International Financial Law Prof Blog

Editor: William Byrnes
Texas A&M University
School of Law

Monday, May 4, 2015

BNP Paribas Criminally Sentenced for Financing Sudan, Iran and Cuba

Justice logoBNP Paribas S.A. (BNPP), a global financial institution headquartered in Paris, was sentenced today for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) by processing billions of dollars of transactions through the U.S. financial system on behalf of Sudanese, Iranian and Cuban entities subject to U.S. economic sanctions.  See BNP Paribas pleads guilty, pays $8.9 billion for Iran and Sudan sanctions busting

BNPP was sentenced to a five-year term of probation, and ordered to forfeit $8,833,600,000 to the United States and to pay a $140,000,000 fine.  Today’s sentencing is the first time a financial institution has been convicted and sentenced for violations of U.S. economic sanctions, and the total financial penalty—including the forfeiture and criminal fine—is the largest financial penalty ever imposed in a criminal case.

“BNP Paribas flouted U.S. sanctions laws to an unprecedented extreme, concealed its tracks, and then chose not to fully cooperate with U.S. law enforcement, leading to a criminal guilty plea and nearly $9 billion penalty” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell.  “BNPP deliberately disregarded the law and provided rogue nations, and Sudan in particular, with vital access to the global financial system, helping that country’s lawless government to harbor and support terrorists and to persecute its own people.  Today’s sentence demonstrates that financial institutions will be punished severely but appropriately for violating sanctions laws and risking our national security interests.”

“BNPP, the world's fourth largest bank, has now been sentenced to pay a record penalty of almost $9 billion for sanctions violations that unlawfully opened the U.S. financial markets to Sudan, Iran, and Cuba,” said U.S. Attorney Bharara.  “BNPP provided access to billions of dollars to these sanctioned countries, and did so deliberately and secretly, in ways designed to evade detection by the U.S. authorities.  The sentence imposed today is appropriate for BNPP’s years-long and wide-ranging criminal conduct.”

“The sentencing of BNP Paribas Bank and the $9 Billion monetary penalty should sound the alarm to international financial institutions thinking of perpetrating these crimes,” said Chief Weber.  “The ability of IRS-CI and our partners to expose blatant violations of U.S. embargos and sanctions has changed the way financial matters are handled worldwide. We will continue to use our financial expertise to uncover these types of violations, as well as methodical and deliberate actions to conceal prohibited transactions from U.S. regulators and law enforcement.”

In connection with its guilty plea on July 9, 2014, BNPP admitted that from at least 2004 through 2012, it knowingly and willfully moved over $8.8 billion through the U.S. financial system on behalf of Sudanese, Iranian and Cuban sanctioned entities, in violation of U.S. economic sanctions.

The majority of illegal payments were made on behalf of sanctioned entities in Sudan, which was subject to U.S. embargo based on the Sudanese government’s role in facilitating terrorism and committing human rights abuses.  BNPP processed approximately $6.4 billion through the United States on behalf of Sudanese sanctioned entities from July 2006 through June 2007, including approximately $4 billion on behalf of a financial institution owned by the government of Sudan, even as internal emails showed BNPP employees expressing concern about the bank’s assisting the Sudanese government in light of its role in supporting international terrorism and committing human rights abuses during the same time period.  Indeed, in March 2007, a senior compliance officer at BNPP wrote to other high-level BNPP compliance and legal employees reminding them that certain Sudanese banks with which BNPP dealt “play a pivotal part in the support of the Sudanese government which . . . has hosted Osama Bin Laden and refuses the United Nations intervention in Darfur.”

Similarly, from October 2004 through early 2010, BNPP knowingly and willfully processed approximately $1.74 billion on behalf of Cuban sanctioned entities.  BNPP admitted that it continued to do U.S. dollar business with Cuba long after it was clear that such business was illegal.  BNPP further admitted that its conduct with regard to the Cuban embargo was both “cavalier” and “criminal.”

BNPP also engaged in more than $650 million of transactions involving entities tied to Iran, and this conduct continued into 2012—nearly two years after the bank had commenced an internal investigation into its sanctions compliance and pledged to cooperate with the government.  The illicit Iranian transactions included transactions for a petroleum company based in Dubai that was effectively a front for an Iranian petroleum company and an Iranian oil company.

In accepting BNPP’s guilty plea, Judge Schofield stated that BNPP’s actions “not only flouted U.S. foreign policy but also provided support to governments that threaten both our regional and national security and, in the case of Sudan, a government that has committed flagrant human rights abuses and has known links to terrorism.”  Judge Schofield further stated that the forfeiture of over $8 billion will “surely have a deterrent effect on others that may be tempted to engage in similar conduct, all of whom should be aware that no financial institution is immune from the rule of law.”

The Justice Department is exploring ways to use the forfeited funds to compensate individuals who may have been harmed by the sanctioned regimes of Sudan, Iran and Cuba.  As a preliminary step in this process, the Justice Department is inviting such individuals or their representatives to provide information describing the nature and value of the harm they suffered.  Beginning today (May 1, 2015), interested persons can learn more about this process and submit their information at www.usvbnpp.com[external link], or call 888-272-5632 (within North America) or 317-324-0382 (internationally).

In addition to its federal criminal conviction, BNPP pleaded guilty in New York State Supreme Court to falsifying business records and conspiring to falsify business records.  BNPP also agreed to a cease and desist order and to pay a civil monetary penalty of $508 million to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.  The New York State Department of Financial Services announced that BNPP agreed to, among other things, terminate or separate from the bank 13 employees, including the Group Chief Operating Officer and other senior executives; suspend U.S. dollar clearing operations through its New York Branch and other affiliates for one year for business lines on which the misconduct centered; extend for two years a monitorship put in place in 2013; and pay a monetary penalty of $2.24 billion. 

In satisfying its criminal forfeiture penalty, BNPP will receive credit for payments it made in OFACconnection with its resolution of these related state and regulatory matters.  The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control also levied a fine of $963 million, which will be satisfied by payments made to the Justice Department.

The New York County District Attorney’s Office conducted its own investigation alongside the Justice Department in this case.  The Justice Department expressed its gratitude to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the New York State Department of Financial Services and the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control for their assistance with this matter.

$8.9 billion settlement of $19 billion possible penalty

On June 30th, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), as part of a combined $8.9 billion settlement (settlement agreement here) with federal and state government agencies, announced a $963 million agreement with BNP Paribas (BNPP) to settle its potential liability for apparent violations of U.S. sanctions regulations.  The $8.9 billion is the largest OFAC settlement to date.  However, the statutory maximum and base civil monetary penalties in this case were $19,272,380,006.

What did BNP Paribas do?

For a number of years, up to and including 2012, BNPP processed thousands of transactions to or through U.S. financial institutions that involved countries, entities, and/or individuals subject to the sanctions programs listed above.  BNPP appears to have engaged in a systematic practice, spanning many years and involving multiple BNPP branches and business lines, that concealed, removed, omitted, or obscured references to, or the interest or involvement of, sanctioned parties in U.S. Dollar Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication payment messages sent to U.S. financial institutions.

The specific payment practices the bank utilized in order to process sanctions-related payments to or through the United States included omitting references to sanctioned parties; replacing the names of sanctioned parties with BNPP’s name or a code word; and structuring payments in a manner that did not identify the involvement of sanctioned parties in payments sent to U.S. financial institutions.  While these payment practices occurred throughout multiple branches and subsidiaries of the bank, BNPP’s subsidiary in Geneva and branch in Paris facilitated or conducted the overwhelming majority of the apparent violations.

FINCENHow egrigous was BNP Paribas' conduct?

OFAC determined that BNPP did not voluntarily self-disclose its violations (it was a whistleblower), and that the apparent violations constitute an egregious case: BNPP’s systemic practice of concealing, removing, omitting, or obscuring references to information about U.S.-sanctioned parties in 3,897 financial and trade transactions routed to or through banks in the United States between 2005 and 2012, including:

$8 billion with Sudan

BNPP officials have described Darfur as a "humanitarian catastrophe" and, while discussing the Sudanese business, noted that certain Sudanese banks "play a pivotal part in the support of the Sudanese government which…has hosted Osama Bin Laden and refuses the United Nations intervention in Darfur."  BNPP’s senior compliance personnel agreed to continue the Sudanese business and rationalized the decision by stating that "the relationship with this body of counterparties is a historical one and the commercial stakes are significant. For these reasons, Compliance does not want to stand in the way."

BNPP processed 2,663 wire transfers totaling approximately $8,370,372,624 between September 2005, and July 2009, involving Sudan.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $16,826,707,625.  $8 billion in four years - approximately $2 billion a year.

$1 billion with Iran

BNPP processed 318 wire transfers totaling approximately $1,182,075,543 between July 15, 2005, and November 27, 2012, involving Iran.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $2,382,634,677.

$700 million with Cuba

BNPP processed 909 wire transfers totaling approximately $689,237,183 between July 18, 2005, and September 10, 2012.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $59,085,000.

$1.5 million with Burma

BNPP processed seven wire transfers totaling approximately $1,478,371 between November 3, 2005, and approximately May 2009, involving Burma.  The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $3,952,704.

Who at BNP Paribas was involved?

Dfs_print_70 (1)Benjamin M. Lawsky, New York's Superintendent of Financial Services, said, "BNPP employees – with the knowledge of multiple senior executives – engaged in a long-standing scheme that illegally funneled money to countries involved in terrorism and genocide. As a civil regulator, we are taking action today not only to penalize the bank, but also expose and sanction individual BNPP employees for wrongdoing. In order to deter future offenses, it is important to remember that banks do not commit misconduct – bankers do."

- COO Signed Off on Continuing Illicit Transactions at Meeting Where He Asked Minutes Not to be Taken";

- North American Head of Ethics/Compliance wrote: "The Dirty Little Secret Isn’t So Secret Anymore, Oui?"

Did the DOJ charge any employees?

No criminal charges have been brought against BNP Paribas' employees involved in the sanction busting.

If not prison, then what was the fallout for employees?

Some executives were merely 'separated'.  What does separated mean?  Asked to resign?  Awarded severance?  Kept salaries and bonuses derived from the illicit business?   What of the COO who "signed off on continuing illicit transactions at a meeting where he asked minutes not to be taken"?  He was allowed to retire.  Did he keep his pension, retirement funds, bonuses?

BNP Paribas states: "As a result of BNP Paribas’ internal review, a number of managers and employees from relevant business areas have been sanctioned, a number of whom have left the Group."

But the Department of Financial Services informs a different story, statingAt DFS's direction, 13 individuals were terminated by or separated from the Bank as a result of the investigation, including the following senior executives:

  • George Chodron de Courcel, Group Chief Operating Officer
  • Vivien Levy-Garboua, Current Senior Advisor to the BNPP Executive Committee and Former Group Head of Compliance
  • Christopher Marks, Group Head of Debt Capital Markets
  • Dominique Remy, Group Head of Structured Finance for the Corporate Investment Bank (CIB)
  • Stephen Strombelline, Head of Ethics and Compliance for North America

In total, including those terminated, the Department of Financial Services reports that the Bank disciplined 45 employees, with levels of discipline ranging from dismissals, to cuts in compensation, demotion, and other sanctions, while 27 additional BNPP employees who would have been subject to potential disciplinary action during the investigation had already resigned.

Who is actually paying the fine?

BNP Paribas shareholders inevitably.  No fines have been levied against the employees involved. BNP shareholders include 76% institutional investors, such as pension and retirement funds.  So retirees are partly bearing the fine.

Belgian State (through SFPI (1)) 10.3%
Grand Duché de Luxembourg 1.0%
Employees 5.5%
Retail shareholders 4.9%
European institutional Investors 46.1%
Non-European institutional investors 30.0%
Other and unidentified 2.2%
   
Total 100%

How will BNP minimize the risk of its employees repeating similar conduct?  

Under the settlement agreement, BNPP is required to put in place and maintain policies and procedures to minimize the risk of the recurrence of such conduct in the future.  BNPP is also required to provide OFAC with copies of submissions to the Board of Governors relating to the OFAC compliance review that it will be conducting as part of its settlement with the Board of Governors.

BNP states that it has designed new robust compliance and control procedures:

  • a new department called Group Financial Security US, part of the Group Compliance function, will be headquartered in New York and will ensure that BNP Paribas complies globally with US regulation related to international sanctions and embargoes.
  • all USD flows for the entire BNP Paribas Group will be ultimately processed and controlled via the branch in New York.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intfinlaw/2015/05/bnp-paribas-criminally-sentenced-for-financing-sudan-iran-and-cuba.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment