BP pays $100,000 to settle wash trading charges
The energy round-trip trading scandal continued to rumble as BP America today paid $100,000 to the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to settle charges of illegal wash trading. A wash, or round-trip, trade is one that produces neither a gain nor a loss and is done to boost trading volumes.
BP is now obliged to co-operate with the commission in its ongoing investigation of related matters. The company neither admitted nor denied the CFTC’s findings under the terms of the settlement.
Several other US energy companies have been involved in round-trip trading. Houston-based Reliant Energy Services was penalised in November 2003. The CFTC fined the company a total of $18 million to settle charges of false reporting, attempted manipulation and wash trades.
And in July 2002, Duke Energy admitted it had conducted 23 wash trades on the Atlanta-based IntercontinentalExchange, while Houston-based Dynegy paid the US Securities and Exchange Commission $3 million in September 2002 over charges it inaccurately accounted for a $300 million natural gas transaction and engaged in 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.
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
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
ECB seeks capital clarity on Spire repacks
Dealers split between counterparty credit risk and market risk frameworks for repack RWAs