Four RBC derivatives staff fined C$312,000 over wash trading
Canadian regulators have fined four senior employees of RBC Dominion Securities a total of C$312,000 ($250,000) for 'wash trading' in shares of RBC and Bank of Montreal.
The Market Regulation Services (RS) panel decided that the four "did not engage in a pattern of manipulative or deceptive conduct [and] admitted their error to RS on being contacted".
According to the RS summary, on August 11 last year RBC and another unnamed bank agreed a hedging transaction involving shares in Bank of Montreal and RBC. The agreements allowed RBC to place buy orders for Bank of Montreal shares and sell orders for RBC, while the other bank would place the corresponding sell and buy orders. The trades were to be completed using the Toronto Stock Exchange's market-on-close facility.
However, the deal went wrong when a dealer at the other bank failed to enter his orders correctly, leaving RBC exposed. They then decided to rectify this by entering the offsetting orders themselves, producing 'wash' trades - trades which result in no change of ownership.
RS acknowledged the initial error was not theirs and that the four were acting under time pressure - their key mistake was not to contact regulators as soon as they realised the situation, RS said.
RBC was also ordered to pay C$231,500 compensation to those affected by the wash trades.
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.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
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. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Prop shops recoil from EU’s ‘ill-fitting’ capital regime
Large proprietary trading firms complain they are subject to hand-me-down rules originally designed for banks
Revealed: the three EU banks applying for IMA approval
BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo ask ECB to use internal models for FRTB
FCA presses UK non-banks to put their affairs in order
Greater scrutiny of wind-down plans by regulator could alter capital and liquidity requirements
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
UK investment firms feeling the heat on prudential rules
Signs firms are falling behind FCA’s expectations on wind-down and liquidity risk management