Compliance systems are key to reputational risk, says Sullivan & Cromwell’s Cohen
Regulators look to the strength of a firm’s compliance system when deciding how aggressively to pursue it for rule violations, according to Rodgin Cohen, chairman of law firm Sullivan & Cromwell. Cohen, a well-known legal expert in bank acquisitions, regulation and securities matters, said investment in compliance systems – especially personnel – is the key to minimizing a firm’s reputational risk.
Cohen, speaking in Philadelphia yesterday at the sixth annual Wharton Financial Institutions Center Risk Roundtable, sponsored by the Wharton Financial Institutions Center and consulting firm Mercer Oliver Wyman, said reputational risk is the “nearly dominant” threat to financial institutions today.
The spate of scandals in the last two years, from the Enron and Worldcom meltdowns to the more recent Wall Street stock research imbroglio, has caused regulators and prosecutors to move much more quickly and aggressively to investigate and prosecute financial institutions. Regulators are also holding financial institutions to higher standards than ever before, leading to situations where “widespread industry practice is suddenly illegal”, Cohen said.
Even so, Cohen said he does not believe any firm is in mortal danger. “There is a well-reasoned, conscious concern among regulators not to create a problem that would drive a company out of business,” he said. Although he believes there is an “insidious” relationship among financial institution regulators, prosecutors and trial lawyers, who share information and leverage off of one another’s investigations, he says this will not last. “This zeal tends to burn itself out.”
But the cost to a firm of being subject to an inquiry or indictment can be large – witness the recent $1.4 billion industry settlement over allegedly tainted stock research. “Most investigations do not lead to serious repercussions unless they involve the CEO or senior staff, or are repeat infractions,” Cohen said. Even so, he said firms must respond to regulatory criticism “with alacrity” and always seek to establish and maintain credibility in the eyes of their regulators.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Fed pivots to material risk – but what is it, exactly?
Top US bank regulator will prioritise risks that matter most, but they could prove hard to pinpoint
Hopes rise for EU re-entry to UK swaps market
EC says discussions on draft decision softening derivatives trading obligation are ‘advanced’
BoE’s Ramsden defends UK’s ring-fencing regime
Deputy governor also says regulatory reform is coming to the UK gilt repo market
Credit spread risk: the cryptic peril on bank balance sheets
Some bankers fear EU regulatory push on CSRBB has done little to improve risk management
Credit spread risk approach differs among EU banks, survey finds
KPMG survey of more than 90 banks reveals disagreement on how to treat liabilities and loans
Bowman’s Fed may limp on by after cuts
New vice-chair seeks efficiency, but staff clear-out could hamper functions, say former regulators
Review of 2025: It’s the end of the world, and it feels fine
Markets proved resilient as Trump redefined US policies – but questions are piling up about 2026 and beyond
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions