By Adam Turteltaub

It’s one thing if a company wants to protect its trade secrets. But, what if it wants to keep its dirty little secrets from getting out? Then, the SEC may want to step in.

Stephen Cohen (LinkedIn), partner at Sidley Austin, and a former senior leader in the Enforcement Division at the SEC, explain in this podcast that, to understand the issue, we need to look back to the Dodd-Frank Act.

The law led to the SEC whistleblower program and included anti-retaliation authority. The SEC believed it had implicit authority to punish efforts that impeded direct communication by whistleblowers with the Commission and its staff. Both the SEC and CFTC have created similar rules prohibiting organization and individuals from taking any action that inhibits someone communicating directly with the SEC about a possible securities law violation.

The SEC has interpreted that to mean that language in non-disclosure and severance agreements, codes of conduct, policies and elsewhere that either require employees to report issues internally rather than to the government, or require non-disclosure to the government as a condition of severance, are illegal.

Several companies have since run afoul of the SEC on this issue, with cases going back to 2015.

So what should companies do? For one, make sure that they are properly balancing the need to protect confidentiality without interfering with whistleblowing. Watch for language prohibiting disclosure of information to third parties that doesn’t provide an exception for the government. Be on the lookout, too, for policies requiring departing employees to attest that they did not disclose information to the government. Look, too, at what your employment agreements say. Likewise, watch what language you include in agreements with your third parties. The SEC looks askance, there, too, to language that it perceives would inhibit reporting of wrongdoing.

Listen in to learn more about this evolving issue and its many pitfalls.

Listen now