US Financial Crime Enforcement in 2026: What In-House Teams Should Expect
As financial institutions and corporations prepare for 2026, enforcement experts advising in-house teams are warning of significant shifts in how US authorities approach financial crime regulation. According to legal analysts tracking trends at the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), Department of Justice (DOJ), and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the coming year will likely see intensified focus on emerging vulnerabilities in cryptocurrency markets, enhanced sanctions compliance requirements, and more aggressive enforcement of long-standing anti-corruption statutes.
For compliance professionals already navigating complex regulatory landscapes, these anticipated developments signal the need for proactive reassessment of internal controls and risk management frameworks, particularly in areas where regulatory expectations are rapidly evolving.
Background and Context
The enforcement landscape heading into 2026 builds upon several years of increasingly sophisticated regulatory responses to financial crime. The continued implementation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), established in 1977, remains a cornerstone of US anti-corruption efforts, while anti-money laundering (AML) regulations have expanded to address new technological challenges. Financial institutions have simultaneously faced growing pressures to enhance suspicious activity reporting (SARs) and know-your-customer (KYC) protocols.
Recent years have seen particular attention on cryptocurrency exchanges and digital asset service providers, which have been brought under increasingly stringent AML and sanctions compliance requirements. Meanwhile, international tariff regimes have created additional compliance considerations for multinational corporations, adding layers to due diligence obligations.
Key Figures and Entities
The enforcement ecosystem continues to be dominated by three federal agencies with distinct but complementary jurisdictions. FinCEN, as the bureau's administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, maintains oversight of financial institutions' AML obligations and serves as the primary recipient of SARs. The Department of Justice, through various divisions including the Fraud Section and Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, pursues criminal enforcement actions against both corporations and individuals. The SEC exercises authority over publicly traded companies, enforcing compliance with both securities laws and anti-corruption provisions.
Beyond these primary enforcement bodies, in-house teams must also navigate requirements from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) regarding sanctions compliance, as well as industry-specific regulators that may have overlapping jurisdiction over financial crime matters. The coordination between these agencies has grown increasingly sophisticated, with joint task forces and information-sharing protocols enhancing enforcement capabilities.
Legal and Financial Mechanisms
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act remains one of the most powerful tools in US enforcement authorities' arsenal, prohibiting bribery of foreign officials and requiring accurate books and records. Recent interpretations have expanded the scope of what constitutes improper payments, particularly regarding facilitation payments and corporate hospitality. Meanwhile, the Bank Secrecy Act continues to serve as the foundational framework for AML compliance, though amendments and regulatory guidance have continuously expanded its requirements.
Emerging areas of enforcement focus include the application of traditional financial crime statutes to cryptocurrency transactions, novel approaches to identifying and prosecuting sanctions evasion through digital assets, and enhanced scrutiny of third-party due diligence programs. Corporate compliance programs themselves have increasingly become subjects of regulatory examination, with authorities evaluating not just their existence but their effectiveness in practice.
International Implications and Policy Response
US financial crime enforcement in 2026 will have significant implications beyond domestic borders, particularly for multinational corporations operating across jurisdictions with divergent regulatory requirements. The extraterritorial application of US laws continues to create compliance challenges for global entities, particularly in areas where international standards have yet to achieve full harmonization.
Policy discussions ongoing in Washington suggest potential legislative updates that could further expand regulatory authority or modify compliance requirements, particularly concerning digital assets and emerging payment systems. Meanwhile, international coordination on enforcement matters continues to evolve through bilateral agreements and multilateral initiatives, though jurisdictional conflicts and legal uncertainties remain persistent challenges for global compliance programs.
Sources
This analysis is based on expert insights compiled by Lexology PRO regarding anticipated financial crime enforcement trends, along with reference to agency guidance from FinCEN, the Department of Justice, and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Information also incorporates reference to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related regulatory frameworks governing anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, and sanctions compliance.
