Enforcement activity and guidance from 2025 under Chairman Paul Atkins provide important context for understanding where the SEC is focusing its attention in 2026. Regulators and practitioners highlighted these priorities at the Securities Enforcement Forum held on February 5^th in New York City where they discussed how the enforcement trends are evolving. The agency’s guidance, combined with rapid technological advancement and the boom of social media, is reshaping the current enforcement landscape. We have taken a closer look at how the SEC’s enforcement priorities shifted in 2025 and what those developments suggest for the emerging risk areas in 2026.

Insider trading remains a core focus

The SEC’s enforcement efforts on insider trading and market manipulation cases continue to span both sophisticated, technology-driven schemes as well as traditional cases involving family members and friends. For example:

• In SEC v. Eamma Safi and Zhi, defendants participated in an international insider trading scheme generating millions of dollars in illicit profits.[1] This case reflects a higher level of sophistication, with defendants using disappearing messaging apps (e.g., Signal), burner phones, and coded language to conceal their activities, creating significant evidentiary challenges for the SEC.
• By contrast, in a more conventional insider trading case, the SEC charged Ross Haghighat, a former director of Chinook Therapeutics, along with four family members and friends.[2] After learning of Chinook’s impending acquisition, Haghighat shared material, nonpublic information, enabling the group to collectively realize approximately $500,000 in illicit profits.

10b5-1 plans under scrutiny

Recent regulatory developments under Item 408 of Regulation S-K, effective February 2023, require public companies to disclose the adoption, termination, and material terms of Rule 10b5-1 trading plans.[3] This is an area that public companies should continue to monitor closely.

Notably, in June 2025, the former CEO and chairman of Ontrak, Inc. was prosecuted for misusing Rule 10b5-1 plans to avoid losses of more than $12.5 million.[4] This marked the first-ever criminal prosecution based solely on misuse of a Rule 10b5-1 plan. The case underscores the need to exercise heightened care and build anticipated events thoughtfully into the design of 10b5-1 plans. Both the SEC and DOJ alike appear poised to pursue cases where abuse of such trading plans is “obvious,” rather than “stretching” marginal theories.

Remedies and the future of disgorgement

While insider trading cases remain a core focus, an area of uncertainty surrounds the scope of remedies under the current Administration. The decision of the Ninth Circuit in SEC v. Sripetch in September 2025 highlighted a key circuit split on disgorgement, with the Ninth Circuit aligning with the First and Fifth Circuits, rather than the Second Circuit. The Ninth Circuit ruled that the SEC is not required to show pecuniary harm to individual investors in order to seek disgorgement, noting that the nature of disgorgement is to require the wrongdoer to pay back their illicit profits, rather than compensate individual victims for their losses.[5] In contrast, Second Circuit precedent requires a showing of pecuniary harm.

This split is critical, as the Second and Ninth Circuits rule on most securities litigation cases.[6] Sripetchpetitioned the Supreme Court in October following the Ninth Circuit’s decision, and it has agreed to review the ruling.[7] The effects of this remain to be seen, but if the Supreme Court holds that showing pecuniary harm is required for disgorgement, the SEC may eventually turn to civil penalties and fines as alternative deterrents.[8]

Financial reporting and accounting cases, a shift toward intent

The current Administration has prioritized enforcement in areas such as narcoterrorism, frauds against the United States government, and frauds involving variable interest entities (VIEs). Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche released various memorandums throughout 2025 outlining the enforcement shifts; for instance, prioritizing bribery schemes that involve ties to drug cartels or other organized crime groups, as opposed to bribery of foreign officials.[9] As the Justice Department shifts their focus, the SEC may assume sole responsibility for pursuing securities fraud enforcement. This could potentially be a positive development, as the SEC was always intended to be the primary regulator of securities fraud.

Although there was a downward trend in accounting and other securities fraud cases in 2025, this dip may not be an accurate indicator of the future trajectory. With Chairman Atkins confirmed in April 2025 and the new Enforcement Director, Judge Margaret Ryan, arriving in September 2025, and given that matters are typically complex and time-consuming to bring, the level of accounting and other fraud cases may return to baseline in the coming year. The anticipated shift is away from technical or process-based errors (e.g., books and records violations) and toward cases alleging intentional wrongdoing.

Renewed focus on individual accountability

In the same vein, a continued move toward individual accountability is evident. The SEC is focusing more on evidence of intentional wrongdoing by individual actors and less on a company’s failure to follow policies or procedures. Additionally, meaningful cooperation and self-reporting have led to more settlements at the company level. As a result, there will likely be an increase in enforcement actions targeting individuals. This change in emphasis is consistent with Chairman Atkins’ earlier writings in which he states, “corporations do not act; individuals do.”[10]

This shift has been accompanied by enhancements to the Wells process. Chairman Atkins has indicated the need for a more “fair and transparent Wells process,” encouraging earlier engagement and increasing the required response time to four weeks, doubling the traditional two-week window.[11]

Disclosure fraud beyond the filing

In June 2025, Chairman Atkins removed fourteen proposed disclosure rules from the Gensler era, specifically including those addressing climate-risk, cybersecurity governance, AI-based investment advice, and expanded derivatives and private fund reporting.[12] Nevertheless, the rise of social media has dramatically increased both the speed and reach of corporate communications, prompting greater SEC scrutiny of public statements and disclosures made outside of SEC filings, particularly disclosures of non-GAAP measures. The current guidance on non-filing disclosures remains unclear; but executives should assume that material statements made on social platforms are subject to the same scrutiny as formal SEC filings. It is important for firms to advise their clients that all public statements must be grounded, consistent, and aligned with board-level reporting. This is particularly important to keep in mind should the SEC shift the cadence of reporting from quarterly to semi-annual, thus leaving more time for non-filing disclosures to occur.

State regulators step forward in enforcement

As federal enforcement priorities shift and staffing constraints attributable to the Administration’s federal workforce reductions and buyouts persist, state regulators appear increasingly willing to “fill the void” by bringing their own securities‑related actions. A clear example of this trend can be seen in the Emergent BioSolutions matter: after the SEC brought and then settled a disclosure case against Emergent for making materially misleading statements about its readiness to manufacture COVID‑19 vaccines,[13] the New York Attorney General followed with a separate case targeting Emergent’s former CEO for alleged insider trading under the Martin Act based on his sale of more than $10 million in stock while knowing about undisclosed vaccine‑contamination issues. The NYAG’s case remains ongoing.[14]

Technology reshaping enforcement detection

The SEC continues to enhance its enforcement toolkit through advanced data analytics. Notably, the SEC’s Market Abuse Unit uses the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) to track all order and trading activity in U.S. equity markets,[15] as a means of detecting potential insider trading activity. The SEC also launched an AI Task Force in August, signaling deeper institutional investment in these tools.[16] As technology evolves, the SEC could see greater efficiencies, specifically in reviewing their TCR system (tips, complaints, and referrals).

Organizations are similarly accelerating their adoption of AI tools. However, with entities moving quickly to keep up with their competition, they must still remember to set up the proper guardrails. FINRA’s 2026 Annual Regulatory Oversight Report, released on December 9, 2025, includes standalone guidance on GenAI. [17] This section contains key factors for firms to consider when testing and deploying GenAI tools, including the establishment of an appropriate governance model, the assessment and mitigation of risks such as hallucinations and bias, and the implementation of robust testing and ongoing monitoring processes. The report also examines the emerging risks and challenges that AI agents may present to investors and the overall market. Specifically, FINRA encourages firms to have conversations with their third-party vendors to understand how they are using AI tools, as this area is often overlooked.

Globally, the EU AI Act is currently one of the most comprehensive AI regulatory frameworks to date, but further regulations in the U.S. may not be far behind. This opens a new landscape for enforcement that has yet to be forged.

Emerging pressure points for regulators

While continued AI enhancement remains a key focus, regulators are also identifying new pressure points in adjacent markets, including crypto assets and prediction platforms. Federal regulators are continuing to refine their approach to crypto regulation through initiatives such as Project Crypto.^[18] As Chairman Atkins announced at a January 29, 2026 joint SEC-CFTC event, Project Crypto will now proceed as a coordinated SEC-CFTC initiative. Although no new rules were adopted at the event, the joint appearance signals a move toward more coordinated oversight of the crypto markets, a trajectory expected to develop over the coming years.[19] Recent congressional action, including the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act, further reinforces this trend toward broader market-structure reform.

The regulatory landscape for the predictions market is also evolving, with federal regulators easing earlier pressure on platforms such as Polymarket. While the DOJ and CFTC have recently closed investigations and allowed the Polymarket platform to return to the U.S. market,[20] U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton (SDNY) signaled that enforcement actions in this area are likely ahead, suggesting that activity in such markets should fall within securities law enforcement frameworks and that making bets outside of traditional spaces does not “insulate you from fraud.”[21]

Preparing for the next phase of enforcement

Even as the SEC’s regulatory scope shifts, or even narrows in some areas, public companies must critically evaluate whether their existing compliance frameworks align with the SEC’s evolving priorities. Regular reassessment of internal controls related to insider trading, financial accounting, and disclosure obligations is essential. Adaptability, not complacency, will define effective compliance in the next phase of SEC enforcement.

---

[1] SEC.gov | Eamma Safi and Zhi Ge a/k/a Josh Ge
[2] SEC.gov | Rouzbeh “Ross” Haghighat; Behrouz “Bruce” Haghighat; Kirstyn Pearl; James Roberge; Seyedfarbod “Fabio” Sabzevari
[3] 17 CFR § 229.408 – (Item 408) Insider trading arrangements and policies. | Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
[4] Office of Public Affairs | Former Chairman and CEO of Publicly Traded Health Care Company Sentenced to 42 Months in Prison for Insider Trading | United States Department of Justice
[5] Ninth Circuit Clarifies SEC Disgorgement Standard, Aligning with the First and Fifth Circuits and Disagreeing with the Second Circuit | Corporate & Securities Law Blog
[6] US Asks Justices to Take SEC Enforcement Case Despite Appeal Win
[7] Supreme Court to Review SEC Power to Recoup Illegal Gains
[8] US Asks Justices to Take SEC Enforcement Case Despite Appeal Win
[9] Guidelines for Investigations and Enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act (FCPA)
[10] Evaluating the Mission: A Critical Review of the History and Evolution of the SEC Enforcement Program
[11] SEC Chairman Previews Updates to Improve Wells Process
[12] 90 Fed. Reg. 25531 (Withdrawal of Proposed Regulatory Actions), June 17, 2025.
[13] Emergent BioSolutions, Inc.
[14] New-york-v-robert-g-kramer-complaint-2026.pdf
[15] Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) – SIFMA – SIFMA
[16] SEC.gov | SEC Creates Task Force to Tap Artificial Intelligence for Enhanced Innovation and Efficiency Across the Agency
[17] 2026 FINRA Annual Regulatory Oversight Report | FINRA.org
[18] SEC.gov | American Leadership in the Digital Finance Revolution
[19] CFTC and SEC Signal New Era of Crypto Harmonization at Joint Project Crypto Event | Consumer Financial Services Law Monitor
[20] CFTC Approval Allows Polymarket to Reenter the U.S. Market | Regulatory Oversight
[21] Wall Street’s Top Cop Expects Enforcement on Prediction Markets – Bloomberg – Securities Docket

---