LinkedInFacebookInstagramXYouTube
305-456-3830|info@diaztradelaw.com

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)

Call 305-456-3830 or email info@diaztradelaw.com.

FinCEN Issues NPRM to Fully Implement Whistleblower Program

Authors:

Jennifer Diaz, President, Diaz Trade Law

Amber Pirson, Attorney, Diaz Trade Law

FinCEN’s March 30, 2026, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) marks a major step toward fully operationalizing the agency’s whistleblower program, designed to incentivize reporting of Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), sanctions, IEEPA, and other illicit finance violations. The proposal outlines how whistleblowers can securely submit information, how awards will be determined, and what protections will be available.  

This development reflects the Treasury Department’s broader strategy to strengthen financial system integrity and encourage actionable tips that support enforcement efforts. For financial institutions, compliance professionals, and potential whistleblowers, the NPRM provides long‑awaited clarity on program structure and expectations. 

Overview of the Proposed Rule 

FinCEN’s NPRM proposes a comprehensive framework for administering whistleblower submissions and awards. Key elements include: 

  • Secure submission procedures for individuals reporting suspected violations of the BSA, OFAC sanctions, and related laws. 
  • Eligibility criteria for whistleblower awards, including documentation requirements and timelines. 
  • Award ranges of 10–30% of monetary penalties collected when a whistleblower’s information leads to a successful enforcement action. 
  • Robust protections for individuals who provide information, including confidentiality and anti‑retaliation safeguards. 

These provisions aim to encourage early, detailed reporting while ensuring whistleblowers are shielded from adverse consequences. 

Why FinCEN Is Prioritizing Whistleblower Incentives 

The NPRM aligns with Treasury’s broader […]

By |2026-04-03T10:52:12-04:00April 3, 2026|Enforcement, International Law, Trade Policy, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|0 Comments
Read More

Compliance Mistakes Can Turn Criminal: Don’t Let This Happen to You

Many importers assume that customs compliance issues are purely administrative and can be easily resolved. In reality, customs law and criminal law intersect far more often than most companies realize. What begins as a civil customs matter can escalate quickly into a criminal investigation when regulators suspect fraud, evasion, or willful misconduct.

When Customs Issues Cross the Line

Most customs violations start as a civil enforcement matter. Errors involving classification, valuation, country of origin, or admissibility are often addressed through a request for information (CBP 28), notice of action (CBP 29), protest, prior disclosure, or penalty proceeding. However, when patterns emerge or when agencies believe false statements or deliberate schemes are involved, the enforcement posture can change dramatically.

Federal agencies, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and the Department of Justice (DOJ), routinely collaborate to investigate potential criminal violations tied to import activity. These investigations may focus on:

  • Undervaluation or misclassification to avoid duties
  • False statements or omissions in entry documentation
  • Evasion of import restrictions or regulatory requirements
  • Coordinated schemes involving suppliers, brokers, or intermediaries

Once criminal intent is suspected, importers may face subpoenas, search warrants, asset seizures, or even criminal charges.

Increased Focus on Enforcement

The recent volatile tariff environment has created increased incentives to cheat the system. The U.S. government has made clear that it is

By |2026-01-30T10:24:39-05:00January 30, 2026|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments
Read More

ICYMI: Electronics Company Pays $11.8M to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

The Department of Justice announced that Harman International Industries, Inc., an audio electronics company, agreed to pay $11.8M to settle allegations of evading duties on goods made of aluminum from China.

What Happened

For a period of over ten years, from June 2011 to March 2023, Harman knowingly imported heat sinks that contained extruded aluminum from China without paying the required antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD).

The settlement also reveals that when Harman discovered its failure to pay AD/CVD, the company concealed this fact and decided not to disclose it to the U.S. government. 

This case arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in a portion of the government’s recovery. The whistleblower in this case will receive over $2M of the settlement proceeds.

Enforcement is a Top Priority for the U.S. Government

High tariffs in the current trade environment have created a higher incentive to cheat. The U.S. government has made clear that enforcing customs laws is a top priority. 

For example, on May 12, 2025, Matthew Galeotti, the Head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, sent a memo to all criminal division personnel highlighting the focus areas of the division for white-collar crime.

The memo included a […]

By |2025-12-12T09:10:25-05:00December 12, 2025|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments
Read More

ICYMI: Technology Company Pleads Guilty to Export Control Violations, Agrees to $140M Fine

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California and the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES) of the Department of Justice’s (DoJ) National Security Division announced that Cadence Design Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California, agreed to plead guilty to resolve criminal violations of export controls. 

As part of the plea agreement, Cadence will pay criminal penalties of nearly $118 million. 

In addition to the charges, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) also announced the resolution of a civil enforcement action against the company in which Cadence agreed to pay over $95 million in civil penalties. 

The DoJ and BIS have coordinated the resolution of the parallel investigation, and each agreed to a partial credit against their fine for payments made to satisfy the other agency’s fine. Under the coordinated agreement, Cadence will pay criminal and civil penalties of more than $140 million.

Cadence committed criminal violations of the export control laws by selling hardware, software, and semiconductor design intellectual property to the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) in China. NUDT was added to the Department of Commerce’s Entity List in February 2015. The university was involved in the development of supercomputers with applications for military and nuclear explosive simulations. 

Cadence and its Chinese subsidiary engaged in a conspiracy to commit export control violations by exporting this technology to NUDT without obtaining the requisite licenses from […]

By |2025-08-07T11:02:32-04:00August 7, 2025|EAR, Enforcement, Export, International Trade, Technology, U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments
Read More

ICYMI: Patio Furniture Company Agrees to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

On July 24, 2025, the Department of Justice (DoJ) announced that Grosfillex, Inc., a Pennsylvania furniture company, agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD).

Grosfillex submitted false forms to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claiming that furniture parts made of extruded aluminum from China were not subject to AD/CVD. The company attempted to hide the aluminum extrusions by falsely packing them as sham “furniture kits.” Additionally, for a different subset of extrusions, the company failed to correct customs forms it had submitted previously, even after learning that the forms contained false information.

The investigation arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act by a former employee of Grosfillex. Under the False Claims Act, private citizens can sue on behalf of the government and share in any recovery. In this case, the whistleblower will receive $962,662.74.

Duty Evasion is on the Rise

This case is just one example of the growing incentive to cheat that comes with higher tariffs. Whether it’s through misclassifying goods, undervaluing imports, or using deceptive transshipment routes, some companies think they are being creative, but, instead, are participating in outright illegal strategies to reduce their tariff liability.

Higher tariffs have even contributed to the emergence of a cottage industry of “tariff reduction” companies that suggest ways to cut import costs. However, many of these so-called strategies amount to evasion, […]

By |2025-08-01T10:51:46-04:00August 1, 2025|AD/CVD, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, penalty, Reasonable Care, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments
Read More
This website uses cookies and third party services. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the Privacy Policy. OK
Skip to content
Go to Top