Why LinkedIn is the next major compliance blind spot

It’s a familiar scenario for many professionals: you’re wrapping up a client meeting in the office when you realise you’re about to miss your train. You’ve been discussing a potential deal — the usual back-and-forth about timelines and next steps. As you rush out of the door, laptop zipped away in your bag, the client sends a follow-up message. Without thinking, you pick up the conversation on your phone via the most convenient channel - LinkedIn Messenger.

Once you step away from your desk, it’s easy to switch devices and seamlessly continue conversations. But in those moments of convenience, it’s also remarkably easy to stray into regulated territory without even realising it.

LinkedIn has come a long way since its public launch in 2003. What started out as a hiring tool has evolved into a major networking site and business communication channel used by more than a billion professionals. It can feel like the least “risky” social media site because it’s grounded in the professional sphere. But from a regulatory standpoint, it carries very real – and growing – risks.

Global Relay’s Communications Capture Trends Report 2025/26 found that nearly a quarter of financial services institutions (23%) now capture data from employees’ personal LinkedIn accounts, putting it alongside email and Teams as one of the most monitored channels globally.

This signals a turning point. LinkedIn is now firmly part of the off-channel landscape, and wealth and asset managers need to consider a far more deliberate approach to how they monitor and manage it.

Business communications or risky business?

As LinkedIn becomes increasingly embedded into our professional lives, so does the compliance risk it presents. People are building client relationships, discussing deals, sourcing opportunities, and hiring talent on the platform - and it’s not hard to see how a harmless chat can quickly become a business communication that needs to be monitored and retained.

The problem is that, unlike channels such as Teams or email, LinkedIn messages aren’t always captured. That creates a significant blind spot for recordkeeping obligations, leaving businesses without a full audit trail of conversations that should be monitored.

All of this blurs the line between personal and regulated activity, and firms can easily get caught lacking.

Why firms are paying attention

The risks emerging on the platform, from fraud to insider trading, are colliding with a regulatory landscape that now places far greater emphasis on culture, conduct, and compliant communications.

In the U.K., while the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has ruled out a U.S.-style clampdown on off-channel communications, it has renewed its focus on employee behaviour and company culture. Its non-financial misconduct proposals will extend rules that currently apply to banks to an additional 37,000 non-bank firms, including wealth and asset managers. To monitor conduct effectively, firms will need complete communication records, and that includes LinkedIn activity.

At the same time, regulations like the FCA’s Consumer Duty and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)’s Marketing Rule mean that anything individuals or firms post, share, or endorse online must be accurate, fair, and compliant. Even a casual comment can potentially be construed as investment advice, and that opens the door to regulatory scrutiny.

Across the pond, the stance is even firmer. U.S. regulators continue to pursue off-channel breaches aggressively, with the $63 million round of fines in January and a consistent tempo of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) enforcements serving as a clear reminder that all business communications - including those on LinkedIn - must be captured.

Control, not prohibition 

The 2020s mark a century since the introduction of prohibition in the U.S., a movement that proved how ineffective attempting to ban something outright can be. A blanket ban on LinkedIn for business communication simply isn’t realistic. It plays a fundamental role in networking, marketing, client engagement, and talent acquisition. Instead, best practice centres on visibility and control, giving firms the oversight they need without stifling the platform’s legitimate business value.

The first step is ensuring that business-related LinkedIn messages, whether sent through personal profiles or company pages, are compliantly captured. For many firms, that now includes monitoring both individual and corporate accounts where appropriate. Not because they want to police behaviour, but because regulators increasingly expect that level of accountability.

It’s natural for employees to worry that capturing LinkedIn conversations could give employers visibility into personal activity. But, in practice, compliant capture isn’t designed to track individual activities. Its purpose is to meet regulatory recordkeeping obligations for business-related interactions. 

Clear policies for social media use are also essential. Employees must understand what is appropriate to post, share or endorse, and where the line sits between personal opinion, networking conversation, and regulated business communication. Most employees don’t intend to breach rules - they simply underestimate how quickly a conversation or comment can slip into regulated territory.

Ultimately, effective LinkedIn compliance isn’t about policing behaviour. It’s about giving firms the visibility they need to manage risk, uphold regulatory expectations, and ensure that communication on the platform is accountable. In a landscape where business increasingly happens on LinkedIn, compliance needs to happen there, too.