On March 31, 2016, the SEC initiated settled cease-and-desist proceedings against Navistar International Corporation. According to the SEC: "From 2011 to 2012, Navistar made misleading statements regarding its development of an engine that could meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ('EPA') Clean Air Act standards that became fully effective in 2010. Navistar was the only U.S. engine manufacturer developing an exhaust-gas-recirculation-only technology, known as 'EGR,' to comply with the EPA's 2010 emissions standard for nitrogen oxides of 0.20 (the 'EPA 2010 standard'). Navistar's then Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, Daniel C. Ustian ('Ustian'), was a staunch proponent of Navistar's EGR-only technology. By 2010, however, Navistar had not developed a commercially viable engine that could meet the EPA 2010 standard without emissions credits. Navistar's competitors, who all used a selective catalytic reduction technology, known as 'SCR,' began to suggest publicly that Navistar would not be able to develop a 0.2 NOx engine with EGR alone and, even if it did, Navistar would not be able to maintain competitive fuel economy and performance. 2. To reassure the public about its EGR-only strategy, Navistar submitted a certification application for an EGR-only engine at 0.2 NOx to the EPA in early 2011 for an engine that it knew was not ready for production and sale to customers. The EPA never approved that application for certification. Navistar submitted two additional certification applications in 2012 for certification of an EGR-only engine at 0.2 NOx. In numerous communications with Navistar from early 2011 through the summer of 2012, the EPA staff repeatedly told Navistar that it would not be able to approve the company's applications if Navistar did not submit additional information and make changes to the technology to ensure that the engine complied with the EPA's emissions testing requirements. Navistar made some of these changes, but doing so negatively impacted the engine's fuel economy and performance. Navistar also failed to make other changes requested by the EPA. 3. Despite these difficulties, Navistar repeatedly addressed investor concerns about the status of development and certification work through statements in Commission filings, press releases, and presentations to investors that created the misimpression that the certification process was proceeding as it typically did and that the forthcoming engine would be commercially competitive. In these statements, Navistar failed to fully disclose the serious difficulties it was experiencing."

On March 31, 2016, the SEC announced that it "charged Navistar International Corp. with misleading investors about its development of an advanced technology truck engine that could be certified to meet U.S. emission standards."

In a litigation release issued on March 31, 2016, the SEC announce that it had "charged Navistar International Corp. with misleading investors about its development of an advanced technology truck engine that could be certified to meet U.S. emission standards."