Goldman fined $2m for fraud conducted by customers
NEW YORK – The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have fined the clearing affiliate of Goldman Sachs $2m for an illegal trading scheme conducted by customers through their accounts at the firm.
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.
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