
SEC charges Merill Lynch in Enron case
But the SEC agreed to accept Merrill Lynch's offer to settle the matter. Merrill Lynch, without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint, has agreed to pay $80 million in disgorgement, penalties and interest, and has agreed to the entry of a permanent anti-fraud injunction prohibiting future violations of federal securities laws. The SEC said it intends to have these funds paid into a court account for ultimate distribution to victims of the fraud. The four former Merrill Lynch executives named in the complaint, Robert Furst, Schuyler Tilney, Daniel Bayly and Thomas Davis, are contesting the matter.
One of the Merill Lynch transactions involved the bank's purchase of two electricity-producing Nigerian barges. The deal helped Enron record $12 million in pre-tax income just before the end of the quarter. But the SEC said Merrill undertook the deal knowing that the energy company would later arrange to buy out its interest at a guaranteed premium - in effect making the transaction a bridge loan.
The second transaction involved options trades that regulators said amounted to wash trades. Their true purpose, according to the government, was to increase Enron's reported income by $50 million. Merrill demanded a fee that amounted to $17 million to participate in the deal. In 2000, Enron approached Merrill Lynch seeking to unwind the transaction before trading under the energy options was scheduled to begin. The deal was unwound in June 2000 after Merrill Lynch agreed to reduce its fee to $8.5 million to terminate the transaction.
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
Industry confused by EU’s ‘bingo card’ clearing rules
Uncertainty over definition of representative trades in Emir active account requirement
FDIC scrutinised over move to cover all SVB deposits
Advisory panel questions whether guaranteeing uninsured deposits was necessary to prevent contagion
EBA seeks to tighten up uneven prudent value adjustments
Regulator to consult ‘soon’ on changes to improve consistency of capital deductions
Post-Brexit divergence puts EU subsidiaries on the rack
Banks face choice between higher staffing costs or over-engineered processes at UK headquarters
SEC criticised for belt-and-braces ban on volume-based pricing
Legal experts question need for rules to prevent firms disguising agency trades as proprietary
SEC expected to protect CRT in conflicts of interest rule
Decision could come as early as today; high hopes for credit risk transfer exemption
FRTB managers face hard facts about risk factors
There are ways to reduce the capital charges caused by NMRFs, but they come at a price
SEC official defends delayed dealer registration rule
Regulator says market should be treated like equities, but PTFs warn it will harm market liquidity