Enforcement

Subscribe to Enforcement via RSS

Just a few days ago, a state-linked hacking group claimed responsibility for a disruptive cyberattack on a Fortune 500 medical technology company with no ransom demand and no negotiation, calling it retaliation for a U.S. military strike. The risk of this type of politically-motivated cyberattack may increase given the increasingly volatile geopolitical environment. To combat this, the President recently signed an executive order targeting cybercrime carried out by transnational criminal organizations, aimed at improving federal coordination in combatting cybercrime. Now is an important time for boards and management teams to focus on crisis and risk management, including durable operational resilience planning. This alert provides perspectives about current best practices on incident preparedness in the face of such threats, explains how this preparedness can be supplemented by an operational resilience framework, discusses the practical implications of the executive order, and lays out a governance hygiene checklist to guide your next cybersecurity oversight discussion.Continue Reading Cybersecurity in the Age of Cyber Warfare: Governance Reminders for Public Company Boards

2026 promises to be a year that will demand both agility and strategic foresight from boards of directors and management as they navigate unprecedented challenges.

Drawing on insights from colleagues across Cleary Gottlieb’s global offices, our 2026 edition of Selected Issues for Boards of Directors examines the critical issues that dominated boardroom discussions in 2025 and identifies the emerging trends that will shape board agendas in the year ahead.

Continue Reading Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2026

On January 7, 2026, the White House issued an Executive Order (EO) titled “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting,” announcing an effort to “accelerate defense procurement and revitalize the defense industrial base” by preventing “major defense contractors” from “conduct[ing] stock buy-backs or issu[ing] dividends at the expense of accelerated procurement and increased production capacity.”[1]  The EO states that going forward there will be limitations on the ability of defense contractors who are “underperforming on their contracts” to pay dividends or buy-back stock, at least until such time as they are “able to produce a superior product, on time and on budget,” pursuant to their existing defense contracts.  The Secretary of the U.S. Department of War (the “Secretary”) is empowered to identify underperformers and initiate remediation or enforcement.[2]Continue Reading Executive Order on “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting” – Key Implications for Defense and Government Contractors

On December 26, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the previous grant of a stay of the injunction enjoining enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and beneficial ownership reporting rule.  As a result, the nationwide preliminary injunction originally granted by the district court is once again in effect pending consideration of the DOJ’s appeal by the Fifth Circuit’s merits panel.Continue Reading Fifth Circuit Reinstates CTA Injunction Pending Oral Arguments in March; FinCEN January 13 Deadline on Hold

This article was authored by J.T. Ho and Helena K. Grannis from Cleary Gottlieb & Kyle Pinder from Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP.

On September 15, 2025, the Office of Mergers and Acquisitions of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance permitted a novel approach to increase retail shareholder voting when it granted a no action letter request from Exxon Mobil Corporation.Continue Reading Applying A Retail Voting Program in Practice

On September 10, 2025, the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services hosted a hearing titled “Proxy Power and Proposal Abuse: Reforming Rule 14a-8 to Protect Shareholder Value” to assess the shareholder proposal process, evaluate the influence of proxy advisory firms and highlight legislative solutions to limit shareholder proposals to material issues. The hearing comes at a time of enhanced regulatory scrutiny of the shareholder proposal process and could be indicative of future 14a-8 reform approaches under the SEC’s recently issued Spring 2025 Reg-Flex Agenda. Continue Reading House Financial Services Committee Previews Possible 14a-8 Reform

On Friday, the Court in Texas v. Blackrock issued an opinion largely denying defendants’ motion to dismiss, which allows a coalition of States to proceed with claims that BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard conspired to violate the antitrust laws by pressuring publicly traded coal companies to reduce output in connection with the investment firms’ ESG commitments. The Court found that the States plausibly alleged that defendants coordinated with one another, relying on allegations that they joined climate initiatives, made parallel public commitments, engaged with management of the public coal companies, and aligned proxy voting on disclosure issues. It is worth noting that, while the court viewed BlackRock’s, State Street’s, and Vanguard’s participation in Climate Action 100+ and NZAM as increasing the plausibility of the claim in favor of denying the motion to dismiss, the Court clarified that it was not opining that the parties conspired at Climate Action 100+ or NZAM.Continue Reading Shareholder Engagement Considerations in light of Texas v. Blackrock

As discussed in our last Corporate Transparent Act (CTA) update, the U.S. Treasury Department announced on March 2 that it planned to issue an interim rule excluding U.S. companies and citizens from CTA reporting obligations. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has now done so, limiting the scope of the CTA to non-U.S. parties. This will dramatically reduce the operational burdens and costs of the CTA for registered investment advisers.Continue Reading FinCEN Eliminates CTA Requirements for All U.S. Companies and U.S. Individuals

We noted in our last Corporate Transparent Act (CTA) update that on February 27, 2025, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a bureau of the U.S. Treasury Department, announced that it would not take any enforcement actions against any company that does not file or update beneficial ownership information required under the CTA until after FinCEN issued a new interim rule.  The Treasury Department announced yesterday that it will not enforce any penalties or fines against “U.S. citizens or domestic reporting companies or their beneficial owners” for not filing this information even after the new interim rule.  Instead, the Treasury Department said that it will issue a proposed rulemaking “that will narrow the scope of the rule to foreign reporting companies only.” Continue Reading Trump Administration Proposes Eliminating CTA Requirements for All U.S. Companies

Amid various ongoing litigation concerning the constitutionality of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) had announced on February 19, 2025, that it was extending the CTA beneficial ownership information filing deadline for most companies to March 21, 2025 (see Client Alert here).  Now, FinCEN has taken a step further, announcing yesterday “that it will not issue any fines or penalties or take any other enforcement actions against any companies based on any failure to file or update” any reports mandated by the CTA.  According to FinCEN, “no enforcement actions will be taken, until a forthcoming interim final rule becomes effective.”  FinCEN states that it will issue the interim rule no later than March 21, 2025, and the new rule will establish new CTA filing deadlines. Continue Reading FinCEN Pauses All CTA Filing Obligations and Will Issue New Rules