Federal Regulators Stay on the Full-Court Press It has become the era of the star prosecutor in white-collar crime. Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan who is closely identified with a string of prominent insider trading cases, was on the cover of Time magazine in February. This fall, he even got a shout-out during a concert from Bruce Springsteen. Robert S. Khuzami, the head of the enforcement division at the Securities and Exchange Commission, is being considered for the chairmanship of the agency. That may be Wall Street's worst nightmare. Goldman Sachs, for one, knows his aggressive approach, considering that he headed up the case that led the firm to reach a $550 million settlement over a security tied to bad mortgages. Although some have been critical, saying that not enough criminal actions have been filed since the financial crisis, both the Justice Department and the S.E.C. have been fierce in their prosecutions of other white-collar crimes. That assertive tone is not likely to change over the next four years under President Obama. With that in mind, three areas are likely to receive special attention: hedge funds, cases involving whistle-blowers and investigations into foreign bribery and corruption. HEDGE FUNDS A TARGET Hedge funds long operated largely free from regulation by the S.E.C. The Dodd-Frank Act changed that for larger funds, which now have to register as investment advisers and strengthen compliance and internal controls, all at much greater cost. The S.E.C.'s enforcement division created an asset management unit in 2010 to focus on hedge funds, and has started filing cases against firms over what the agency views as aberrational financial performance. In October, it filed fraud charges against Yorkville Advisors and two of its executives, claiming that they had overvalued assets and exaggerated returns that hid losses and increased their fees. A greater concern may be the crackdown on insider trading and how it could affect hedge funds, especially those that trade individual stocks. The biggest bull's-eye appears to be on the back of SAC Capital Advisors and its founder, Steven A. Cohen. Prosecutors filed charges recently against Mathew Martoma, a former portfolio manager at SAC Capital, accusing him of using confidential information about two pharmaceutical companies that allowed the firm to reap profits and avoid losses totaling about $276 million. That would make it among the most lucrative insider trading cases. Neither Mr. Cohen nor SAC Capital is named in the criminal complaint, but the firm said that the S.E.C. was considering filing civil charges under a rarely used provision of federal securities laws that authorizes a case against a so-called controlling person, like an employer or other organization that directs the actions of another. In 1988, Congress adopted the Insider Trading and Securities Fraud Enforcement Act to allow the S.E.C. to seek a penalty of up to three times the gain or loss avoided when a controlling person knowingly or recklessly failed to "establish, maintain, or enforce any policy or procedure" designed to prevent insider trading. The charges against Mr. Martoma are not the first against someone who had worked at SAC Capital, and the S.E.C. may take aim at the firm over failing to police its portfolio managers properly. Hedge funds were hardly a blip on the radar when the statute was enacted, but they are now potential targets if the S.E.C. believes that they tolerated insider trading, regardless of whether managers knew or participated in the violations. WHISTLE-BLOWERS WELCOME The federal government has embraced whistle-blowing as a means of gathering information. With substantial rewards for successful cases, more corporate employees are likely to turn over information about their companies. That will also mean that the eye-popping awards will continue to resemble lottery jackpots. Under a 2006 law, the Internal Revenue Service gave its first whistle-blower reward, $104 million, this year to Bradley Birkenfeld for information about tax evasion through secret Swiss bank accounts at UBS. At the time of the award, Mr. Birkenfeld was finishing a prison sentence for his role in aiding a bank client's tax evasion, but that did not prevent him from getting a slice of the I.R.S. recovery of unpaid taxes. His disclosures were crucial to peeling back the veil of Swiss bank secrecy, and the government is more than happy to reward even those who participate in wrongdoing when it leads to bigger players. The S.E.C. has become a major benefactor to whistle-blowers under a provision of the Dodd-Frank Act that requires it to pay at least 10 percent, and as much as 30 percent, of any penalty of over $1 million for information that helps to prove a violation. In a recent report, the S.E.C. said it had received 3,001 tips in the 2012 fiscal year, its first full year of operation. And it has amassed over $450 million in an account designated to reward whistle-blowers. So don't expect the S.E.C. and other agencies to shy away from relying on corporate employees and others to bring violations to their attention. THE AGE OF OVERSEAS BRIBERY If there is one area that epitomizes the Justice Department's aggressive approach toward global companies, it is the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. A law spawned in the post-Watergate era to deter the payment of bribes to foreign officials to obtain business has now become a scourge for companies caught up in an investigation because of the enormous costs of cooperating with the government. A prime example is Wal-Mart, which responded to a New York Times report of potential bribery in its Mexican subsidiary by undertaking a global review of its operations. The company recently reported that it had expanded its internal investigation to cover operations in Brazil, China and India. Executives in its joint venture in India were suspended because of possibly illicit payments. The internal inquiry has cost Wal-Mart $99 million so far this year, paid mostly to lawyers and accountants. Those costs will grow as the inquiry expands, and don't be surprised to see them pass $250 million before the company works out a settlement with the Justice Department and the S.E.C. In a recent speech, Lanny A. Breuer, the head of the Justice Department's criminal division, said that enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act had"become part of the fabric" of the department and the law was "now a reality that companies know they must live with and adjust to." That adjustment can mean millions of dollars if there is a realistic possibility of foreign bribery made on behalf of a company with global operations. These cases only scratch the surface of what we are likely to see in the headlines. The aggressive approach of the Justice Department, S.E.C. and other agencies will result in more headaches for Wall Street and corporate America as new ways of breaking the law come to light.