Head of White-Collar and Co-Head of RISC
Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP
Kevin Harnisch is Head of White-Collar and Co-Head of Regulation, Investigations, Securities and Compliance (RISC), United States. Kevin litigates before the SEC, FINRA and other self-regulatory organizations, the Department of Justice, the CFTC, US attorney's offices, and federal courts. He handles matters relating to securities enforcement defense, internal investigations, anti-corruption issues, and represents corporations and their directors and officers, broker-dealers, hedge funds, private equity funds, and investment banks.
Kevin served as a Branch Chief in the Division of Enforcement of the SEC, where he led cases regarding financial fraud, market manipulation, insider trading, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and municipal bond offerings. He has authored numerous articles, and he frequently lectures on federal securities law and anti-corruption issues. He has experience defending public companies in a wide array of SEC, DOJ and other government agency investigations. Those investigations often pertain to such issues as the accuracy of financial statements, undisclosed related party transactions, the adequacy of internal controls, the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws, responses to whistleblowers, and potential insider trading.
Recent Articles & Comments
Rescinding the gag rule eliminates an inherently unfair treatment of what the SEC and settling defendants could say about the SEC’s allegations, which are often missing important context. The SEC would routinely tout its allegations as if they were beyond doubt, while defendants would have to remain silent in the face of pointed questions, including from investors, the press, and business partners. Shackling defendants’ ability to say anything suggesting there was another side to the story…
In her speech, Director Ryan provided important insights on how the Division of Enforcement will implement the Commission’s priorities of investor protection, fair and efficient markets, and the facilitation of capital formation.
Enforcement should absolutely pursue those who thwart those objectives. Too often, the Enforcement Division has been lured by the appeal of generating statistics, such as the number of actions filed or amount of fines imposed. Director Ryan made plain…
Providing at least 30 days to respond to a Wells notice is a welcome recognition of current practice. The existing standard fourteen-day initial deadline is almost always unrealistic, especially for large, complex, and lengthy investigations and therefore is routinely extended. The elongated minimum time frame, when coupled with formalizing the requirement for specifying the nature of the potential charges and authorizing the disclosure of the supposed supporting evidence, will enable…
The number of enforcement actions and amounts of fines imposed in a given year are false proxies for assessing the effectiveness of the enforcement program. A decline in the number of enforcement actions is a logical result of a shift in priorities under Chair Atkins, and an emphasis on moving away from actions that create the impression of trying to achieve regulation through enforcement. The more interesting data points are only now being developed as there is a new Director of Enforcement…