Huawei denies claims it is owned by the Chinese Government

Chinese telecoms firm Huawei has denied reports of government ownership, stating that it is controlled by its employees through virtual shares.

The company was responding to a report published by American academics Christopher Balding of Fulbright University Vietnam and Donald C Clarke of George Washington University Law School on April 17. The duo said in their abstract: “The myth of Huawei’s employee ownership seems to persist outside of China… This article… aims to refute this myth once and for all.”

The US has warned its allies not to contract Huawei to build any part of their 5G technology

The paper highlighted that Huawei is fully controlled by a holding company, of which Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei owns just one percent. The remaining 99 percent is owned by a trade union committee, the company claims.

No information on the members of this committee is available. However, all official trade unions in China are supervised by the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) body.

Clarke and Balding’s paper concluded: “Given the public nature of trade unions in China, if the ownership stake of the trade union committee is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.”

Speaking at a press conference on April 25, Chief Secretary of Huawei’s Board of Directors Jiang Xisheng refuted these claims. He told reports that around half of the company’s 180,000 employees own “virtual shares” that pay dividends and provide them with voting rights.

Jiang added that trade union ownership was simply a legal convenience as Chinese law applies strict restrictions to the number of shareholders allowed to own a stake in a company.

He said Huawei pays an annual fee to the Shenzhen municipal trade union, which conducts an inspection of the holding company’s trade union committee and renews its licence. Outside of this, he claimed that neither union plays a role in the day-to-day operations of Huawei, save for organising extracurricular activities for employees and soliciting donations for health and charity initiatives.

“We don’t have any other relationships with [the Shenzhen municipal trade union]. We don’t need to report our business operations. They won’t come to ask for anything either,” said Jiang.

The question of governmental involvement in Huawei’s corporate structure has been raised by a range of media outlets in recent months after tensions arose between the US and Huawei over the firm’s involvement in 5G network installation.

The US has warned its allies not to contract Huawei to build any part of their 5G technology, citing concerns that the Chinese Government could use them for espionage.

Jiang denied these allegations, saying: “Most of what the US Government says, as we all know, is not true.” He added: “There is no government capital in Huawei.”

Jiang’s comments, while indicative of Huawei’s push to persuade the media that it is not secretive about its operations, are unconvincing in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

Balding and Clarke’s paper presents a wealth of evidence that Huawei is owned only in name by employees, while the Chinese Government has an extremely well-documented history of both official and unofficial, disclosed and undisclosed, methods of exerting control over the country’s businesses.

Given the CCP’s strict control on foreign media access, it will likely prove extremely challenging for either the US or China to definitively prove or disprove espionage and business control claims.

Congress demands answers from Google about user location database

US congressional leaders have written to Google CEO Sundar Pinchai to request information about a database known as Sensorvault, where the tech giant allegedly stores exact location data from hundreds of millions of personal devices.

The letter, sent on April 23 to Pinchai on behalf of the bipartisan House Energy and Commerce Committee, raised a number of questions regarding the use and sharing of this data.

Sensorvault’s existence was revealed by The New York Times earlier in April. The US newspaper reported that law enforcement officials had sought access to data held by Google for use in criminal investigations, notably in identifying whether suspects had been near crime scenes.

Much of the data held in Sensorvault is collected through Google’s location history service

These ‘geofence’ warrants allow the police to search the database for new leads, but there is a risk of misidentification, as innocent bystanders could be erroneously implicated in investigations.

Much of the data held in Sensorvault is collected through Google’s location history service, which was launched on both Apple and Android devices in 2009. It allows the tech giant to collect location data from anyone signed in to a Google app on their phone, even if it is running in the background.

A representative for Google said in a statement, as reported by Reuters, that location history is “off by default”, adding: “If a user chooses to turn it on, we can provide helpful information, like real-time data to help them beat traffic on their way home from work. They can delete their location history data, or turn off the product entirely, at any time.”

The letter asked Google for further information about Sensorvault, specifically who has access, how accurate the data is, and whether it is the only store of personal location data the company has.

“The potential ramifications for consumer privacy are far-reaching and concerning when examining the purposes for the Sensorvault database and how precise location information could be shared with third parties,” the letter said.

Congressional lawmakers have asked that Pinchai answer their questions by May 7 and have organised a briefing for May 10.

The letter is the latest development in a congressional campaign for data privacy regulation, which is being spearheaded by senators such as Amy Klobuchar, a Democratic presidential candidate from Minnesota, and Marco Rubio from Florida.

It appears Congress is gathering information about Sensorvault to ascertain the scale of the problem and establish what legislative action is required.

Despite its developed technology sector, the US’ internet regulations are not comprehensive. With industry leaders such as Facebook and Google frequently at the centre of privacy scandals, it is clear that legislation is sorely needed.

Investors sue Lyft amid share price slump

Investors in ride-hailing app Lyft are suing the company over claims that it overhyped its market share ahead of its much-anticipated initial public offering (IPO).

Since its IPO in March, Lyft’s share price has slid

Bloomberg reported that two class-action complaints had been filed against Lyft, its officers and directors, and underwriters in San Francisco on April 17. Lyft claimed in its prospectus that the company held 39 percent of the market at the end of 2018, but investors allege the company overstated this figure.

At the time of publishing, Lyft had not responded to a request for comment.

Since its IPO in March, Lyft’s share price has slid from an offering price of $72 a share to around $59 when markets closed on April 17. One major concern of analysts is the threat posed by rival Uber, which has officially filed for its own IPO.

According to Markets Insider, Susquehanna analyst Shyam Patil said that while Lyft works in a “very large and growing market”, the dynamic of being the second best in a sector that’s all about scale is worrying. “[The] extremely competitive nature of the space and going up against an aggressive #1 player in Ubermakes it tough to predict future customer acquisition costs as well as rider and driver retention,” Patil said, giving Lyft’s share price a target of $57.

The lawsuits against Lyft also mention the company’s failure to tell investors that it would soon be forced to recall thousand of bikes over braking issues. Bike-share operator Motivate, which is owned by Lyft, pulled its electric bikes from New York City, San Francisco and Washington, DC, after a “small number” of riders reported a braking problem that caused the front wheel to lock up.

Lyft was the first of a stampede of tech unicorns to list on the public markets this year, but it may soon be overshadowed by other long-awaited IPOs, such as digital scrapbook Pinterest and cloud videoconferencing service Zoom, which will both make their market debuts on April 18. Following Lyft’s decline, their performance will likely determine whether investors remain optimistic about new tech IPOs.

Apple and Qualcomm settle long-running dispute

Tech giants Apple and Qualcomm have reached eleventh-hour settlements on a series on long-running lawsuits with billions of dollars at stake.

Qualcomm’s shares jumped 23 percent following the announcement

The two firms have been at one another’s throats for three years over the way that Qualcomm licenses its technology.

Apple has accused Qualcomm of exploiting patents to maintain a monopoly on modem chips that allow mobile phones to connect to data networks, while Qualcomm has alleged that Apple used its technology without paying for it.

News of the settlement came as the two firms were beginning yet another trial in San Diego’s federal court. The case was set to last around a month, and could have cost either firm billions of dollars.

All litigation worldwide has now been dismissed, according to a joint statement by the two tech giants. The settlement includes an undisclosed payment from Apple to Qualcomm, along with a six-year licensing deal and a multiyear supply agreement. The latter means that Qualcomm chips are likely to be used once again in Apple’s products.

Apple’s iPhone was formerly powered by Qualcomm chips, but due to the dispute, in 2016, the company began to use hardware from rival Intel in some of its models.

Several hours after the settlement was announced, Intel announced that it would be exiting the modem chip business, clearing the path of competition for Qualcomm in supplying hardware to Apple.

The settlement may help Qualcomm to regain the prominent supply position that it held in the early 2010s, before Intel stole much of its market share. It may also help Apple to integrate 5G technology into its iPhone models earlier than expected, as Qualcomm has a 5G modem chip available for shipping now, whereas Intel was not expecting to have the chip ready until next year.

Qualcomm’s shares jumped 23 percent following the announcement, while Apple’s remained flat.

AT&T sells its stake in Hulu, leaving Disney in control

US telecoms giant AT&T has sold its nearly 10 percent stake in Hulu back to the streaming service for $1.43bn. The move, announced on April 15, leaves Disney in control of the company with the 60 percent stake it obtained when it bought 21st Century Fox.

The news comes just a week after Disney announced details about its own much-anticipated streaming service

“We thank AT&T for their support and investment over the past two years and look forward to collaboration in the future,” said Hulu CEO Randy Freer in a statement. AT&T gained its stake in Hulu after purchasing Time Warner, now known as WarnerMedia.

Telecoms firm Comcast owns the remaining 30 percent of Hulu, but MarketWatch reported there is speculation that Comcast will sell its shares in the company, leaving Disney the sole owner.

The news comes just a week after Disney announced details about its own much-anticipated streaming service, Disney+. The new service, which will launch in North America in November, will include content from Disney franchises such as Pixar, Marvel, National Geographic and Star Wars, as well as from Fox.

Kevin Mayer, the chairman of Disney’s direct-to-consumer unit, told investors that the company would likely sell Disney+, Hulu and streaming sports network ESPN+, as a bundle. This could be good news for consumers, who are facing higher costs as the market for streaming services becomes increasingly fragmented.

Currently, Hulu is the third most popular streaming service behind Netflix and Amazon Prime, but it could soon take a backseat to Disney+. According to a report in March by Vox’s Todd VanDerWerff, Hulu is the key to Disney’s streaming strategies.

“Disney+ might end up being built around Hulu, but Hulu will be central to whatever Disney+ becomes in the way that HBO will be central to whatever WarnerMedia’s streaming service becomes,” VanDerWerff wrote.

Hulu’s valuation of $15bn is just a fraction of Netflix’s $152bn, but with Disney on its side, whether or not it undergoes a rebranding, Hulu could finally level the playing field.

Foxconn shifts iPhone production to India

Foxconn Technology Group will begin mass-producing the iPhone X in India this year, a strategic move for the manufacturing firm that has historically concentrated production in China.

Foxconn’s relocation marks a tactical change for Apple, which has previously concentrated iPhone manufacturing efforts in China

Speaking at an event in Taiwan on April 15, Foxconn Chairman Terry Gou said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had invited him to India as the company prepares to shift iPhone manufacturing there.

Foxconn currently has two assembly sites in India, one located just south of Chennai and the other on the outskirts of Coimbatore, where it makes devices for Xiaomi and Nokia. According to a report by Bloomberg, the company will trial production of the iPhone X at its Chennai factory before launching a full-scale manufacturing operation.

Foxconn’s relocation also marks a tactical change for Apple, which has previously concentrated iPhone manufacturing efforts in China. However, competition from local firms such as Huawei, together with on-going trade tensions between China and the US, has forced the company to examine alternatives.

India is the fastest-growing smartphone market in the world, but technology manufacturers have shunned it in favour of China due to higher US import duties on India products. It appears that Apple has weighed the balance of probabilities and decided that India is a more fruitful option, despite these levies.

A slowdown in the Chinese economy, in comparison to Modi’s drive to boost Indian production, will have also played a part in that decision. The prime minister’s Make in India campaign has faltered in a number of areas, but smartphone production has shown strong growth, with 450,000 jobs created in the mobile industry between 2014 and 2018.

“In the future we will play a very important role in India’s smartphone industry,” Gou said at the Taiwan event. “We have moved our production lines there.”

He added that the company is in discussion with the Indian government with regards to investment. Foxconn currently has a dozen software experts in India, and plans to increase that figure to 600, Gou said.

It’s not yet clear what impact Foxconn’s move will have on Apple’s China operations, although it is likely to worsen the economic stagnation the country is facing. It will also impress upon the Chinese government the importance of repairing its trade relationship with the US, lest it lose a substantial proportion of its manufacturing sector to India or other countries.

Jack Ma’s digital health insurance start-up is growing rapidly in China

Ant Financial’s mutual aid health insurance platform, Xiang Hu Bao, reached 50 million users in less than six months as billionaire Jack Ma sets his sights on disrupting China’s health insurance industry.

China’s traditional insurance market is primed for disruption

Ma’s Ant Financial launched Xiang Hu Bao, which literally means “mutual protection”, in October 2018. The platform is now available within Ant’s popular payment app, Alipay.

Alipay announced on April 11 that in light of its quick growth the platform aims to provide basic health plans to 300 million people over the next two years. According to Bloomberg, that would represent more than 20 percent of China’s rapidly ageing and increasingly ailing population.

Users of Xiang Hu Bao can sign up for free to access a basic health plan, which, according to Alipay, “complements other premium health insurance offerings”. The platform’s participants act as a collective that share the expense evenly when one falls critically ill.

“Traditionally, fraud and a lack of transparency have made it difficult for mutual aid platforms to effectively benefit those in need. In particular, low-income groups could not afford the premiums and advance payments that are typically required with traditional commercial health insurance offerings,” Alipay said in a statement.

Currently, nearly half of Xiang Hu Bao’s 50 million participants are migrant workers, and almost a third are from rural areas. Alipay’s blockchain technology has also increased “transparency and trust” among users by ensuring the authenticity and notarisation of evidence supporting claims made on the platform, the firm said.

China’s traditional insurance market is primed for disruption, according to a report by insurance firm Aviva. With consumers increasingly drawn to digital payments, the country’s insuretech market has grown swiftly. By 2020, insuretech premiums are predicted to reach more than 1.1trn RMB ($164bn).

In health insurance, the sector is beginning to heat up with more and more start-ups emerging, including from WeChat-owner Tencent. But with its huge user base and vast resources – Ant’s last funding round reportedly valued the company at $150bn – Ant Financial is in a good position to rise to the forefront of the industry.

New Exodus spyware app found to be targeting iPhone users

Researchers have revealed that a spyware app previously found to target Android devices has also been pursuing iPhone users. On April 8, mobile security firm Lookout announced that an iOS version of the spyware known as Exodus had been made available to iPhone users through phishing sites that imitated Italian and Turkmen mobile carriers.

These sites would direct unsuspecting victims to download an app disguised to offer mobile carrier support. The app was then able to extract contacts, audio recordings, photos, locations and more from devices.

“Though different versions of the app vary in structure, malicious code was initialised at application launch without the user’s knowledge, and a number of timers were set up to gather and upload data periodically,” said Adam Bauer, a senior security intelligence engineer at Lookout.

An iOS version of the spyware known as Exodus had been made available to iPhone users through phishing sites that imitated Italian and Turkmen mobile carriers

The Android apps, which were uncovered in March, were subsequently removed from the Google Play Store, but not before being downloaded hundreds of times. According to an investigation by the non-profit Security Without Borders, the apps were capable of gaining root access once installed onto devices, allowing the spyware to extract data from messaging apps, read emails, take pictures and unveil Wi-Fi passwords.

One difference between the Android and iOS cases was that while hackers were able to put their Android apps straight into the Google Play Store, they needed to use the Apple Developer Enterprise Programme to bypass Apple’s tightly controlled App Store. Apple has now revoked the enterprise certificates, meaning the app can no longer be installed on iOS devices and existing installations will not run.

However, this is only the latest in a string of controversies surrounding Apple’s enterprise certificates. In February, an investigation by Reuters found that software pirates were distributing hacked versions of popular apps through the certificates. Before that, TechCrunch reported that Facebook was distributing an app to teenagers that would extract their data in exchange for $20 gift cards.

While Apple previously told Reuters that it would crack down on developers abusing its enterprise certificates, it is clear there is still some cleaning up to do.

Fiat Chrysler teams up with Tesla in bid to sidestep EU emissions fines

Fiat Chrysler (FCA) has partnered with Tesla in a multimillion-euro tie-up that will allow it to avoid large fines for breaking new stricter EU emissions laws.

This move will bring FCA’s fleet under the permissible threshold for emissions, under regulations that come into force next year

Under the terms of the deal, which was first reported by the Financial Times, FCA’s cars will count as part of Tesla’s fleet, meaning the Italian carmaker can report a lower average emissions figure.

This move will bring FCA’s fleet under the permissible threshold for emissions, under new regulations that come into force next year. By 2021, all car manufacturers must achieve an average of 95g of CO2 per kilometre or face an excess emissions premium of €95 ($106) per gram above the set limit.

According to data from Jato Dynamics, FCA is currently a long way above that high-water mark, averaging 123g of CO2 per kilometre in 2018. UBS said the company had the “highest risk of not meeting the target”. FCA has also lagged behind other carmakers in electric vehicle development, further raising its emissions profile.

Under EU regulations, carmakers are able to pool their fleets in order to bring average emissions beneath the chargeable limit, an option that FCA has demonstrably taken through this tie-up with Tesla. It is the first auto manufacturer in Europe to do so through the so-called open pool system.

“The purchase pool provides flexibility to deliver products our customers are willing to buy while managing compliance with the lowest cost approach,” FCA said in a statement.

According to a declaration published on the EU’s website, the two companies partnered on February 25, with FCA announcing that Tesla would be counted in its fleet of brands, which also includes Alfa Romeo, Jeep and Maserati. While the document does not give financial details, it is thought the deal is worth hundreds of millions of euros.

This is not the first time that Tesla has leveraged its eco-credentials in order to cash in from other carmakers. The electric automaker earned $103.4m last year by selling zero emissions vehicle credits under a programme operated in its home state of California.

Given its success in the US, it is unsurprising that Tesla is now opting to replicate this business model within Europe. It does raise questions, however, as to the efficacy of EU regulations in reducing emissions. Indeed, by teaming up with Tesla, FCA has been able to circumvent fines without yet taking significant action to reduce its average vehicle CO2 output.

Boards under pressure from rising tide of cybercrime

With cyberattacks becoming more commonplace and costly and GDPR having introduced harsher penalties for data breaches, boards are under greater pressure than ever before. Investors are increasingly demanding that directors oversee cybersecurity risks, while regulators are threatening to hold them to account. A cyberattack, therefore, may not only damage a company’s reputation, but that of its directors too if they are found to be personally liable. As if that weren’t enough, CEOs and their teams are being preyed on directly by cybercriminals using ever more sophisticated scams.

No matter how much IT teams shore up their defences, they can only hold the line so far

The number of business email compromise attacks grew by 226 percent in the final quarter of 2018, according to Proofpoint. Often known as ‘CEO fraud’, they involve emails purporting to come from a senior director and instructing funds to be transferred into a third-party account. CEOs and board members are among the key targets for such attacks, as they are the decision makers who hold the purse strings and whose details are openly available online.

Multiple lines of defence
In one case last year, the CEO of film company Pathe’s Dutch arm was sacked after authorising payments of over €19m ($21m) into a bank account in Dubai. Dertje Meijer and the company’s financial director Edwin Slutter believed they were acting on instructions from the company’s Paris headquarters and that the money related to an acquisition that was underway. Both lost their jobs but an investigation found that they were the victims of fraud and Slutter later filed for unfair dismissal.

Targeted attacks like this demonstrate the new reality of the cyber landscape. No matter how much IT teams shore up their defences, they can only hold the line so far. As cybercriminals are well aware, it is people who are the weakest link. Many of the biggest security breaches are now due to human error or insider threats, rather than technical failures.

It is clear that cybersecurity is no longer just an IT issue – it must now be recognised as a company-wide challenge, and one that needs to be overseen at the highest level. Dealing with threats like these requires a more co-ordinated approach than before. Firewalls and anti-virus software are critical, but companies also need to have the right policies and staff training programmes in place too.

Take those spoof CEO emails, for instance. While the IT department can take steps to stop them reaching an individual’s inbox, directors and staff will need to be aware of the risk and know what to look out for. Companies should have a process for reporting suspicious emails and – because criminals are becoming more cunning and it may not be possible to prevent every attack – they should have measures in place to minimise the impact.

Of course, cybersecurity is very much a new field for most directors and a recent report from the UK Government found that even boards at many big companies are unsure of its implications. The Cyber Governance Health Check 2018 found that only 16 percent of FTSE 350 boards showed a “comprehensive understanding” of the potential disruption and financial impact resulting from cyberattacks.

As cyberthreats get too close for comfort, it is critical that CEOs step into a discovery phase and bring themselves up to speed. They must familiarise themselves with the basics of cybersecurity so they are aware of the risks and can make informed decisions. Starting a dialogue with their technical team and working together to develop an integrated approach is a good starting point.

A team effort
Cybersecurity cannot be left to one department, but depends on people throughout the business playing their part – from frontline staff to the finance and HR teams. And senior staff in all departments need be aware of their cyber vulnerabilities, just as they are of their budgets. It is a good idea to create a framework that brings together all cybersecurity defence tools, such as malware protection, browser software and patch tools, with other security procedures such as staff training, granting or removing access rights.

Having comprehensive policies and procedures in place and ensuring everyone understands their roles and responsibilities is vital, as is keeping records for compliance purposes. It is also important to have monitoring in place and a system of alerts – for example, if patches have not been updated, or other procedures have not carried out. Carry out regular audits and try to achieve a recognised standard such as Cyber Essentials or ISO/IEC 27001:2005.

As cybercrime becomes more complex, CEOs need to lead the fightback. Only if boards work with IT teams to develop a coordinated approach will companies be in the best possible position to defeat the growing threat.

Innolith’s “breakthrough” electric vehicle battery could increase range to 600 miles

Innolith, an energy technology start-up based in Switzerland, claims to have made the world’s first rechargeable battery capable of powering an electric vehicle (EV) for more than 600 miles on a single charge.

On April 4, the firm announced that its high-density, lithium-ion batteries would be safer and cheaper than existing EV batteries, while also allowing drivers to travel further between charges. At a density of 1,000 watt-hours per kilogram (Wh/kg), Innolith’s battery would far exceed the capabilities of the Panasonic-made batteries used in the Tesla Model 3, which The Verge reports are an estimated 250Wh/kg. Currently, certain Tesla models can achieve a range of up to 330 miles per charge.

After an initial pilot production period in Germany, Innolith said it would look to sign partnerships with major battery and automotive companies. In three to five years, the company said its battery would be on the market.

At a density of 1,000 watt-hours per kilogram, Innolith’s battery would far exceed the capabilities of the Panasonic-made batteries used in the Tesla Model 3

“The EV revolution is currently stymied by the limitations of available batteries,” said Innolith CEO Sergey Buchin in a statement. “Consumers want an adequate range on a single charge in an affordable EV, and confidence that it is not going to catch fire. The Innolith Energy Battery is the breakthrough technology that potentially can meet all these needs.”

Although EVs are becoming increasingly popular among consumers – Bloomberg New Energy Finance predicts they will make up more than half of all new car sales by 2040 – range anxiety is still a major concern for those considering making the switch. A 2018 global survey by Deloitte found that driving range, alongside cost, a lack of EV charging infrastructure and charging time, continues to be one of the top four issues consumers have with EVs.

According to a report by Bloomberg, low-density batteries are also holding back the development of high-speed chargers at a time when more carmakers – including Volkswagen, Tesla and Ford – are seeking to enter the market.

Although Innolith’s claims about its groundbreaking battery will have to be verified and it won’t hit the market until 2022 at the earliest, a safer battery with a drastically improved driving range could prove a major turning point for the EV industry.

Jumio founder agrees $17.4m settlement amid SEC fraud claims

The founder and former CEO of mobile payments start-up Jumio will pay $17.4m to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to settle claims that he defrauded investors in order to boost his own wealth, the regulator said on April 3.

Daniel Mattes has been accused of exaggerating Jumio’s revenue by a factor of 10 between 2013 and 2014 in order to drive investor interest in the Silicon-Valley-based start-up. Mattes reportedly made $14.6m by privately selling shares between April 2014 and January 2015, funds which he hid from Jumio directors. He is also accused of falsely informing the company’s lawyers that the directors had approved the sale of the shares.

According to the SEC’s filing, Mattes told investors that he was not selling his own shares because there was “lots of great stuff coming up” and “he’d be stupid to sell at this point”. Jumio was forced to restate its financial results in 2015, wiping out most of its revenue. Shares in the company became worthless after it filed for bankruptcy in 2016.

Daniel Mattes has been accused of exaggerating Jumio’s revenue by a factor of 10 in order to drive investor interest in the Silicon-Valley-based start-up

“Mattes enriched himself at investors’ expense by making false claims about Jumio’s financial results,” said Erin Schneider, Associate Regional Director for the SEC’s San Francisco office. “Company executives must provide investors with accurate information irrespective of whether their companies are publicly or privately traded.”

Under the terms of the settlement, Mattes is permanently barred from serving on the board of a publicly traded company in the US. He will now pay over $16m in disgorgement fees, along with a $640,000 penalty, subject to court approval.

The SEC also settled in a separate case with former Jumio CFO Chad Starkey, after accusing him of “failing to exercise reasonable care concerning Jumio’s financial statements”. Starkey will pay approximately $420,000 in disgorgement fees. Starkey and Mattes neither admitted to nor denied the SEC’s claims.

In the past, the US regulator has principally concerned itself with offences relating to public companies. Over the past few months, however, it has taken a number of private firms to task for fraud. In February, for example, it charged two former executives of Lucent Polymers with defrauding customers, alleging that the entire business model was based on falsified claims.

In a statement to Plastic News, Kevin Tierney, attorney to former Lucent  Polymers CEO Kevin Kuhnash, said it would be “premature to make a comment [on the SEC’s allegations] at this time”, while the company’s former COO, Jason Jimerson, was unavailable for comment.

Through this change in approach, the SEC is sending a powerful message that no business – private or public – is immune from regulatory scrutiny.