UK’s FCA Shuts Down 100 Investigations and Slashes Compliance Activity in 2024: A Strategic Shift?
- Is the FCA Really Scaling Back Its Enforcement?
- How Does the FCA’s Strategy Compare to the SEC’s?
- What’s Behind the FCA’s Pivot?
- FAQ: Your Burning Questions Answered
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has made headlines by closing 100 active investigations and significantly scaling back its enforcement efforts in 2024. This move mirrors a broader trend among regulators like the SEC, as they pivot toward high-impact cases amid political and economic pressures. While critics question whether this signals weaker oversight, the FCA insists it’s prioritizing efficiency—focusing on egregious misconduct while easing burdens on businesses. Dive into the details below, including how this shift compares to the SEC’s approach and what it means for crypto regulation.
Is the FCA Really Scaling Back Its Enforcement?
In a dramatic shift, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has closed 100 investigations without action since 2023, slashing its active caseload to just 124—down from 230 in 2022. This marks the steepest drop since the FCA’s inception in 2013. The reduction coincides with leadership changes: Therese Chambers and Steve Smart took over as co-directors of enforcement in mid-2023, refocusing efforts on fewer but higher-impact cases. For context, between April and November 2023, the FCA wrapped up 24 investigations (15 resulted in action; 9 were dropped). By March 2025, new probes plummeted to 23, far below the historical average of 50+ annually. Yet, paradoxically, enforcement actions rose—41 in 2024 and 33 in 2025, eclipsing the typical 20–25 per year. High-profile penalties included a £44 million fine for Nationwide Building Society and £39 million for Barclays Bank, both tied to anti-money laundering (AML) violations. Notably, seven cases reached resolution within 16 months in 2024, a stark improvement over the historical 42-month average. City lawyers note the FCA now targets “clear-cut” violations where outcomes are predictable, avoiding speculative probes.
How Does the FCA’s Strategy Compare to the SEC’s?
Across the Atlantic, the SEC is singing a similar tune. Under the current administration, the SEC reportedly shelved 60% of its crypto-related enforcement cases, per Cryptopolitan. Audit inspections and enforcement actions have also dwindled—a far cry from its former aggressive stance. Both regulators cite “efficiency” as the driver, but critics argue political winds are at play. The UK government, for instance, has openly pressured the FCA to relax restrictions and boost economic growth. Meanwhile, the SEC claims it’s reallocating resources to high-risk areas. Despite the pullback, the FCA is gearing up for a new crypto-asset regime in 2027, which will cover non-financial misconduct (e.g., harassment) starting in 2026. It’ll also oversee AML for professional services—proof that regulation isn’t vanishing, just evolving.
What’s Behind the FCA’s Pivot?
Industry insiders offer mixed takes. Lorraine Johnston of Ashurst LLP notes the FCA retains a “robust compliance culture” but predicts further declines in case numbers. Tracey Dovaston of Pallas Partners calls the shift positive, emphasizing that the agency no longer opens cases for “diagnostic purposes.” The BTCC research team suggests this reflects a global trend: regulators are trading quantity for quality, prioritizing slam-dunk cases to conserve resources. Still, skeptics warn that lighter enforcement could embolden bad actors, especially in crypto’s Wild West. One thing’s clear: the FCA’s 2024 stats—fewer probes but more fines—signal a recalibration, not a retreat.
FAQ: Your Burning Questions Answered
Why did the FCA close so many investigations?
The FCA streamlined its focus to high-impact cases under new leadership, dropping marginal probes to allocate resources efficiently.
Is crypto regulation weakening under the FCA?
Not exactly. While enforcement has dipped, the FCA is preparing for a 2027 crypto regime with expanded oversight, including non-financial misconduct rules.
How does the SEC’s approach differ?
Like the FCA, the SEC has cut back on enforcement, particularly in crypto. Both agencies frame this as strategic prioritization rather than reduced vigilance.
