NYSE fines firms for operational failures
NEW YORK – NYSE Regulation, the regulatory arm of the New York Stock Exchange, has fined member firms for operational failures and supervisory violations. It fined 18 member firms and two former member firms a total of $5.85 million for failing to submit accurate electronic blue sheets containing trading information requested by the NYSE and other regulators.
Additionally, the firms are charged with failing to establish and maintain appropriate systems and procedures for the supervision and control of the reporting requirement. The member firms agreed to validate their trade reporting processes and confirm the validations to the NYSE.
"Blue sheets are an essential component of NYSE investigations into insider trading, market manipulation and other potential violations. Firms must get their operations in order, then periodically test their internal systems to be sure this vital information is accurate," said Susan Merrill, chief of enforcement, NYSE Regulation.
The fined firms include Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, of New York; UBS Securities LLC of Charlotte, North Carolina; and Wachovia Capital Markets LLC also of Charlotte, North Carolina.
Blue sheets are documents that are generated by firms at the request of regulators in connection with investigations of questionable trading. The blue sheets provide information such as the identity of an account holder for whom specific trades were executed and whether a transaction was a buy or a sell and long or short.
Since 1989, firms have submitted blue sheets in an electronic format to all regulators including the NYSE. Inaccuracies and systemic problems were first detected at the Firms by the Market Surveillance division of NYSE Regulation and then referred to the Division of Enforcement for prosecution.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion