SEC Issues Largest Ever Whistleblower Award of $279 Million (reuters.com) 47
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has given its largest ever award of almost $279 million to a whistleblower whose information was crucial in an enforcement action by the regulator. The SEC did not reveal the case involved, but the award shows there is a significant incentive for whistleblowers to come forward with accurate information about potential securities law violations. Reuters reports: The award is more than double the $114 million that it had issued in October 2020. "As this award shows, there is a significant incentive for whistleblowers to come forward with accurate information about potential securities law violations," said Gurbir Grewal, director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, in a statement. "The whistleblower's sustained assistance including multiple interviews and written submissions was critical to the success of these actions," said Creola Kelly, chief of the SEC's Office of the Whistleblower.
Payments to whistleblowers are made out of an investor protection fund that was established by Congress and financed entirely through monetary sanctions paid to the SEC by securities law violators. Awards to whistleblowers can range from 10% to 30% of the money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million.
Payments to whistleblowers are made out of an investor protection fund that was established by Congress and financed entirely through monetary sanctions paid to the SEC by securities law violators. Awards to whistleblowers can range from 10% to 30% of the money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million.
And the government gets how much? (Score:2)
The fact that the whistleblower gets a huge award from the government and then has to pay a huge chunk of it in taxes to the very same government makes your brain hurt.
Re:And the government gets how much? (Score:5, Informative)
The IRS rule is you pay federal taxes on income derived from any source. Therefore, you would pay 39.6% on the payment. However, you can deduct attorneys fees from this amount and, as a rule, attorneys generally take up to 40% of the award. Also, there is a possibility of you paying state income tax on the award as well.
A bit more information [marketrealist.com].
Re:And the government gets how much? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not a scam.
It's called "hiring a lawyer on a contingency basis".
The lawyer is risking a lot of billable hours that he can win your case.
In exchange he gets a high payout.
What's the client get? A lawyer they couldn't otherwise afford.
How do you think it should work? Lawyers work for free?
Re: (Score:2)
How do you think it should work? Lawyers work for free?
Making laws much more simple so that we do not need so many lawyers.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok that's nice but do you think the average 100 IQ person can make a logical argument?
And how about someone 80 IQ? Remember half the population is under 100 IQ.
Almost every time I read slashdot, where most poster are probably above 100, I see several people posting emotional screeds and rants, unable to use evidence or make a logical point or reflexively slamming the mod down button. What chance does an average person have if so many "smart" people can't handle a debate like an adult should be able to?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm, according to this link, average and median are close enough so as not to matter for our purposes but yes you are right that 100 is likely not the exact mathematical average. Close, though.
https://www.123test.com/interp... [123test.com]
This was 5th link down but had the clearest chart.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, it wold not eliminate the need for lawyers. And I do not have any problem with hiring a lawyer on a contingency basis. It would only reduce the need for lawyers.
The complexity reduction would be a nice thing but it is unlikely to happen on a significant scale due to the reality how law making works.
Re: (Score:3)
I know you like to rant about wealthy people, but plenty of regular people lose money to crooked investors and many cities have pension funds that also have money tied up in the market. But don't let that get in the way of your political screed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What, you don't believe the purpose of whistleblower laws is to ensure somebody's grandkids never have to work a day in their lives?
(I'm only halfway kidding. $250 million should be enough for great-grandkids, but in practice, the second or third generation never learns fiscal discipline and ends up blowing their money early.)
FUCK WHY? (Score:1)
Re:FUCK WHY? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:FUCK WHY? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not necessarily, no. Why would it?
Whistleblower will never work again and in some cases is literally risking their life.
They're getting a percentage of money that would be zero without their help.
Why can't you let the little guy win for once?
Re: FUCK WHY? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Have you ever complained about the obscene compensation that the CEO class gets? Have you ever wondered about all the bullshit fees that mysteriously appear on bills? Have you even seen "shipping and handling" fees that are 30% of the cost of the item?
Corrupt practices, both legal and illegal, are so prevalent in our economy that it should make everyone furious. Meanwhile you whine about a truly minuscule amount of money compared to the multi-billions dollars worth o
Re:FUCK WHY? (Score:5, Insightful)
The award amount is generally 10% of the money collected from the fine.
It's done that way because honestly, the whistleblower might otherwise participate in the scheme - let's say you cap it at $10M, and given how large it is here, that whistleblower might know if they kept quiet for two years, they'd make $50M. That won't encourage people to come forward.
Also, whistleblowers generally suffer huge pushback - they are effectively unemployable in their field of employment and other employers generally won't employ them, so it helps to set them for life because they're not going to be able to work ever again. Or they're going to have to make huge sacrifices like having to move out of the country.
And hey, if it encourages people to report frequently and report often all the better
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Again, how does $50 million bucks not "set them for life??"
Also, if waiting a few years makes their award even bigger, that's strong incentive NOT to come forward for much longer.
Re:FUCK WHY? (Score:4, Informative)
Sure award them, hell go into the millions, But why such an obscene amount?
The law is written in such a way that the whistleblower gets a small percentage of the penalty amount the company pays. In other words, some company here just paid a massive fine to the SEC.
Re: (Score:2)
> while still making that whistle blower rich for life
Who's rich and doesn't spend a lot of their money?
It was CETA Energy (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
It needs to be something for which the SEC took in Billions in fines.
Re: (Score:2)
If they're authorised to pay out 10-30% of proceeds, and they paid out $279m then we're looking at a minimum fine of $930m. A $155m ponzi scheme doesn't cut it.
I doubt they'd pay out before the fine was collected and absolutely beyond possibility of reduction on appeal.
What's more, surely the SEC can't toss that many billion dollar fines around. So it shouldn't be too hard to narrow down the potential cases. Chances are those even peripherally involved will know who the whistleblower must be, making the an
Now try blowing the whistle on war crimes (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Snowden literally gave away (among a lot more info), the identities of most of the overseas people working with the U.S. in Iraq and everywhere else in the world. He surely got a lot of people murdered, claiming he "didn't have time" to filter the release, absurd considering it was months. Then he just happens to go straight to Moscow, where he immediately meets and marries a trophy wife.
Snowden was recruited by the Putin regime. Get over it.
Re: (Score:2)
He got his girlfriend moved to Russia and then married her. He didn't marry a "trophy wife" he'd just met after moving to Russia. Give evidence of one person killed due to details leaked by Snowden. Come on, just one.
Re: (Score:2)
> then fled to Putin
Are you a CIA propagandist or have you just not had time in the past decade to look into this for five minutes?
I'm assuming you're not just dumb and fall for obvious hoaxes.
Re: (Score:2)
How is it telling? The only reason the reward is millions is because the amount defrauded was millions. Would it also be telling if the total fraud had only been $100 with a reward of $10? No one planned for this case or this payout; they just setup some flexible machinery.
Irony would be (Score:2)
... if the whistle blower was one of these Wall Street types who gets 25 million dollar bonuses every year for doing not much.
Re: (Score:1)
That's not where Wall Street bonuses are.
Not even close.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not where Wall Street bonuses are.
Not even close.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news... [bloomberg.com]
"The top earners at Goldman will be approaching $30 million", "And at Jefferies Financial Group Inc., pay for some of the best performers has surpassed $25 million"
Re: (Score:1)
So one form of extreme waste deserves another!
Noice! How much reward is available ... (Score:2)
... for exposing rampant insider trading by congress-critters?
oh. nevermind. fuck.
SEC serves a legitimate purpose. (Score:2)
That is some fucked up shit. (Score:1)
After Tax (Score:1)
Amazing (Score:1)