
Goldman fined $2m for fraud conducted by customers
LOSSES & LAWSUITS
The SEC and NYSE alleged that between 2000 and 2002, a number of Goldman's customers carried out the illegal short-selling scheme by placing their orders to sell through Goldman's direct market access automated trading system and falsely marked the orders 'long'. Relying solely on the way its customers marked their orders, Goldman executed the transactions as long sales.
Because the customers sold the securities short and did not have the securities at settlement date, Goldman delivered borrowed and proprietary securities to the brokers for the purchasers to settle the customers' purported 'long' sales.
The complaint accused the affiliate, Goldman Sachs Execution and Clearing of violating regulations requiring brokers to accurately mark sales long or short and restricting stock loans on long sales. It concluded that if Goldman had instituted and maintained appropriate procedures, it could have discovered through its own records the customers' illegal activity.
The SEC Order and NYSE Decision found that Goldman's exclusive reliance on its customers' representations that they owned the offered securities was unreasonable.
Goldman was censured for its conduct and ordered to pay $2 million in civil penalties and fines, in addition to an order to cease and desist from committing future violations. Goldman consented to the order and decision without admitting or denying the SEC or the NYSE's findings.
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
US takes scissors to repos. In Europe, it’s not cut and dried
Stateside banks fear disadvantage over haircut rules that EU sees as not ready to implement
Europe’s lenders sail into uncharted waters of the banking book
Regulators are pushing banks to map their credit spread risk. Here be dragons?
SEC may lack legal clout to impose new dealer rule – Citadel
Adoption of quantitative dealer definition may require congressional changes to US Securities Exchange Act
US Basel endgame hits clearing with op risk capital charges
Dealers also fret about unlevel playing field compared with requirements in the EU
CFTC’s clearing house recovery rule splits industry
Some fear CCPs will fast-track recovery, others say any rule book will be ignored in emergency
EU banks ‘will play for time’ in stand-off over India’s CCPs
Lawyers say banks are unlikely to set up subsidiaries and will instead pin hopes on revised Emir fix
ECB mulls intervention on uneven banking book reporting
Inconsistency among EU banks on whether deposits and loans are in scope for credit spread risk
Iosco warns of leveraged loan ‘vulnerabilities’
As recovery rates plummet, report calls for clearer covenants and more transparency on addbacks