The Danske Bank was recently accused of deceiving investors in its financial reports. The bank allegedly handled $150 billion in transactions but the financial reports were per se misleading. According to the lawsuit, the bank failed to prevent the sale of toxic assets, including skewed currency. The company’s Estonian Branch also performed money laundering payments. This lawsuit, filed by investors who were affected by the skewed currency reports, argues that Danske’s Estonian branch was a major contributor to the company’s failure to comply with the law.
Danske’s Estonian Branch
The $230 billion money laundering scandal has now hit the Estonian branch of Danske Bank, and the police are seeking answers as to how the items were purchased. The former account manager of Danske Estonia, Agnevstsikov, has admitted that he paid $57,000 for a Range Rover Sport and subsequently sold it for a profit. But the bankers allegedly took out loans from their bank clients to purchase the expensive vehicle.
Danske’s financial reports were per se misleading
The securities litigation filed against Danske Bank stems from an alleged money-laundering scandal at the Estonian branch. The company allegedly misrepresented the company’s goodwill in that country while failing to disclose its potential risk to the public. The bank also failed to adequately identify money-laundering risks and implement the necessary risk-emitting measures. In September 2018, an independent investigation found that Danske had violated securities laws in its financial reporting for the years 2014-2016.
Danske’s Estonian branch handled $150 billion in transactions
An investigation into a scandal that affected the country’s biggest bank is now underway. According to people familiar with the matter, $150 billion in transactions flooded the bank’s Estonian branch from 2007 to 2015. Most of these transactions came from Russian and former Soviet Union companies. But it is still unclear how much of that amount should be considered suspicious. Danske Bank is currently conducting an internal investigation. It will publish its findings on September 19.
Danske’s headquarters executed some of the money laundering payments at issue
The recent exposé of the Danske Bank scandal, involving 200 billion Euros in money laundering, has triggered a debate over the laxity of regulatory oversight and the lack of compliance with anti-money-laundering laws. This brief explores recent examples of poor regulatory and political behavior, with a focus on the UK financial system. It also highlights the importance of identifying and reporting lapses in compliance with laws, including the UK’s.
Danske’s 2015 financial report was materially misleading
The Danish government has rejected allegations that the company’s 2015 financial report was materially inaccurate. The ad obfuscation occurred in connection with a technical write-down of goodwill in Estonia and disclosures about the bank’s Estonian branch. But investors were nonetheless enticed to buy ADRs, which were later subsequently downgraded by more than 20%.
Danske’s 2014 financial report was materially misleading
The class action in the Danske securities scandal claims that the company failed to follow anti-money laundering protocol. The case stems from alleged failures by a Danske branch in Estonia to supervise and follow up on suspicious transactions. As a result, Danske executives failed to adequately deal with the problems and made a series of misstatements, which materially misled investors. Although the Danske bank denies the allegations, it has acknowledged the shortcomings of its accounting and reporting practices.
Danske’s 2014 financial report was misleading
In an opinion issued today, the Second Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that Danske Bank’s financial report was misleading in 2014. The complaint accused the bank of failing to disclose revenues from money laundering transactions while stating that its financial statements were prepared according to international accounting standards. The court found that Danske’s failure to disclose these revenues constituted a violation of federal law and a material misstatement of material fact.