Former Apple director of corporate law Gene Levoff was sentenced today to a fine and four years of probation for insider trading. Levoff faced up to two years in prison, but he will avoid incarceration.
Ex-Apple Lawyer Avoids Prison After Conviction
Gene Levoff's job at Apple was to ensure that Apple employees followed the company's insider trading procedures, including enforcing "blackout periods" around earnings announcements, but he ended up committing the crime he intended to police, per Bloomberg.
Because of his position, Levoff had access to Apple's financial reports before they were made public, which he utilized to acquire Apple shares prior to better-than-expected results and sell shares when profits were weaker than expected. Before being sacked by Apple in 2018, Levoff made roughly $277,000 and avoided losses of around $377,000.
Levoff pleaded guilty to six charges of securities fraud for insider trading in June, and he was sentenced today. Levoff will pay almost $604,000 in addition to four years probation.
Federal prosecutors claimed that Levoff should be imprisoned for insider trading to prevent future corporate executives from committing a similar crime, but the judge handling the case said it wasn't required because Levoff lost his job and would no longer be able to practice law.
Gene Levoff’s Abuse Of Privilege
Between 2011 and 2016, Levoff generated illicit gains of $604,000 on trades worth more than $14 million by taking advantage of his privileged access to Apple's draft Securities and Exchange Commission filings, per Law.com. He traded during quarterly blackout periods and made judgments based on nonpublic financial data, flagrantly breaking the company's insider trading policy, which he was meant to enforce.
His actions are significant because he serves on Apple's Disclosure Committee. Levoff's actions not only destroyed Apple's trust in him but also jeopardized the financial market's openness.
His flagrant disrespect for the regulations he intended to enforce calls into question the efficacy of internal compliance procedures. The case highlights the inherent conflict of interest that exists when individuals in positions of power participate in illegal actions, endangering company governance and public trust.
Photo: Medhat Dawoud/Unsplash


Cathie Wood Backs AI Slowdown as Safety Concerns Grow
OpenAI Urges US-Led Global Standards for Frontier AI
France Urges Faster AI Push Despite Safety Risks
Westinghouse Targets $50 Billion Valuation in U.S. IPO
SK Hynix, Intel Discuss U.S. Memory Chip Production Deal
US Federal Register Drops Alibaba Qwen AI Search Tool
SpaceX Nasdaq 100 Weight to More Than Double in Rebalance
Apple Pay Set for India Launch With Axis Bank
Qualcomm Gains on $60B Amazon AI Chip Deal
Rosenblatt Starts Nokia at Buy on AI Networking Growth
Hyundai CEO Warns Chinese Automakers Could Disrupt US Market
Trump Plans Federal AI Force and AI Czar
US Northeast Airports Resume Operations After Telecom Outage Disrupts Thousands of Flights
SoftBank Shares Jump 8% as SB Energy IPO Optimism Builds
Big AI wants to slow down AI research. Is it a safety pause or a strategic retreat?
Who should own the knowledge that underpins AI technology?
Databricks to Invest $350 Million in Singapore AI Expansion 



