To clarify, “Insider Trading”, the criminal charge, requires a contract with the company or fiduciary duty with the company not to trade on nonpublic informatio

To clarify, “Insider Trading”, the criminal charge, requires a contract with the company or fiduciary duty with the company not to trade on nonpublic information or disclose something nonpublic + the receiver trade on it, as a prerequisite to getting charged by the insider trading police (SEC + DOJ). Thats the reason for this line in indictment summary: > The SEC’s complaint alleges that despite receiving a company policy that prohibited them from insider trading There would be no case without it (but NDAs or trade secret policies or a clause present in most employment contracts would cover it) In any case, When only receiving a tip, the obligations of the receiver is still unclear. Maybe they can trade, maybe they cant. (As there is no actual federal law on insider trading in the US and the SEC has made it up through court cases over time.) They use their general fraud statute, as well as prior remaining case law that slightly went in their favor, because they lose in court a lot.