SEC v. Goldman Sachs

3375 Words14 Pages
SEC V. GOLDMAN SACHS & CO. AND FABRICE TOURRE
When financial fraud has occurred to the American people by the alleged “Too Big to Fail” banks on Wall Street, is it more productive to the economy and society to criminally charge the executives of these financial institutions or negotiate a civil penalty that compensates victims and reforms the deceptive trade practices of our nation’s largest banks? Further, if settlement is the best solution, why settle for the less money than the financial harm caused by the big banks? The following will discuss the negotiations behind the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (hereinafter referred to as “SEC”) settlement with Goldman Sachs & Co. (hereinafter referred to as “GS&C”) and Fabrice Tourre,
…show more content…
Treasury and pay the remaining $250 million to a Fair Fund Distribution to compensate misled investors.24 Furthermore, GS&C agreed to reform the personnel, education, and training of those reviewing and approving certain mortgage securities as well as consent to a permanent injunction from violations of the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933.25 However, interestingly enough, GS&C acknowledged it misled or omitted important information to investors in the consent order, but refrained from admitting or denying the SEC’s allegations.26

More about SEC v. Goldman Sachs

Get Access