A recent New York Times opinion piece on the Epstein emails is one of the most revealing essays I’ve read about the intersection of privilege, power, and language. It’s a study not only of abuse, but of the coded ways elite circles communicate, and what those patterns tell us about status, access, and the quiet barter economy of non-public information. The guest columnist, Anand Giridharadas, makes a compelling case for what he calls the “Epstein class,” writing: “People a
Banks brace for AML failures. They brace for fines, monitorships, headlines, and massive cleanup programs. But here’s the risk almost no one prepares for: What happens when the remediation itself becomes the next compliance problem? That’s the uncomfortable question raised by the unfolding TD Bank story — where a multibillion-dollar anti-money laundering settlement has now collided with allegations that the bank’s internal cleanup disproportionately targeted employees of Chin
SEC and FINRA rules require firms to maintain, monitor, and enforce restricted lists to prevent even the appearance of insider trading. Even unintentional missteps can destabilize an institution. Will you catch the next problem quietly — or read about it in tomorrow’s headlines?
See what’s new in HarmCheck — from expanded detection capabilities and eDiscovery tools to our newest compliance advisor (and a surprise guest in a tie).
Debanking — the closure of customer accounts by banks — is drawing new scrutiny from regulators, customers, and the public. A recent case involving Bank of America highlights why compliance teams need tools like HarmCheck to stay ahead.
Too often, organizations treat risk mitigation as a compliance function: audits, checklists, and reactive crisis response. But this is a limited view. The smarter path is to design for safety, ethics, and regulatory awareness from the beginning. In other words, risk mitigation isn’t just compliance, it is part of corporate strategy.