United States: 'Salman': Supreme Court To Examine Tipping Liability

In recent years, both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice have become highly aggressive in their efforts to combat insider trading, leading to many high-profile victories as well as a few losses. Increasingly, so-called "remote" tippees who are several levels removed from the corporate insider, or tipper, have become targets of these enforcement actions. The standards for deciding when a remote tippee is permitted to trade in nonpublic market information, however, are still unsettled. A few weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the Ninth Circuit's decision in United States v. Salman, 792 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2015), on the question of what type of "personal benefit" to the corporate insider is necessary to establish a claim for insider trading. Salman v. United States, --- S. Ct. ----, 2016 WL 207256, at *1 (2016) (No. 15-628). In all likelihood, the Supreme Court's decision will have a profound impact on future prosecutions of insider-trading cases.

Liability Under 'Dirks v. SEC'

In the seminal Supreme Court case of Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983), the court laid out the contours of tipping liability for insider trading under the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The court began by reaffirming its prior decisions that the duty to refrain from trading on material nonpublic information arises from the existence of a fiduciary relationship between the corporate insider and the company, not from the mere possession of such information. To hold otherwise, the court explained, would "amount to recognizing a general duty between all participants in market transactions to forgo actions based on material, nonpublic information." Id. at 655 (internal quotations omitted).

The court specifically rejected the SEC's position that a tippee "inherits" an insider's fiduciary duty simply by virtue of receiving insider information. Id. at 655-56.1 Agreeing that some tippee trading should be prohibited, the court explained that an insider who is forbidden from personally using material nonpublic information to the insider's advantage is also barred from providing that same information to an outsider for personal gain. Likewise, transactions by those who "knowingly participate with the fiduciary in such a breach" are as forbidden as those on behalf of the fiduciary himself. Id. at 659. In these ways, a tippee's duty—whether to disclose or abstain from trading—is derivative of the insider's duty. Id.

The test for a violation of that duty is whether the insider will derive some personal benefit— direct or indirect—from the tip, for without some gain, there is no breach. Id. at 662. This test requires courts to focus on "objective criteria," such as whether the corporate insider receives a monetary advantage or other benefit, such as reputational, that can result in future earnings. Moreover, certain facts and circumstances justify such an inference, such as "a relationship between the insider and the recipient that suggests a quid pro quo from the latter," or also when the "insider makes a gift of confidential information to a trading relative or friend" such that the "tip and trade resemble trading by the insider himself followed by a gift of the profits to the recipient." 463 U.S. at 663-64.

Decision in 'U.S. v. Newman'

In United States v. Newman, 773 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit tackled the question of how to apply the standard for "personal benefit." The case involved a group of analysts at hedge funds who obtained material nonpublic information from employees at publicly traded companies, and then shared that information with each other and with portfolio managers at their companies. Id. at 443. Todd Newman and Anthony Chiasson, the two defendants charged, were portfolio managers who received that information from a chain of analysts at different firms, and then traded on it. Id. Thus, Newman and Chiasson were three or four levels removed from the original tipper and the first tippee, and there was no evidence that either was aware of the source of the inside information. Id.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York maintained that Newman and Chiasson were criminally liable because, as sophisticated traders, they "must have known that information was disclosed by insiders in breach of a fiduciary duty." Id. at 443-44.2 Both Newman and Chiasson were found guilty on all counts.

To the surprise of many observers, the Second Circuit reversed the convictions. The court began by emphasizing that under Dirks, a "tippee's liability derives only from the tipper's breach of a fiduciary duty," and that the corporate insider (or tipper) has committed no breach unless a personal benefit is received in exchange for the tip. Id. at 447. While recognizing that the standard for a personal benefit is "permissive," the court rejected the argument that proof of any casual friendship or social relationship (as existed between the insider and the tippee in that case) would suffice. Id. Were that so, "practically anything would qualify." Id. at 452. Rather, the relationship must be significant enough that the exchange of the tip is "objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of a pecuniary or similarly valuable nature." Id.

The government contended that the Newman decision would "dramatically limit [its] ability to prosecute some of the most common, culpable, and market-threatening forms of insider trading."3 It unsuccessfully sought reconsideration and rehearing en banc, and then review by the Supreme Court, but all were denied.

Decision in 'U.S. v. Salman'

Six months after Newman, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reached a very different conclusion when it affirmed a conviction for insider trading and conspiracy in United States v. Salman, 792 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2015). In that case, the government alleged that the tipper, an investment banker, provided material nonpublic information to his older brother, a broker, about upcoming mergers and acquisitions of the bank's clients. Id. at 1089. The brother, in turn, began to share the information with Bassam Yacoub Salman, whose sister had become engaged to and then married the original tipper. Id. The brother encouraged Salman to "mirror image" his trading activity based on the information provided by the tipper.4

The government presented evidence at trial that Salman knew that the information had originated from the tipper, and that Salman and the brother had "agreed" to protect the tipper by destroying evidence of their trading. Id. Additionally, the government showed that the tipper and his brother enjoyed a "close and mutually beneficial relationship," with the brother paying for the tipper's college tuition and standing in for their father at the tipper's wedding to Salman's sister. Id. At trial, the tipper testified that he provided the information to his brother to "benefit him" and to "fulfill whatever needs he had." Id. at 1089.

Based on this evidence, a jury found Salman guilty on all counts. Salman appealed, urging the Ninth Circuit to adopt Newman and hold that the government's evidence was insufficient to find that the tipper disclosed the information to his brother in exchange for a personal benefit; or, if he did, that Salman was not aware of the benefit.5 Id. at 1090.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction. After articulating the test for tippee liability and defining what constitutes a "personal benefit," the court zeroed in on a line from Dirks itself, where the Supreme Court stated that "the elements of fiduciary duty and exploitation of nonpublic information also exist when an insider makes a gift of confidential information to a trading relative or friend." 792 F.3d at 1092 (citing Dirks, 464 U.S. at 663-64) (emphasis added). In the Ninth Circuit's view, the tipper's disclosure of material nonpublic information to his brother, knowing that the latter intended to trade on it, was exactly the kind of "gift" to a "trading relative" that Dirks anticipated. Id.

The court conceded that Newman should not be "lightly ignore[d]." Id. But it rejected the Second Circuit's decision to the extent it held that in the context of a friendship or familial relationship, there must be evidence of a specific, tangible benefit to be gained by the tipper. Id. at 1093. If, as Salman argued, direct evidence that the disclosure of information was intended as a "gift" was insufficient, then "a corporate insider or other person in possession of confidential and proprietary information would be free to disclose that information to her relatives, and they would be free to trade on it, provided that [the tipper] asked for no tangible compensation in return." Id. at 1094. In the Ninth Circuit's view, that could not be the law.

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court agreed to review the following question in Salman:

Does the personal benefit to the insider that is necessary to establish insider trading under Dirks v. SEC, require proof of "an exchange that is objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of pecuniary or similarly valuable nature," as the Second Circuit held in United States v. Newman, or is it enough that the insider and the tippee shared a close family relationship as the Ninth Circuit held in this case?

Pet. for Writ of Cert. in Salman v. United States, --- S. Ct. ---- (No. 15-628).6

There has been much speculation as to why the Supreme Court agreed to review Salman after turning down Newman only a few months earlier. Perhaps it took the creation of an explicit conflict between the Second and Ninth Circuits to persuade the court to intervene. It is also possible that the court questioned Salman's holding while agreeing broadly with Newman's. Then again, the court could harmonize the two decisions, drawing a distinction between the tippers and defendants in Newman, who were three or four levels removed from each other, and had (in the Second Circuit's view) weak ties to one another, and the tipper and the defendant in Salman, who were members of a close extended family. Whatever the outcome, the Supreme Court's decision will surely be dissected by prosecutors and defense counsel alike and influence the future of insidertrading enforcement actions and prosecutions for years to come.

Originally published by New York Law Journal.

Footnotes

1. The court also noted that to impose a duty to disclose or abstain in all cases could have an "inhibiting influence on the role of market analysts," who commonly "ferret out and analyze information" and whose role the SEC has recognized as necessary to the preservation of a healthy market. 463 U.S. at 658. Newman echoed that point.

2. The district court declined to instruct the jury that it must find that the defendants knew of the personal benefit received by the insiders, notwithstanding supporting language in Dirks, because it believed that the Second Circuit held that such knowledge was not an element of the offense. Newman, 773 F.3d at 444. The Second Circuit rejected that interpretation of its precedent, and held that the requisite proof of the defendants' knowledge was insufficient.

3. Pet. for Reh'g and Reh'g En Banc, United States v. Newman, 2015 WL 1064423, at *3.

4. Instead of trading in his own account, Salman arranged to deposit money through a series of transactions into an account held in the name of his wife's sister and her husband. 792 F.3d at 1089. Salman would pass the tips he received to the husband who would then trade in the account. Id.

5. While Salman's appeal was pending, the Second Circuit decided Newman. The Ninth Circuit permitted Salman to file a supplemental brief raising Newman. Id. at 1090.

6. The court declined to review a second question involving the definition of willful blindness.

'Salman': Supreme Court To Examine Tipping Liability

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.