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
How strong is the case? It is not definitive given the information available but in reality the truth does not matter. Mounting a defense against the SEC makes little sense for Begelman. Being a civil case, criminal charges are not a consideration. The state is seeking a civil penalty and a repayment of the gains (Securities and Exchange Commission). If Begelman surrenders his profits and pays a penalty of $15K he is able to avoid any admission of wrongdoing (Gehrke-White). Thus, it is pragmatic and financially beneficial (avoid prolonged legal fees) for Begelman to settle and move on regardless of his actual guilt or innocence. The only winner in the case is the State. The SEC effectively extorts $30K from the defendant by
On May 26, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in SEC v. Graham, No. 14-13562 (11th Cir. May 26, 2016), reached an important decision. The court extended the reach of 28 U.S.C. § 2462, the five-year statute of limitations for “any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture” applicable to enforcement actions by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The court held that SEC enforcement actions for declaratory relief and disgorgement were subject to the five-year statute of limitations. The Eleventh Circuit built its ruling on top of a decision by the Supreme Court, Gabelli v. SEC, 133 S. Ct. 1216 (2013), which held that 28 U.S.C. § 2462 applied to SEC civil penalty actions.
I believe that the behaviors of the Ford, Firestone, and the financial corporations on Wall Street were considered criminal behaviors. There was sufficient evidence against these corporations. Apparently, the prosecutors could not prove criminal intent in their behaviors; however, in the case of the financial institutions on Wall Street, you cannot have millions of loans bought and sold that clearly do not meet the standards of a “good loan”. Additionally, it seems utterly irresponsible for the executive banking institutions to not be aware of these loans not meeting the standards for all of the years they were being bought and sold. I believe knowing this information proves criminal intent because no further action there was taken to prevent these loans from being bought and sold without regulation.
The blood stain clothes that detective Smith detained is considered real evidence. The clothes had been worn by the accused and were covered in blood; perhaps the victim’s blood, is in connection with the investigation (Anderson, Rondinelli, Watkins, 2013, p 26). Case Saturley v. CIBC World Markets Inc., 2012 had electronic documents as proof against the accused, he was doing unauthorized trading for CIBC clients. The records that were found on the defendant’s laptop was indeed connected to the investigation as was used to convict him.
This memorandum discusses a brief history of Pat, his wrongdoings and related action, and the response by the related law enforcement agencies.
Gov. Chafee and former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb had rather lackluster performances during the debate. Webb’s stand-out moments were his complaints of not being given enough time to answer, to which Cooper responded, “You agreed to these debate rules.” Gov. Chafee also faltered when Cooper asked about his 1999 vote to repeal Glass-Steagall, which Cooper explained to voters as the “Depression-era banking law repealed in 1999 that prevented commercial banks from engaging in investment banking and insurance activities.” Chafee said, “The Glass-Steagall was my very
Financial historians have disputed the rational for reforming the banking system in the US as a result of the 1920s banking crisis. Calomiris (2010) argue that there may have been political self-interest incentives as to why the Glass-Steagall Act was enacted. Firstly Steagall had bargaining power as Chairman of the banking committee in the House of Representatives. Second, the Pecora Hearings populist politicians including Henry Steagall advocated in favour of small banks contributing in making large bank disliked amongst the public. And finally deposit insurance was introduced as a temporary system allowing for easy approval in the Congress.
The Dodd- Frank law on whistle-blowing bounty program is an upgrade from the Sarbanes- Oxley. The Sarbanes – Oxley whistle -blower program protected employees from getting retaliated upon by their employers when they report misconduct within the company they are employed. Dodd- Frank law took is a step further, an employee who reports financial misconduct are entitled to receive 10 percent to 30 percent of the fines and settlements if the conviction is upheld and the penalties exceed $1 million dollars (Ferrell, 112, 2013). The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was signed into law by President Obama in 2010 (Ferrell, pg. 110, 2013). The focal mission of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is to make markets for
Viewing this article through the lens of the platonic framework is significant because it allows one to judge the acts of the Obama administration versus the acts of Wall Street executives in the aftermath of the previous recession. While the executives that are committing the injustice would be the most evil here for not only committing the unjust acts but for also not seeking their punishment and blaming it on low-level management, the administration is worse than the low-level management for the fact that they are not bringing justice either. This makes clear then why Lynch and Yates are attempting to correct this injustice that’s occurring
c. Auction rate securities—it took state law to come up with a settlement of these problems. The SEC had difficulties applying regulations and laws to this behavior of bidding up the price and then not buying. The clients were not aware that Goldman was bidding on the securities. Goldman’s response as well as some others was that there was always investment houses bidding in such auctions.
In 1999 the United States Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act which finished off the repealing process of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 (Moffett, Stonehill, & Eiteman, 2012, p. 114). The Glass-Steagall Act had imposed barriers within the United States financial sector, where commercial banking entities were separate from investment banks. This meant that commercial banks were able to operate in higher risk activities that were traditionally reserved for the investment institutes. Commercial banks were now able to directly offer their customers a wider array of loans, including creative mortgage arrangements.
The illegal construction of the Bernie Madoff securities pyramid scheme grew to preposterous proportions from legal, auditing, and regulatory weaknesses of the Securities Exchange Commission, the designated regulatory body of the U.S. financial markets. The required expertise, authority, and relevant penalties needed to deter management from committing ethical breaches lacked substance in the case study of BMIS (Crews 11). Even after the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals that occurred in the early 2000s, the SEC unexplainably revoked provisions created to help avoid fraud. The provision the SEC revoked specifically mandated firms structured like Madoff’s to be audited by accounting firms registered and audited by the Board. By revoking the provision, BMIS was allowed to continue its Ponzi scheme for another half a decade with the aid of utilizing an unregistered, small accounting firm called Freihling & Horowitz (“Madoff’s Jenga”
Rule based accounting standards are difference from principle based standards in that rule based standards are just that – rules. For instance, the Internal Revenue code is rule based. There are things you can do and things you can’t. When rules are broken,
In 1882, a partnership was formed between Marcus Goldman and his son in law Sam Sachs to create the financial services firm Goldman Sachs & Co. Due to the strategic management; Goldman quickly grew to become a major commercial paper dealer and eventually would become the market’s leader. Goldman began experiencing exponential success over the years with over 190 partners, 13,000 employees by 1998. However, although it was experiencing success, skeptical speculations begin to arise about Goldman’s ability to maintain its place as market leader considering its competitors issues IPO’s over a decade ago. Goldman being a partnership
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is the US federal agency that holds the primary mandate to enforce federal securities laws and regulations to control the securities industry and the country’s stock exchange and regulation of all activities and organizations including the US electronic securities market. The SEC is committed to promoting a market environment that yields public trust characterized by integrity to attain its mission of protecting investors through maintenance of fair and efficient markets through facilitation of capital information (Basagne, 2010). The SEC financing is a major area of focus since there has been major concern regarding the SEC agency financing and whether they utilize the