SEC Whistleblower Office Reports Record Numbers for FY2018
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.19.18
On November 14, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Office of the Whistleblower issued its annual report to Congress. As detailed in the report, the SEC saw record-breaking numbers for its whistleblower program in fiscal year 2018, including the highest volume of whistleblower tips and the highest amount (by far) of dollars awarded to whistleblowers. While the total award amount was impacted by two of the largest-ever whistleblower awards, the increase in the number of tips was likely due, in part, to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers, 138 S. Ct. 767 (2018), which limited the scope of whistleblower retaliation protections to individuals who report possible violations directly to the SEC.
The SEC’s whistleblower program was established in 2010 under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. It authorizes the Commission to pay monetary awards to people who voluntarily provide information that leads to successful enforcement actions resulting in monetary sanctions over $1 million and successful related actions. The monetary awards must equal 10 to 30 percent of the monetary sanctions collected.
Since the program’s inception, the Commission has awarded more than $326 million in whistleblower awards to 59 individuals. In FY 2018 alone, the Commission awarded over $168 million to 13 individuals, exceeding the total amount awarded in all prior years combined. Notably, the Commission ordered an $83 million award in March 2018 (split among three individuals), as well as a $54 million award in September 2018 (split between two individuals). These amounts represent the two highest whistleblower awards in the history of the program.
The Office of the Whistleblower also received a record number of tips in FY 2018. The 5,282 tips amounted to a 17-percent increase over the 4,484 tips received in FY 2017 and a 76-percent increase over the 3,001 tips received in FY 2012, the first full year of data tracking.
The report notes that the increase in tips “may have been attributable, in part, to the [Supreme Court’s] ruling” in Digital Realty. In February 2018, the Court held that the whistleblower provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 require an individual to report a possible securities law violation to the SEC in order to qualify for protections against employment retaliation under Section 21F(h) of the Dodd-Frank Act. This ruling incentivizes employees who suspect securities law violations to go directly to the SEC before or instead of raising concerns to their supervisors or compliance functions. Following the Digital Realty decision, the Commission issued proposed amendments to Rule 21F-2 of the Exchange Act to modify the rule in accordance with the Court’s holding.
In sum, the information provided in the annual report reflects the increased activity in SEC whistleblower matters. Corporate clients must be aware of their risks and obligations with respect to whistleblowers, especially given the changing landscape of whistleblower retaliation protections.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26


