IELR Blog

Official Blog of the International Enforcement Law Reporter

Activities and Publications of the Ibero-American Institute of The Hague in the Semester 2025-I, including the Complete Program of the XII Ibero-American Week of International Justice (The Hague, May 21 – June 4, 2025)

by Leave a Comment

The following is information about the activities and publications of the Ibero-American Institute of The Hague (IIH) in the Semester 2025-I received from Professor Hector Olasolo, President, IIH.

 

  1. The Official Program of the XII Ibero-American Week of International Justice (The Hague, May 21 – June 4, 2025),includes the following activities:

-XII CPI Competition for Judicial Simulation before the International Criminal Court (Spanish version) with 19 universities from Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Uruguay and Venezuela.

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/actividades/concurso-de-simulacion-judicial-sobre-la-cpi.

 

-International Seminar for the XX Anniversary of the Office of Public Defence of Victims of the International Criminal Court (OPDV), the XV Anniversary of the IIH and the XV Anniversary of the International Legal Clinic developed by both entities in alliance with the Faculty of Jurisprudence of the Universidad del Rosario (Colombia).

 

-IX Seminar on International Thought on International Criminal Justice where the following will be presented: (a) Volumes 16 to 42 of the Ibero-American Perspectives on Justice Collection published between 2024 and 2025 (available for free download at: https://editorial.tirant.com/es/colecciones/perspectivas-iberoamericanas-sobre-la-justicia); (b) the research work carried out in the period 2011-2025 by the International Legal Clinic; and (c) the essays selected from the CEBOS and CECJ Competitions.

 

For more information, please visit: https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/actividades/semana-iberoamericana-de-la-justicia-internacional-y-los-derechos-humanos

 

  1. Sending to the Publisher the trilogy prepared in commemoration of the XV IIH Anniversary entitled: THE TRILOGY ON THE ROLE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT FROM NON-POSITIVIST PERSPECTIVES. It is expected to be published in January 2026 and will be presented at the XIII Ibero-American Week of International Justice (May 2026).

 

  1. Completion of the 27 collective works resulting from the Research Program on Responses to Corruption associated with Transnational Organized Crime (2020-2024), funded by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Colombia and the Universities of Rosario and Pontificia Javeriana (Colombia), which has had the institutional support of the IIH. At this time, 20 of the 27 volumes are already available for free download, it is expected that another 4 will be available at the end of this month of May (criminology 1 and 2 and criminal procedural law 1 and 2) and the remaining 3 (tax I and 2 and criminal procedural law 3) between June and August.

 

All the collective works have been published as volumes 16 to 42 of the Ibero-American Perspectives on Justice Collection (co-edited by Tirantlo Blanch, IIH and Instituto Joaquín Herrera Flores (Brazil/Spain)) and can be downloaded free of charge at:

https://editorial.tirant.com/es/colecciones/perspectivas-iberoamericanas-sobre-la-justicia.

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/formacion-e-investigacion/coleccion-perspectiva-iberoamericana-sobre-la-justicia.

 

  1. Publication of Volume 12 (2024) of the Ibero-American Yearbook of International Criminal Law (ANIDIP), which is published jointly with the Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) and the Tirant lo Blanch Publishing House (Spain), and can be downloaded free of charge (like the previous 11 volumes) at:

https://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/anidip.

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/formacion-e-investigacion/anidip-anuario-ibero-americano-sobre-derecho-internacional-penal.

 

  1. Submission to the Editorial of Volume 5 (2025) of the Bilingual Series (English/Spanish): International Law Clinic Reports (ILCR). Publication is expected in the last quarter of 2025. The above four volumes are available for free download at:

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/formacion-e-investigacion/international-law-clinic-reports-informes-de-la-clinica-juridica-internacional.

https://repository.urosario.edu.co/items/f41c5371-14b0-4b08-85c7-e1ce9330f24d.

 

  1. Selection by the international jury of the winning essay of the XIV Edition of the CEBOS Essay Contest on International Criminal Justice: Mercenaries or Victims? The International Criminal Responsibility of the Recruiters of Deceived Soldiers, written by Simón Ospina Pieschacón (Colombia).

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/actividades/certamen-de-ensayos-blattmann-odio-benito-y-steiner

 

  1. Selection by the international jury of the winning essay of the VIII Edition of the Contest of Critical Studies on Justice (CECJ): International Right to Cultural Restitution? A View from the Quimbaya Treasure Case, written by Gabriel Andrés Concha Botero (Colombia).

https://www.iberoamericaninstituteofthehague.org/actividades/certamen-de-estudios-criticos-sobre-la-justicia

If anyone is interested in the 18-page official program, please contact bzagaris@bcrlaw.com

 

RUSSIAN NATIONAL CHARGED FOR CONSPIRING WITH RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE TO ATTACK UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT COMPUTER SYSTEMS

by Leave a Comment

Maryland Federal Grandy Jury Indicts Amin Timovich Stigal

By Kaila Hall

 

On June 25, 2024, a Maryland Federal Grand Jury charged1 Russian national Amin Timovich Stigal with conspiracy to hack into and destroy the Ukrainian Government’s computer systems and data ahead of Russia’s invasion in February 2022. Stigal allegedly attacked computer systems in countries that supported Ukraine, including the United States. Stigal currently remains at large. The U.S. District Court in Maryland issued a warrant for Stigal’s arrest. The Department of State is offering a reward2 of up to $10 million for information on Stigal’s location or his malicious cyber activity.

Stigal has been linked to several Russian cyberattacks against Ukraine and NATO-allied nations in recent years. From August 5, 2021, through February 3, 2022, Stigal and the Russian Federation’s Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU) used the data-wiping malware WhisperGate to examine U.S. Federal Government computers in Maryland. The WhisperGate malware initially wipes all computer files, then proceeds to imitate ransomware by displaying a ransom note demanding $10,000 in Bitcoin. In the event that the ransom was paid, the computer data would be irretrievable, nonetheless. Per court documents from the U.S. District Court in Maryland, Stigal and GRU probed U.S. government websites and computers 63 times. The District Court did not disclose whether the probing of U.S. systems in Maryland was successful. The indictment stated that Stigal and the Russian military officers used fake identities, a global network of computers, and cryptocurrency to conceal their connection to the Russian government.

The U.S. District Court in Maryland’s indictment also pointed to an incident Stigal was involved in on January 13, 2022, in which he allegedly conspired with the GRU to use “WhisperGate” to launch cyber-attacks against the Ukrainian Government. Leading up to the invasion of Ukraine, the Russian military urged Stigal to hack into Ukrainian government computers that deal with matters of critical infrastructure,3 agriculture, education, science, and emergency services. Stigal and the GRU targeted multiple Ukrainian government entities,4 including the Ukrainian Ministry of International Affairs, the State Treasury, the Judiciary Administration, the State Portal for Digital Services, the Ministry of Education and Science, the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Service for Food Safety and Consumer Protection, the Ministry of Energy, the Accounting Chamber for Ukraine, the State Emergency Service, the State Forestry Agency, and the Motor Insurance Bureau.

Federal prosecutors5 alleged that the Ukrainian State Portal for Digital Services website was hacked and displayed a message saying, “Ukrainians! All information about you has become public, be afraid and expect the worst. This is for your past, present and future.”

Per U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Stigal faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison if convicted. A federal district court judge will review such guidelines and determine the sentence if applicable.

In response to the January 2022 WhisperGate incident, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg criticized the attacks, stating “NATO has worked closely with Ukraine for years to help boost its cyber defences. NATO cyber experts in Brussels have been exchanging information with their Ukrainian counterparts on the current malicious cyber activities. Allied experts in country are also supporting the Ukrainian authorities on the ground. In the coming days, NATO and Ukraine will sign an agreement on enhanced cyber cooperation, including Ukrainian access to NATO’s malware information sharing platform. NATO’s strong political and practical support for Ukraine will continue.”6

Following Stigal’s indictment, Attorney General Merrick Garland confirmed, “The Justice Department will continue to stand with Ukraine on every front in its fight against Russia’s war of aggression, including by holding accountable those who support Russia’s malicious cyber activity.” Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen also indicated that “the Department will do its part to prevent and disrupt such malicious behavior that relies upon online services or infrastructure in the U.S., or that targets U.S. victims.” Assistant Attorney General also noted the Justice Department would “also identify, pursue, and eventually hold to account those responsible for Russia’s malicious actions, including the cybercriminals that the Russian government cultivates in furtherance of its malign agenda.”

The Russian Embassy in Washington D.C. has not released a statement regarding the indictment. The indictment was announced amid a series of diplomatic talks between the United States and Russia on cyber-attacks.

On January 14, 2022, at the request of the United States, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) conducted7 raids and arrested fourteen alleged members of REvil, a Russian-based ransomware crime group. The FSB announced it had also seized 426 million rubles or $600,000 of computer equipment. In June 2021, U.S. President Joseph Biden met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva and demanded Putin’s cooperation in combating cyber-attacks and ransomware. A month later, Biden warned Putin that Russia would face severe consequences if it did not act promptly to neutralize ransomware actors and threats. In the months since Biden’s initial meeting with Putin, American officials have reiterated their requests for anti-cybercrime cooperation. The U.S. and Russia have established an “expert group” to address cyber-attacks. In February 2023, another cyber-attack attributed to TA471 (UAC-0056), a Russian-allied cyber threat actor, also used WhisperGate to target and destroy Ukranian government entities’ computer systems. TA471 has also attacked multiple NATO member states that support Ukraine.

 

 

Kaila Hall is an intern at IELR. She is a rising senior at Cornell University.

 

[1] “Office of Public Affairs | Russian National Charged for Conspiring with Russian Military Intelligence to Destroy Ukrainian Government Computer Systems and Data | United States Department of Justice.” justice.gov, 26 June 2024,

www.justice.gov/opa/pr/russian-national-charged-conspiring-russia-military-intelligence-destroy-ukrainian

 

[2] Amin Stigal – Rewards for Justice. net/rewards/amin-stigal/.

 

[3] Mettler, “$10M Offered for Russian Accused in “WhisperGate” Malware Attack on Ukraine.” Washington Post, 26 June 2024,

www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/06/26/10m-offered-russian-accused-whispergate-malware-attack-ukraine/

 

[4] “Office of Public Affairs | Russian National Charged for Conspiring with Russian Military Intelligence to Destroy Ukrainian Government Computer Systems and Data | United States Department of Justice.” justice.gov, 26 June 2024,

www.justice.gov/opa/pr/russian-national-charged-conspiring-russia-military-intelligence-destroy-ukrainian

 

[5] Mettler, “$10M Offered for Russian Accused in “WhisperGate” Malware Attack on Ukraine.” Washington Post, 26 June 2024,

www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/06/26/10m-offered-russian-accused-whispergate-malware-attack-ukraine/

 

[6] “Statement by the NATO Secretary General on Cyber Attacks against Ukraine.” NATO, www.google.com/url?q=www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_190850.htm&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1719606038338 933&usg=AOvVaw32hkQxjdX24iSgGfq1Du45

 

[7] Zagaris, “RUSSIA ARRESTS 14 ALLEGED MEMBERS of the REVIL RANSOMWARE GANG as UKRAINE EXPERIENCES HACKS and MALWARE.” IELR , 18 Jan. 2022,

ielr.com/content/russia-arrests-14-alleged-members-revil-ransomware-gang-ukraine-experiences-hacks-and

MOLDOVA ARRESTS OFFICIALS OBSTRUCTING RED NOTICES

by Leave a Comment

Interpol Launches Anti-Corruption Operation in Moldova

By Kaila Hall

 

On June 6, 2024, Moldova arrested1 four interior ministry employees who allegedly allowed criminals to escape Red Notice arrest warrants by the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL). Moldova’s Interpol Chief has also been detained2 and indicted on a corruption charge. The officials are believed to have ties to an international criminal conspiracy with connections to cybercriminals in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. Evidence3 suggests that the officials have accepted multi-million U.S. dollar bribes to harbor criminals in Moldova and protect them from Red Notices. The Anti-Corruption Prosecution Office ordered raids on 33 locations with the assistance of federal authorities in the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Spain. Law enforcement seized mobile phones, laptops, computers, and documents. These items will be examined during the criminal investigation. Further information will be provided surrounding these arrests, pending an additional criminal investigation.

The Anti-Corruption Chief Veronica Dragalin explained that the detained officials had “paid intermediaries and public figures in Moldova to inform wanted criminals of (their) Red Notice status.” She stated that the officials assisted wanted criminals to “obtain asylum or refugee status” in Moldova and elsewhere “with the aim of blocking and deleting” the notices by bribing public officials.4

On April 2, 2024, the Anti-Corruption Prosecution Office opened a criminal case regarding this scandal, following an initial investigation from the French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office. Prior to the case’s opening, INTERPOL provided information to French law enforcement regarding this matter.  On June 4, 2024, Moldova’s Anti-Corruption Prosecution Office executed search warrants.5

According to INTERPOL’s Secretary General, Jürgen Stock, “over 70,000 people are subject to INTERPOL Red Notices.” Currently, there are nearly 7,000 Red Notices6 in circulation. INTERPOL releases Red Notice alerts to its 196 member states, requesting that “law enforcement worldwide locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition, surrender, or similar legal action.” It should be noted that a Red Notice is not an international arrest warrant. The individuals are wanted by the requesting member country or international tribunal. Member states apply their laws when deciding whether to arrest a person.

INTERPOL Red Notices have received criticism7 in recent years. In 2018, French journalist Mathieu Martiniere and his colleague Robert Schmidt published an investigation into Interpol. They told AFP that “[INTERPOL’s] situation has improved, but more than a hundred innocent people still slip through the net every year and can be extradited and then imprisoned.” The Red Notice system has also been frequently accused of “being misused by member states to hunt down political dissidents.” This prompted Secretary General Jürgen Stock to create a task force, in 2014, of around 40 experts to validate notices prior to publication. In 2022, 1,465 of the nearly 71,000 notices were canceled before publication. The organization has faced additional controversy, especially with the election of Ahmed Naser al-Raisi as the President of INTERPOL in 2021. The Emirati general is currently under investigation8 in France for complicity in torture.

[1] “Moldova Arrests Officials for Helping Criminals Bypass Interpol Red Notices.” Www.occrp.org, www.occrp.org/en/daily/18785-moldova-arrests-officials-for-helping-criminals-bypass-interpol-red-notices.‌

[2] “Moldova’s Interpol Chief Charged with Corruption.” Www.euractiv.com, 8 June 2024, www.euractiv.com/section/enlargement/news/moldovas-interpol-chief-charged-with-corruption/. ‌

[3] “Search Warrants Executed by the Anti-Corruption Prosecution Office in an International Joint Investigation | Procuratura Anticoruptie a Republicii Moldova.” Procuratura.md, 11 June 2024, procuratura.md/anticoruptie/comunicate/comunicate-de-presa/search-warrants-executed-anti-corruption-prosecution-office. ‌

[4] “Interpol and FBI Break up a Cyber Scheme in Moldova to Get Asylum for Wanted Criminals.” AP News, 4 June 2024, apnews.com/article/interpol-fbi-moldova-red-notice-08755a95baae8edac2f9ccc9c4ad1775.

[5] “INTERPOL Action Leads to Anti-Corruption Operation in Moldova.” Www.interpol.int, www.interpol.int/en/News-and-Events/News/2024/INTERPOL-action-leads-to-anti-corruption-operation-in-Moldova.‌

[6] “View Red Notices.” Www.interpol.int, www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Notices/Red-Notices/View-Red-Notices.

[7] “Interpol Focuses on Abuse of Famous Red Notices as It Marks 100 Years.” France 24, 29 Nov. 2023, www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231129-interpol-fights-crime-and-controversial-image-100-years-on.‌

[8] “Emirati General Accused of Torture Appointed Head of Interpol.” France 24, 25 Nov. 2021, www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211125-emirati-general-accused-of-torture-appointed-head-of-interpol-police-agency.‌

 

U.S. Treasury Publishes 2024 National Strategy for Combating Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing

by Leave a Comment

By Kaila Hall

On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury published the 2024 National Strategy for Combating Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing1 (2024 Strategy). The report addresses the key threats included in the 2024 National Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and Proliferation Financing Risk Assessments2 from February 2024 (2024 National Risk Assessments). This latter report identified illicit financial threats resulting from fraudulent schemes, ransomware attacks, the ongoing opioid epidemic, foreign and domestic terrorist attacks, corruption, and the exploitation of technological advancement in financial products and services.

Amid the recent rise of international conflicts and wars, the American financial system remains at risk. Terrorist organizations are implementing new fundraising methods, while drug and human traffickers are evading U.S. surveillance mechanisms, cybercriminals are conducting extensive fraud campaigns, and nation-states are utilizing ransomware and further financing weapons of mass destruction. The 2024 National Risk Assessments determined the most significant illicit finance vulnerabilities as being the misuse of cash, the misuse of financial products and services, the ease of formation of and limited information required to create legal entities, inadequate global anti-money laundering & countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regulation, supervision, and enforcement, AML/CFT compliance deficiencies, complicit professionals facilitating illicit finance, among several others.

Consequently, the 2024 Strategy seeks to eliminate the pathways that illicit actors exploit and increase enforcement mechanisms. The U.S. Treasury has four priorities and 15 supporting actions to implement between now and the 2026 Strategy. Priorities include (1) assessing and addressing legal and regulatory vulnerabilities in the U.S. AML/CFT regime, (2) promoting a risk-focused and effective AML/CFT regulatory framework for financial institutions, (3) enhancing operational effectiveness in combating illicit finance, and (4) supporting responsible technological innovation and harnessing technology to mitigate illicit finance risks.

The supporting actions include (1) implementing the Corporate Transparency Act, providing authorized access to the Beneficial Ownership Information registry, protecting data, and promoting compliance, (2) bringing greater transparency to real estate transactions, (3) assessing the need for additional action on sectors not subject to comprehensive AML/CFT measures, (4) considering updates to the regulatory requirements and supervisory framework for virtual asset activities, (5) assessing the potential need to revise recordkeeping and reporting requirements and thresholds, and (6) enhancing risk-focused supervision and enforcement. Additionally, the Treasury will (7) appropriately resource AML/CFT supervision and enforcement for certain non-bank financial institutions, (8) regularly update and communicate illicit finance risks and national AML/CFT priorities, (9) prioritize targeted measures and interagency and multilateral coordination to disrupt illicit finance activity, (10) expand and enhance public-private information sharing, (11) strengthen implementation of global AML/CFT standards, (12) implement the Treasury’s strategy to combat de-risking and improve financial inclusion, (13) support U.S. leadership in financial and payments technology, (14) encourage private sector use of technology to improve AML/CFT programs and compliance, and (15) continue to enhance use of al, data analytics, and additional technological innovations in government efforts to combat illicit finance.

More specifically, recent AML/CFT precautions include the U.S. Treasury operationalizing the Beneficial Ownership Information E-Filing System on January 1, 2024. This constituted a historic step to increase transparency.

With regard to fraud, the U.S. Treasury plans to continue to prioritize investigations, prosecutions, and convictions of fraudsters and fraud facilitators. It also will consider expanding or enhancing fraud reporting reward programs and work with non-traditional partners to identify complicit professionals. Lastly, it plans on expanding the use of administrative authorities and awareness-raising campaigns to assist the public in identifying sources of fraud for law enforcement agencies.

Concerning drug trafficking, the U.S. Treasury will consider the need for further guidance to financial institutions on how to detect financing related to precursors and equipment linked to fentanyl and other synthetic opioids. Additionally, it intends to continue to engage bilaterally with key jurisdictions, including Mexico, the PRC, and Canada.

In terms of ransomware and related money laundering, it will continue investigating, prosecuting, and otherwise disrupting ransomware and digital extortion activity by identifying and imposing consequences on cybercriminals and the money launderers that support them. It expects to take civil or criminal enforcement and regulatory actions, including sanctions-related enforcement actions, against Virtual asset service providers (VASPs) illicitly facilitating ransomware activity and money laundering.

With reference to human trafficking, the U.S. Treasury will enhance training on the financial aspects of human trafficking investigations and will leverage financial intelligence and anti-money laundering expertise to strengthen investigations and prosecutions of transnational human trafficking enterprises.

Regarding corruption, it hopes to continue to target the proceeds of foreign corruption that are used to purchase U.S. assets or that transit through the U.S. financial system. It also intends to enhance the use of anti-corruption sanctions, particularly prioritizing designations of financial facilitators and private enablers of public corruption.

Concerning international terrorism with U.S.-based supporters of Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Iran proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah, the Treasury will coordinate and share information with foreign partners on the financing of terrorist groups and their affiliates. It also aims to disrupt financial facilitators and supporters of international terrorism through targeted designations.

For more information on the four priorities, Annexes 1 and 2 respectively include a summary of the illicit finance threats and vulnerabilities, while Annex 3 pertains to progress on priorities and supporting actions. The 2024 National Strategy for Combating Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing be viewed here: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/2024-Illicit-Finance-Strategy.pdf

The Treasury strategies on money laundering, terrorist financing, and other illicit financing are useful for the regulated community since they use these reports in determining the overall risks and then assessing their own risks and developing risk-based due diligence.

Kaila Hall is an intern at IELR. She is a rising senior at Cornell University.

Bibliography:

[1] “Treasury Announces 2024 National Illicit Finance Strategy.” U.S. Department of the Treasury, 16 May 2024, home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2346. ‌

[2] “Treasury Publishes 2024 National Risk Assessments for Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and Proliferation Financing.” U.S. Department of the Treasury, 7 February 2024, home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2080.

‌

U.S. District Court in Alabama Rules CTA Unconstitutional

by Leave a Comment

On March 1, 2024, Judge Liles C. Burke, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Northeastern Division) issued a 53-page memorandum opinion, declaring that the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) “exceeds the Constitution’s limits on the legislative branch and lacks a sufficient nexus to any enumerated power to be a necessary or proper means of achieving Congress’ policy goals.” Judge Burke  granted plaintiffs’ National Small Business United (NSBA) and Issac Winkles, an NSBA member and owner of two small businesses, motion for summary judgment.  [Nat’l Small Bus. United v. Yellen, No. 5:22-cv-01448-LCB (N.D. Ala. 2022)].

Judge Burke finds that the U.S. government’s arguments that the CTA is within Congress’ broad powers to regulate commerce, oversee foreign affairs and national security, and impose taxes and related regulations are not supported by precedent.

The opinion does not reach the plaintiffs’ arguments that the CTA violates the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

In his decision Judge Burke observes that civil and criminal penalties apply to violations.  He notes that the CTA applies to 32.6 million currently existing entities and 5 million new entities formed each year from 2025 to 2034.

The opinion finds that the plaintiffs have standing as Winkles is a regulated party and as a member of the NSBA, and that the NSBA has associational standing as a result.

Congress’ Power over Foreign Affairs and National Security

The CTA is not a proper use of the Congress’ power over foreign affairs and national security. The opinion states the CTA “convert[s] an astonishing  amount of traditionally local … conduct into a matter for federal enforcement, and involve[s} a substantial extension of federal police resources.  Accordingly, Judge Burke reasons that compliance with international standards may be good policy, but it is not enough to make the CTA “necessary” or “proper.”

The opinion finds that the Congress’ foreign affairs powers do not authorize the CTA. Those powers do not extend to purely internal affairs, especially in an arena traditionally left to the States (the authority to incorporate).

Commerce Clause

The opinion rules that the CTA does not regulate commerce on its face, have a jurisdictional hook, or serve as an essential part of a comprehensive regulatory scheme.   Hence, the CTA is outside Congress’ power to regulate non-commercial, intrastate activity.  In particular, the opinion underscores that the act of incorporation is not enough to invoke the Commerce power.  “The plain text of the CTA does not regulate the  quintessentially economic activities the Government asserts or require entities to engage in those activities to be regulated.”

Taxing Power & Necessary and Proper Clause

The opinion rules that although the relationship between disclosure provisions and the taxing power is “well recognized,” the cases on which the Government relies  show that giving access to the CTA’s database for tax administration purposes is not sufficient to establish a close enough relationship here.

Analysis

The decision by Judge Burke will certainly not be the last word. The Court has permanently enjoined the government from enforcing the CTA against the named plaintiffs and ordered a further hearing on the award of costs of litigation.  As a result, enforcement of the CTA is likely to be paused for now, but only against those plaintiffs.  The March issue of the International Enforcement Law Reporter will have a more comprehensive discussion of the decision and its implications.

 

 

THE SANFORD & HALL REPORT on International Fraud Awareness, Sponsored by SECURITY INNOVATION

by Leave a Comment

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 30, 2023 /PRNewswire/ — SANFORD & HALL supports the International Fraud Awareness Week (November 12th – 18th, 2023). “The support of organizations around the world helps make Fraud Week an effective tool in raising anti-fraud awareness,” said President John Gill, J.D., CFE of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). The intersection of international fraud and security threats is profound, affecting businesses from local shops to global corporations.

World renowned experts and industry leaders from intelligence, law, technology, cyber, accounting, academia, entertainment, building management, and more.
World renowned experts and industry leaders from intelligence, law, technology, cyber, accounting, academia, entertainment, building management, and more.
ABOUT THE SPONSOR: Security Innovation is a pioneer in software security and literally wrote the book on “How to Break Software Security.” Since 2002, organizations have relied on its assessment and training solutions to secure software wherever it runs.
ABOUT THE SPONSOR: Security Innovation is a pioneer in software security and literally wrote the book on “How to Break Software Security.” Since 2002, organizations have relied on its assessment and training solutions to secure software wherever it runs.

CEO Ed Adams underscores the need for board engagement in cybersecurity, noting, “Fraud is omnipresent, demanding constant vigilance. The expert panel highlights the key role of knowledge in a digital era where trust is paramount.”

 

The Sanford & Hall Report is a virtual series that leverages the national security experiences of its co-hosts, Adriana Sanford, founder of Data Privacy Help, LLC, and an award-winning global threats expert, and retired USN Rear Admiral Garry E. Hall, from 9/11 to our modern world. Sanford is an international TV commentator, who appeared regularly as a senior analyst on CNN en Español, reaching 93 million viewers. Rear Admiral Hall served at the White House as a senior director at the National Security Council and special assistant to the president for National Security Affairs.

S&H, together with a stellar lineup of industry leaders and renowned experts, is set to explore the multifaceted realm of fraud prevention and response.

  • Ed Adams, CEO, Security Innovation
  • Robert Anderson, CEO, Telecom4Good
  • Brian Barry, Executive Director, Ventura County Medical Association
  • Sandy Climan, President, Entertainment Media Ventures
  • Stefanie Drysdale, SVP, Prescient
  • Cristian Edwards, Managing Director, Puga Ortiz Abogados
  • Sawsan Gad, Geospatial Data Scientist, 2020 UNESCO Award
  • Bennet Kelley, Founder of Internet Law Center | Award-Winning Journalist
  • Lora Koretz, Clinical Associate Professor, Arizona State University
  • Jonathan Meyer, Co-Chair of National Security Committee & Vice Chair of Export Controls and Economic Sanctions Committee, ABA-International Law Section
  • Adriana Mendieta, Cyber Insurance Specialist
  • Mary Lue Peck, SVP, BOMA International
  • Joseph Pochron, EY Managing Director
  • Joel Simangan, CISO, Los Angeles Unified School District
  • Ross Delston, Attorney/Expert Witness (AML) | Former US banking regulator (FDIC)
  • Joe Vadakkan, President, CSA-SW Chapter
  • Karen Worstell, Senior Cybersecurity Strategist, VMware Carbon Black
  • Arlene Yetnikoff, CISO, Caltech
  • Bruce Zagaris, Author, International White-Collar Crime: Cases & Materials | Editor, International Enforcement Law Reporter | Partner, Berliner Corcoran & Rowe

About the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
Based in Austin, Texas, ACFE is the world’s largest anti-fraud organization and premier provider of anti-fraud training and education. For more information, visit ACFE.com. or go directly to FraudWeek.com

Claremont Graduate University (S&H Educational Sponsor)
Established in 1925, CGU is an independent institution devoted to graduate study and a member of The Claremont Colleges, a consortium of seven independent educational establishments.

Latest Speaker Publications

  • “See Yourself in Cyber: Security Careers Beyond Hacking” by Ed Adams. Discover ways to weave cybersecurity throughout your organization’s structure. Available 2024 on Amazon.com
  • “Navigating Leadership: Making a PACT with Excellence” by Rear Admiral Garry E. Hall (retired). Available now on Amazon.com

For More Information Contact:
Data Privacy Help, LLC: Adriana Sanford, adriana@dataprivacyhelp.com

SOURCE Data Privacy Help, LLC

New Book Discusses Modern Cross-Border Criminal Threats and Impact on Security and Sovereignty in the Caribbean

by Leave a Comment

Professor Ivelaw Lloyd Griffith, a Guyanese-American who has as served in several academic leadership roles, including as Vice Chancellor (president) of the University of Guyana, has written the latest of a series of books on the topic of crime and security in the Caribbean.

His latest book, Challenged Sovereignty: The Impact of Drugs, crime, Terrorism, and Cyber Threats in the Caribbean (344 pages, U. of Illinois Press) is about to be released.

The books covers the drug trade, crime, terrorism and cyber threats in the Caribbean.  These cross-border issues have significantly impacted the small countries.  The author combines case studies with regional analyses to capture the cross-border problems that have undermined the governments’ basic goal of protecting their people against military threats, subversion and the erosion of political, economic, and social values.  The author points out that seeking solutions to these multidimensional threats requires addressing both traditional and non-traditional security and sovereignty issues.  The author focuses on clashes between Cross-border problems and the state from warring drug gangs in Jamaica, to Trinidad and Tobago’s one-time status as a center for terrorism-related activities, to the political resurgence of drug trafficker Desi Bouterse in Suriname, and the growing cyber threats across the region.

Among the author’s prior books on these topics are: The Quest for Security in the Caribbean (M.E. Sharpe), Drugs and Security in the Caribbean (Penn State University Press), The Political Economy of Drugs in the Caribbean (Palgrave Macmillan), and Caribbean Security in the Age of Terror (Ian Randle Publishers).

Global Data Privacy Laws Fireside Chat

by Leave a Comment

Adriana Sanford will be addressing the International Committee of the Senior Lawyers Division of the American Bar Association.

FEATURED SPEAKER: Adriana Sanford, J.D., DUAL LL.M., is an internationally recognized, award-winning expert on global risks and data privacy, who provides C-Suite level training throughout the Americas on the nuances of data privacy law (on a country-by-country basis).
Recently featured in Top Cyber News magazine, Sanford is a California lawyer, author, professor, and Chilean American international TV commentator with a proven track-record for navigating, engaging, and influencing a broad constituent base.
 MODERATOR:
Jonathan M. Meyer
ABA Co-Chair, International Committee, Senior Lawyers Division (SLD); ABA Vice Chair, Committee on Export Controls and Economic Sanctions
Register Here:

U.S. Treasury Publishes Final Rule on Reporting Beneficial Ownership Information

by Leave a Comment

On September 29, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a final rule implementing the Corporate Transparency Act’s (CTA) beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting provisions.

Rule Brings U.S. Closer to Comply with the International Rules on Entity Transparency

In 2006 and 2016, the Financial Action Task Force Mutual Evaluations found the U.S. non-compliant with entity transparency standards.

The final rule will help bring the U.S. closer  to complying with the international rules on entity transparency.  However, the rules do not take effect until January 1, 2024. Reporting companies created or registered before January 1, 2024 will have one year (until January 1, 2025) to file their initial reports. The rules do not take effect until January 1, 2024. Reporting companies created or registered before January 1, 2024 must submit an initial report within one year of the effective date, the same as in the proposed rule.   The rules do not take effect until January 1, 2024. Reporting companies created or registered after January 1, 2024, will have 30 days after receiving notice of their creation or registration to file their initial reports. The proposed rule required filing the initial report within 14 days of their creation or registration.

By then the international standards will have moved further.  For instance, unlike the U.S., the EU and many countries include in their entity transparency standards reporting on common law trusts.  In any addition, the EU and the international standard is to have public registries, allowing a broad segment of the public to view the BOI so that they can verify it and/or report discrepancies.

Access to the Beneficial Ownership Information and FinCEN Resource Issues

In the U.S. even proposed regulations on access to beneficial ownership information is not yet available.  It is likely that the information on beneficial owners is kept by FinCEN and only can be accessed by financial regulators and law enforcement from federal, state, Indian tribes, and foreign governments and banks to verify Customer Due Diligence.  All will likely have to request access and then await processing by FinCEN.  FinCEN is already behind on releasing the other regulations on access and a revised CDD rule.  FinCEN is seriously underresourced, especially in view of all the new regulatory projects.  The OECD in 2018 downgraded the U.S. for timeliness in responding to requests for information and in the qualify of the information exchanged.  The penalties for any misuse of the information are so harsh that banks receiving information will have to restrict it, so that they can protect themselves from any penalties.

Concessions to Formation Agents and the Business Community

The final rule has made concessions to the business community and formation agents.    The rule defines a company applicant to be only two persons: the individual who directly files the document that creates the entity, or in the case of a foreign reporting company, the document that first registers the entity to do business in the United States;  and the individual who is primarily responsible for directing or controlling the filing of the relevant document by another. The proposed rule stated that anyone in the chain of working on formation was considered a company applicant.

The rule, however, does not require reporting companies existing or registered at the time of the effective date of the rule to identify and report on their company applicants, as the proposed rule did. In addition, reporting companies formed or registered after the effective date of the rule also do not need to update company applicant information, as the proposed rule did.

Analysis

As I stated in my remarks on Sept. 22 at the STEP/LATAMCaribbean conference in Panama in a talk on Will the U.S. Remain the Jurisdiction of Choice for Latin Americans in the aftermath of the Enactment of the CTA, the U.S. will remain the jurisdiction of choice for both legitimate and illegitimate investors.

The current (October) issue of the IELR will have a more comprehensive discussion of the CTA BOI final rules.

OECD Announces Public Consultation on Tax Transparency for Crypto-Assets

by 1 Comment

On March 22, 2022, the OECD issued a public consultation document involving a new world tax transparency framework to furnish the reporting and exchange of information with regard to crypto-assets and proposed amendments to the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) for the automatic exchange of financial account information between countries.  The consultation has the goal to inform the decisions of policy makers on the potential adoption of any such framework and its related components.

A challenge to tax and financial regulators is that a person can transfer and hold crypto-assets without intervention of traditional financial intermediaries and without any central administrator being able to watch either the transactions or the crypto-asset holdings.  In addition, the Crypto-Asset market has resulted in a new set of intermediaries, such as Crypto-Asset exchanges and wallet providers, which may currently only be subject to limited regulatory oversight. Crypto-Asset exchanges typically facilitate the purchase, sale, and exchange of Crypto-Assets for other Crypto-Assets or fiat currencies.  As a result, individuals can exploit crypto-assets to evade international tax transparency initiatives, such as the CRS.

Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF)

As a result of the potential to circumvent tax transparency initiatives, the G20 has asked the OECD to develop a framework for the automatic exchange of information on crypto-assets (Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework or CARF).  The new framework establishes mechanisms for the collection and exchange of tax-relevant information between tax administrations, with respect to persons engaging in certain transactions in crypto-assets.  The framework includes crypto-assets that a person can hold and transfer in a decentralized way, without the intervention of traditional financial intermediaries, as well as asset classes utilizing similar technology that may exist in the future.  The framework requires businesses that furnish services to exchange crypto-assets against other crypto-assets or  fiat currencies.

Proposed CRS Amendments

In addition to the CARF, the OECD has developed proposals, as part of the first comprehensive review of the CRS, to improve the operation of the CRS, based on the experience of governments and businesses since its adoption  in July 2014.   The proposal broadens the scope of the CRS to cover electronic money products and the Central Bank Digital Currencies.   As a result of the development of the CARF, the proposals also embrace changes to cover indirect investments in crypto-assets through Investment Entities and derivatives.  Simultaneously, the proposal has new provisions to achieve an efficient interaction between the CRS and the CARF, including ways to avoid duplicative reporting.       The amended CRS endeavors to strengthen the due diligence procedures and reporting outcomes  in order to improve the usability of CRS information for tax administrations and limiting burdens on financial institutions.

The OECD is requesting public comments on its proposals.  Interested persons should send their comments no later than April 29, 2022 by email (in Word format) to taxpublicconsultation@oecd.org.  Additional information on the CARF, the amended CRS, or to comment on the public consultation draft should view the public consultation document.   All written comments received will be made publicly available on the OECD website. Comments submitted in response to this invitation will be posted on the OECD website.

The OECD will hold a public consultation meeting at the end of May 2022.  Speakers and other participants at the upcoming public consultation meeting will be selected from among those providing timely written comments.

Once it receives and digests the input received through the public consultation, the OECD will make final the rules and commentary to the CARF and the amended CRS.  The OECD will also develop the exchange instruments and technical solutions needed to support reporting and exchanges pursuant to the CARF and the amended CRS.  The OECD intends to report on the CARF and the amended CRS under the Indonesian Presidency of the G20 for its October 2022 meeting.

Analysis

The public consultation documents explains that the CARF and amended CRS responds to dynamics of the Crypto-Asset market, including both the Crypto-Assets offered, as well as the intermediaries involved.  These developments pose a significant risk that recent gains in global tax transparency will be gradually eroded.

Clearly, the Crypto-Asset market and the intermediaries involved are different from the usual information providers in third-party tax reporting regimes, such as the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), to a new set of intermediaries, which only recently became subject to financial regulation and are frequently not subject to tax reporting requirements with respect to their clients.  Perhaps, more importantly, the public consultation responds to the ability of individuals to hold Crypto-Assets in wallets unaffiliated with any service provider and transfer such Crypto-Assets across jurisdictions.  The ability of persons to hold and transfer Crypto-Assets pose a risk that Crypto-Assets will be used for illicit activities or to evade tax obligations.  The potential for persons to possess and transfer Crypto-Assets unaffiliated with any service provider has reduced tax administrations’ visibility on tax-relevant activities carried out within the sector, increasing the difficulty of verifying whether associated tax liabilities are appropriately reported and assessed.

The OECD public consultation complements the work of the J5 countries.  On March 25, 2021, the Joint Chiefs of Global Tax Enforcement (J5) assembled investigators, cryptocurrency experts and data scientists in a coordinated push to track down individuals and organizations perpetrating tax crimes around the world.  Without having in place an effective framework and reporting mechanisms, the J5 and other tax authorities are limited in their compliance and enforcement abilities.

The public consultation follows closely  the U.S. Department of Justice announcement of its first director of National Cryptocurrency Enforcement and President Biden  signing an Executive Order (titled “Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets” and issued with an accompanying Fact Sheet) regarding the U.S. government’s strategy for digital assets.  The Executive Order orders federal agencies to issue various reports that will set forth future U.S. policy toward digital assets, including the potential launch of a federally issue digital dollar.

Hence, the international and national compliance and enforcement framework for Crypto-assets are changing dynamically.

The current issue of the IELR will discuss in more detail the public consultation and its implications.

Disclaimer

Nothing in this blog constitutes or is intended to constitute legal advice. Neither transmission nor receipt of such materials creates an attorney-client relationship. Blog readers and subscribers should consult with an attorney. This blog may be considered attorney advertising under the rules of some states. The hiring of an attorney is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Pages

Categories

Sign up for our mailing list!
Get the latest blog posts, and an exclusive discount offer for one year's subscription to the International Enforcement Law Reporter.
We respect your privacy.