The Eastern District Court of New York dismissed the criminal information against Deutsche Bank AG in a proceeding brought by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in January 2021.
The relevant order was signed by Judge Rachel P. Kovner on July 5, 2024.
On January 7, 2021, the government filed a double information charging Deutsche Bank with conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States in violation of 18 USC § 371. In Count One, Deutsche Bank was charged with conspiracy to violate the accounting provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as amended, 15 USC §§ 78m(b)(2)(A), 78m(b)(5), 78ff(a), 78m(b)(2)(B) and 78m( b )(5). In Count Two, Deutsche Bank was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud affecting a financial institution in violation of 18 USC § 1349.
Among other obligations, the deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) required Deutsche Bank to cooperate with the government’s investigation and implement an enhanced compliance program for a period of at least three years. Deutsche Bank was also required to pay a criminal monetary penalty of $87,091,424, of which $5,625,000 was fully credited against the $30,000,000 civil monetary penalty imposed on Deutsche Bank by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC ) in connection with CFTC proceedings28, 290 January2 and the order and paid $20,000,000 to the Consumer Fraud Fund of the United States Inspection Service.
The DPA provided that the government would not pursue criminal prosecution against Deutsche Bank and move to dismiss the information within six months of the DPA’s expiration if Deutsche Bank fully complied with all of its obligations under the DPA. The DPA expired on or about January 7, 2024.
On or about January 8, 2024, Deutsche Bank’s CEO and CFO certified to the government that Deutsche Bank had met its disclosure obligations under paragraph 6 of the DPA.
Based on information known to the government, Deutsche Bank has fully complied with its disclosure obligations under the DPA, including fully cooperating with the government, implementing an enhanced compliance program and procedures, and satisfying the terms of the self-reporting provisions .
In addition, on or about and between January 15, 2021 and February 15, 2022, Duetsche Bank made a timely payment of the criminal fine remaining after the credit.
Because Deutsche Bank has fully complied with all of its obligations under the DPA, the government has determined that dismissal of the information with prejudice is appropriate.
Upon due consideration and reconsideration of the unopposed motion, the Court ordered the Government’s motion granted and the criminal information filed in this action dismissed with prejudice.
In January 2021, Deutsche Bank entered into a three-year deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York and the Department of Justice’s Fraud and Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Division (MLARS). The criminal information was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York charging Deutsche Bank with one count of conspiracy to violate the books and records and internal accounting controls provisions of the FCPA and one count of conspiracy to commit fraud affecting financial institution in relation to the behavior of the goods.
According to admissions and court documents, between 2009 and 2016, Deutsche Bank, acting through its employees and agents, including senior executives and regional executives, knowingly and willfully conspired to maintain false books, records and accounts for concealment, among other things. things, payments to a business development consultant (BDC) that acted as a proxy for a foreign official, and payments to a BDC that were actually bribes paid to a decision maker for a client in order to obtain lucrative business for the bank. In some cases, Deutsche Bank made payments to BDCs that were not supported by invoices or evidence of any service provided. In other cases, Deutsche Bank employees created or helped BDC create false justifications for payments.
In connection with a Saudi Arabian BDC, Deutsche Bank admitted that its employees conspired to contract with a company owned by the wife of a client decision maker to facilitate more than $1 million in bribe payments to the decision maker. Deutsche Bank approved the BDC relationship despite Deutsche Bank employees knowing about the relationship between the Saudi BDC and the decision maker and approved the corrupt payments despite Deutsche Bank employees openly discussing the need to pay the Saudi BDC in order to induce her husband to continue working with Deutsche Bank. In requesting approval of a payment, Deutsche Bank officials warned that the “customer and [the Saudi BDC] are closely related and . . . any stoppage of payment to [the Saudi BDC] it will certainly cause a significant outflow [business]” from the customer.
Deutsche Bank also contracted with an Abu Dhabi BDC to achieve a lucrative transaction, despite Deutsche Bank officials knowing that the Abu Dhabi BDC did not qualify as a BDC apart from its family relationship with the receiver client decision makers, and that the Abu Dhabi BDC was in fact acting as a proxy for the client decision maker. Deutsche Bank paid Abu Dhabi BDC over $3 million without invoices.
By agreeing to misrepresent the purpose of payments to BDCs and falsely characterizing payments to others as payments to BDCs, Deutsche Bank employees conspired to falsify Deutsche Bank’s books, records and accounts in violation of the FCPA. Additionally, Deutsche Bank employees knowingly and willfully conspired to fail to implement internal controls in violation of the FCPA by, among other things, failing to conduct substantial due diligence on the BDCs, making payments to certain BDCs that did not have a contract with Deutsche Bank on time and making payments to certain BDCs without invoices or adequate documentation of the services purportedly performed.
In the commodities fraud case, the DOJ notes that between 2008 and 2013, Deutsche Bank precious metals traders participated in a scheme to defraud other traders at the New York Mercantile Exchange Inc. and Commodity Exchange Inc., which are commodity exchanges operated by CME Group Inc. On several occasions, traders in Deutsche Bank’s precious metals office in New York, Singapore and London submitted orders to buy and sell precious metal futures contracts with the intention of canceling those orders prior to execution, including in an attempt to profit by defrauding others market participants by introducing false and misleading information about the existence of real supply and demand for precious metal futures contracts.