Photo of Brian Egan

Brian Egan advises on a number of international legal issues that affect US and foreign clients, including economic sanctions, export controls, and anti-money laundering programs; national security trade and investment reviews; international arbitration and other cross-border disputes; international cybersecurity and data privacy; and issues of public international law. He has worked in various senior legal positions for the US government, giving him keen insight into domestic and international legal matters that influence US government national security and foreign relations policies and programs. Before joining Steptoe, Brian served as the Legal Adviser to the US Department of State, the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council, Deputy White House Counsel, and Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement and Intelligence with the US Department of the Treasury. Brian has regularly appeared in public fora to speak on international legal issues, including testifying before Congress, public speaking engagements, and panel presentations.

Read Brian's full bio.

On February 18, 2021, the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets control (OFAC) announced a $507,375 settlement with BitPay, Inc. (BitPay). This civil settlement resolved apparent violations of multiple sanctions programs related to digital currency transactions, and is the second OFAC enforcement case brought against a business in the blockchain industry. This

On January 1, 2021, the United States enacted the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (NDAA) after the US House of Representatives and US Senate voted to override a presidential veto of the law. Included within the NDAA are a significant number of provisions related to anti-money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT), including provisions reforming the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), a collection of statutes underpinning most of the current AML regulatory framework. These amendments, many of which have been under consideration for years, represent the most substantial AML-related reforms enacted since at least the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001. Below, we outline ten of the most significant AML provisions contained in the NDAA. Given the breadth of the reforms, it is particularly important for US “financial institutions” – including money services businesses (MSBs) and other non-traditional financial institutions subject to the BSA – to carefully review the Act to understand how their compliance obligations may have changed or may change in the future as the Act is implemented via regulation.
Continue Reading Ten Key Takeaways from the NDAA’s AML Reforms

On September 16, 2020, the US Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) seeking comments on regulatory changes to enhance the effectiveness of anti-money laundering compliance programs of regulated financial institutions. As described in FinCEN’s press release, the ANPRM presents an opportunity for financial institutions to provide comments on “a wide range of questions pertaining to potential regulatory amendments under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA).” While FinCEN has published a number of rules in recent years through formal notice and comment procedures, the rules have been fairly targeted to issues such as customer due diligence. FinCEN has also issued a number of guidance documents, including guidance applying FinCEN’s rules to certain entities in the blockchain industry, but did not accept public comments from industry at the time. Therefore, the publication of the ANPRM presents a relatively rare opportunity for regulated entities to be heard on a range of AML programmatic and compliance issues.
Continue Reading FinCEN Seeks Comments on Effectiveness of AML Programs, Presenting Rare Opportunity for FinTech and Blockchain Companies

On October 11, the leaders of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a joint statement regarding anti-money laundering (AML) compliance for persons engaged in certain activities involving digital assets. While the statement largely reaffirms known agency guidance and existing regulations, it is noteworthy for a number of reasons.

First, the joint statement, issued from multiple regulators, is the first of its kind in the digital asset space with respect to AML and may indicate an intent of regulators to show that their approach to AML compliance is aligned and to coordinate more closely on AML compliance going forward. While each of the three regulators has published guidance regarding digital assets and has engaged in related enforcement actions, there has not been any public indication to date that such efforts have been coordinated across agencies.Continue Reading US Regulators Issue Joint Statement on AML Compliance Involving Digital Assets

On March 19, 2018, US President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13827 (the EO), which for the first time targets US economic sanctions against a virtual currency – namely, a digital currency colloquially known as the “petro” that has been issued by the Government of Venezuela (GOV). Specifically, the EO prohibits “all transactions related to,

You know that federal entities like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) have all issued guidance concerning cryptocurrencies.  But get ready to add a new agency to the list—the Department of Defense’s Defense Security Service (DSS).

Standard Form 86 (SF-86), “Questionnaire for National Security Positions,” is the lengthy form that anyone applying for a security clearance from the US government must complete.  Question 20A of the SF-86 asks whether the applicant or immediate family members have ever “had any foreign financial interests (such as stocks, property, investments, bank accounts, ownership of corporate entities, corporate interests or businesses) in which you or they have direct control or direct ownership? (Exclude financial interests in companies or diversified mutual funds that are publicly traded on a US exchange.)”

We know that FinCEN considers cryptocurrency to be currency, the CFTC considers it a commodity, and the IRS considers it to be property, but is it also a “foreign financial interest” for the purposes of the SF-86? 
Continue Reading Can Your Cryptocurrency Get a Clearance?