Merrill Lynch fined $1 million for conflicts of interest; BoA picks up the tab
Another loss for Bank of America as Merrill is penalised for unfair practices
NEW YORK - Merrill Lynch has been fined $1 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The fine is for violating securities law and failing to disclose conflicts of interests when recommending its own consulting services to pensions clients.
The US regulator issued the penalty somewhat belatedly, as Merrill Lynch was purchased by rival Bank of America as of January 1, 2009. Merrill sustained a $15.3 billion loss for 2008 - compounded by early bonus payments of $4 billion - causing Bank of America to seek $20 billion recapitalisation and $118 billion in asset guarantees from the US Treasury last month. Bank of America is understood to have paid as much as $50 billion to buy Merrill.
The SEC complaint says Merrill failed to disclose its conflict of interest for advising clients to use directed brokerage services, thereby causing their money managers to conduct trades through Merrill - formerly Wall Street's largest brokerage. The regulator said Merrill and its consultants "could and often did receive significantly higher revenue" as a result of the unfair practices.
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
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
Iosco chief sees no need for CCPs to hold more capital
CCPs have shown resilience in volatile times without extra skin-in-the-game, says Buenaventura
Banks urge EBA to delay risk benchmarking amid Iran conflict
Risk managers say hypothetical portfolio exercise clashes with severe market turbulence
EU officials tamp down hopes for bank capital relief
Capital cuts are not a done deal in EC’s review of competitiveness, despite US deregulation
EU regulators clash over ceding supervision to Esma
Belgian and Spanish regulators differ on drive for centralised oversight of cross-border firms
Why Trump’s latest Truth should make TradFi twitchy
Wall Street is becoming the villain in US president’s crypto movie
EBA guidance prompts banks to rethink CSRBB perimeters
Banks will likely have to expand their credit spread risk coverage following recommendations