Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

6cases from 3 jurisdictions
€108.9mTotal of monetary amounts
€5.59mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

When?

per year, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
20241€14.7m
20254€93.2m
20261€1.07m

6 cases

2 Jul 2026 IRB-Brasil Resseguros S.A.IRB-Brasil Resseguros: BRL 6.32m settlement over obstructing SUSEP supervision BrazilBribery and corruption €1.07m

IRB-Brasil Resseguros S.A. concluded a Termo de Compromisso (settlement in sanction proceedings) with the CGU and allegedly pays a fine of BRL 6,317,473.41 because the company had hindered the investigative and supervisory activity of the insurance supervisor SUSEP (Art. 5 V Lei 12.846/2013). The fine equals the statutory minimum of 0.1% of gross revenue (BRL 6,509,921.81) less BRL 192,448.40 already paid in SUSEP proceedings over inconsistent reporting. Extraordinary publication was waived, and the proceedings are thereby closed.

What organisations can take from it

Incomplete or inconsistent information given to a supervisory authority can, as obstruction of supervision, trigger an anti-corruption fine.

Relevance to training and awareness

Obstructing supervisory authorities through inaccurate information

Authority / court
Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption
Legal basis
Lei 12.846/2013, Art. 5 V, Art. 6 I; Decreto 11.129/2022, Art. 25 § 2; Portaria Normativa CGU 155/2024
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Repeat case
no
Mitigating circumstances
Credit was given for a compliance programme (3.6%), the absence of proof of advantage or damage (1%) and settlement-related reductions for cooperation and admission; fines already paid to SUSEP were deducted.
Published
3 Jul 2026

Original amount 6,317,473.41 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

18 Dec 2025 R M Capital Pty Ltd; The SMSF Club Pty LtdR M Capital and SMSF Club: 925,000 AUD over accepted referral fees AustraliaGifts, hospitality and benefits €521,597

On an application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the Federal Court of Australia allegedly imposed civil penalties totalling 925,000 AUD: 575,000 AUD on the licensee R M Capital and 350,000 AUD on its authorised representative The SMSF Club. Between November 2014 and July 2016 SMSF Club accepted referral fees totalling 135,863.65 AUD (excluding GST) on 52 occasions from a property provider that referred clients to it, who then set up self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) with its help and used them to buy property from that provider; the court treated this as prohibited conflicted remuneration, and R M Capital, as licensee, had through gross negligence failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it. Both companies must provide ASIC with an independent expert's report on their compliance arrangements within six months; R M Capital lodged an appeal on 15 January 2026. The decision is not final.

What organisations can take from it

Advisers must not accept commissions from product providers that could influence their recommendations – and licensees must actively check for such arrangements by their representatives and provide training on them.

Relevance to training and awareness

Commissions and benefits from product providers to financial advisers

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Federal Court of Australia (Verfahren der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption · Gifts, hospitality and benefits
Legal basis
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 963F, s 963G(1), s 1317G(1E), s 1101B(1)(a)(i)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
no
Mitigating circumstances
For SMSF Club, ASIC and the company submitted as mitigating that it ended the referral arrangement immediately after ASIC raised concerns in 2016, cooperated and agreed to resolve the matter, that these were the first contraventions alleged against it and that no client loss was alleged; the court allegedly approved the jointly proposed penalty.
Published
19 Dec 2025

Original amount 925,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

30 Sep 2025 Bulls Holding Investments Company S.A., RS Investimentos S/ABulls Holding and RS Investimentos: BRL 508.8m for obstructing supervision BrazilBribery and corruption €81.5m

The Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU, Office of the Comptroller General) fined Bulls Holding Investments Company S.A. BRL 387,431,733.02 and RS Investimentos S/A BRL 121,380,000.00 (BRL 508,811,733.02 in total) and ordered extraordinary publication of the decision for each. According to the final report, the companies had submitted to the insurance supervisor SUSEP bids to take over the pension association APLUB, which was under special intervention, backed by inadequate and in part apparently forged documents, thereby interfering with SUSEP's supervisory activity; RS Investimentos was additionally sanctioned for supporting Bulls Holding's acts. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

Misleading documents submitted to a supervisory authority count in Brazil as interference with supervision under the Anti-Corruption Law and can trigger very large fines.

Relevance to training and awareness

Truthful submissions to supervisory authorities

Authority / court
Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption
Legal basis
Lei nº 12.846/2013, Art. 5 II und V, Art. 6 I und II, Art. 14
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
2 Oct 2025

Original amount 508,811,733.02 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

7 Aug 2025 Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanyLiberty Mutual: declination against 4.7 million USD after bribery of Indian state bank employees USABribery of public officials €4.04m

From 2017 to 2022, the Indian subsidiary Liberty General Insurance paid around 1.47 million USD to employees of six state-owned banks so that they would refer bank customers to its insurance products; the payments were booked as marketing expenses and routed through third parties. The DOJ declined to prosecute; Liberty Mutual is disgorging 4,699,088 USD in profits.

What organisations can take from it

Employees of state-owned banks are public officials – sales commissions paid to them are bribes, even if they are booked as marketing.

Relevance to training and awareness

Distribution partnerships with state-owned banks, payments disguised as marketing

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice (Fraud Section; USAO District of Massachusetts)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials
Legal basis
FCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-2; Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (Declination)
Action
Disgorgement of profits
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary self-disclosure (March 2024), full cooperation, root cause analysis, termination of those involved, improved controls including rules on messaging apps.
Published
7 Aug 2025

Original amount 4,699,088 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

17 Mar 2025 Qualicorp Consultoria e Corretora de Seguros S.A.Qualicorp: leniency agreement worth BRL 44.5m over payment to a public official BrazilBribery of public officials €7.15m

Qualicorp Consultoria e Corretora de Seguros S.A. acknowledged, in a leniency agreement with the CGU and the AGU, that it had paid an economic advantage to a public official whose action or omission was in the company's interest. It allegedly pays BRL 44,485,434.29 as a fine plus disgorgement: BRL 27,803,396.43 as disgorgement of the advantage obtained and a fine of BRL 16,682,037.86 under Lei 12.846/2013 (40% reduction), both indexed to IPCA up to December 2024. The agreement extends to other companies of the Qualicorp group. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

What organisations can take from it

If management knows of or tolerates payments to officials, the fine rises; without an effective compliance programme there is also no mitigating factor.

Relevance to training and awareness

Payment to a public official to influence official action

Authority / court
Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU) und Advocacia-Geral da União (AGU)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials
Legal basis
Lei 12.846/2013, Art. 6 I, Arts. 16 und 17, Art. 19 I; Lei 8.429/1992; Decreto 11.129/2022
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Credit was given for returning the advantage (1%), cooperation (1.5%) and voluntary admission (2%); no compliance programme was taken into account. The fine equals the statutory minimum of the advantage obtained, then reduced by 40%.
Liability of senior managers
Tolerance or knowledge by senior management was applied as an aggravating factor at the maximum rate of 3%.

Original amount 44,485,434.29 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Mar 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

23 Dec 2024 MMM Holdings, LLCMMM Holdings: USD 15.2m over gift cards for Medicare plan enrolments USAGifts, hospitality and benefits €14.7m

The Puerto Rico Medicare Advantage provider pays USD 15,228,340 to resolve False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statute allegations and entered into a five-year Corporate Integrity Agreement with HHS-OIG. From January 2018 to December 2022 MMM allegedly gave gift cards to administrative assistants of medical practices so that they would get thousands of Medicare beneficiaries to enrol in an MMM plan; the resulting premium payments amounted to USD 6,091,336.

What organisations can take from it

Gifts to practice staff who advise insured patients are as sensitive as benefits to doctors.

Relevance to training and awareness

Gifts to practice staff who advise or refer patients

Authority / court
U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Puerto Rico; HHS Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG)
Area of law
Bribery and corruption · Gifts, hospitality and benefits
Legal basis
False Claims Act; Anti-Kickback Statute
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
The company's cooperation and its implementation of internal controls were taken into account.
Published
23 Dec 2024

Original amount 15,228,340 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial