts that reference a pricing benchmark that some ranchers have complained is manipulated. &nbsp;

core/list

The Treasury Department Releases Proposed Rules to Combat Money Laundering

FinCEN has&nbsp;<a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/04/10/2026-07033/anti-money-laundering-and-countering-the-financing-of-terrorism-programs">proposed a rule</a>&nbsp;to reform the requirements for financial institutions' anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) programs. The proposed rule is designed to shift compliance models toward a more effectiveness-based, risk-driven approach and would create a “two-pronged framework” under which a financial institution’s “establishment” of its AML/CFT program would be evaluated separately from its “implementation.”

FinCEN and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”)&nbsp;<a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/04/10/2026-06963/permitted-payment-stablecoin-issuer-anti-money-launderingcountering-the-financing-of-terrorism">jointly issued a proposed rule</a>&nbsp;to implement provisions of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (“GENIUS Act”). The rule implements the GENIUS Act's directive to treat permitted payment stablecoin issuers (“PPSIs”) as financial institutions for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act, proposes AML obligations for PPSIs, and proposes certain specific obligations required by the GENIUS Act for PPSIs. It also implements the GENIUS Act's directive to require PPSIs to maintain effective sanctions compliance programs.

SEC Announces FY 2025 Enforcement Results and “Back to Basics” Strategy&nbsp;

On April 7, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”)&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-34">released</a>&nbsp;its fiscal year (“FY”) 2025 enforcement summary, highlighting a shift in how the agency measures and deploys enforcement resources. While the Commission reported hundreds of filed actions and significant monetary remedies, its leadership emphasized that enforcement effectiveness will no longer be judged by volume or headline penalty figures. Instead, the Commission signaled a move toward matters involving tangible harm, including fraud, market manipulation, insider trading, and breaches of fiduciary duty. The announcement also highlighted a renewed focus on charging individual wrongdoers, returning funds to affected investors, and rewarding cooperation and remediation, reflecting a broader recalibration of enforcement priorities.

OFAC Escalates April 2026 Sanctions Designations and Secondary‑Sanctions Warnings

Over the past two months, the Treasury Department, through OFAC,&nbsp;<a href="https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions">issued</a>&nbsp;a series of new sanctions designations spanning Iran-related activity, terrorism, narcotics trafficking, and financial cybercrime, reflecting an aggressive use of economic tools to disrupt illicit networks. Recent actions targeted, including Iranian oil and weapons‑procurement networks, global drug trafficking organizations tied to the Sinaloa Cartel, cyber fraud and scam operations in Southeast Asia, and entities allegedly funneling funds to designated terrorist groups. In releasing these updates, Treasury repeatedly underscored the risk of secondary sanctions for non‑U.S. banks, intermediaries, and facilitators that knowingly, or in some cases recklessly, support sanctioned actors or transactions, signaling heightened expectations for financial institutions’ sanctions screening, due diligence, and transaction monitoring programs.

DOJ Treats Sanctions Violations in Crypto as Criminal Conduct

Recent DOJ actions reflect a shift toward sanctions compliance in the digital asset space, with prosecutors now framing crypto‑related sanctions failures as criminal conduct. As shown in recent DOJ cases&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/garantex-cryptocurrency-exchange-disrupted-international-operation">such as the Garantex action</a>, once digital asset transactions involve sanctioned persons, entities, banks, or designated wallets, sanctions theories are now increasingly paired with charges such as money laundering, unlicensed money transmission, bank fraud, and violations implicating national security.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newstrail.com/the-sanctions-and-the-sanctioned-doj-actions-aligning-crypto-with-ofac-violations/">High‑profile matters</a>&nbsp;also illustrate that DOJ is focused not only on designated actors themselves, but on service providers that allegedly enabled sanctioned parties to continue moving funds after designation. The trend signals that ineffective sanctions controls may now form the basis for criminal liability.

SEC Leadership Change: David Woodcock Appointed Director of Enforcement

On April 8, the SEC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-35-sec-appoints-david-woodcock-director-division-enforcement">announced</a>&nbsp;that David Woodcock will assume the role of Director of the Division of Enforcement in May, following the March resignation of Margaret Ryan. The appointment reinforces the Commission’s recently articulated shift; SEC leadership emphasized that the change is intended to support a continued “course correction” in enforcement priorities, with renewed emphasis on core securities law violations, individual accountability, and disciplined use of enforcement resources.

Treasury and DOJ Emphasize Individual Accountability

Recent April 2026 actions by DOJ underscore that individual prosecution remains the central mechanism through which federal authorities are pursuing corporate crime. Through&nbsp;<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/one-week-dojs-new-fraud-division-secures-300m-funding-prosecutorial-support-while-announcing">announcements</a>&nbsp;tied to the newly formed National Fraud Enforcement Division, DOJ emphasized that its enforcement strategy is aimed at identifying, charging, and sentencing individuals responsible for fraudulent conduct involving government programs and taxpayer funds. DOJ officials highlighted that corporate structures and intermediaries will not shield executives or operators from criminal exposure, with leadership reiterating that those who misuse public funds “will answer to federal prosecutors.” These statements reflect DOJ’s emphasis on deterrence through personal accountability.

In Case You Missed It...

<a href="/news-and-events/what-does-ibms-17-million-fca-settlement-portend-government-contractors-wrestling/" id="42664">What Does IBM’s $17 Million FCA Settlement Portend for Government Contractors Wrestling with Compliance?</a>

Blank Rome partners&nbsp;<a href="/people/jennifer-a-short/" id="18959">Jennifer A. Short</a>,&nbsp;<a href="/people/dominique-l-casimir/" id="19011">Dominique L. Casimir</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="/people/brooke-t-iley/" id="19152">Brooke T. Iley</a>&nbsp;authored this alert on the Department of Justice’s announcement of a $17 million False Claims Act settlement with International Business Machines (“IBM”), based on the company’s alleged violations of federal anti-discrimination laws.&nbsp;<a href="/news-and-events/what-does-ibms-17-million-fca-settlement-portend-government-contractors-wrestling/" id="42664">Read more&gt;&gt;</a>

<a href="/news-and-events/the-world-banks-2025-integrity-compliance-guidelines-explained-simply-for-companies-seeking-mdb-financing/" id="43892">The World Bank’s 2025 Integrity Compliance Guidelines, Explained Simply for Companies Seeking MDB Financing</a>

Blank Rome partner&nbsp;<a href="https://www.blankrome.com/people/bradley-l-henry">Bradl</a><a href="/people/bradley-l-henry/" id="18773">e</a><a href="https://www.blankrome.com/people/bradley-l-henry">y L. Henry</a>&nbsp;authored this article for Westlaw Today regarding The World Bank Group’s modernization of its Integrity Compliance Guidelines for the first time since 2010, issuing a comprehensive update on November 24, 2025.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.blankrome.com/publications/world-banks-2025-integrity-compliance-guidelines-explained-simply-companies-seeking">Read more&gt;&gt;</a>

© 2026 Blank Rome LLP. All rights reserved. Please contact Blank Rome for permission to reprint. Notice: The purpose of this update is to identify select developments that may be of interest to readers. The information contained herein is abridged and summarized from various sources, the accuracy and completeness of which cannot be assured. This update should not be construed as legal advice or opinion, and is not a substitute for the advice of counsel.

The BR Investigations and Enforcement Forum: April 2026

Offices

Stay Connected

Slide Menu

Slide Search

The BR Investigations and Enforcement Forum: April 2026

Offices

Stay Connected